Personal Finance

3784 readers

1 users here now

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

WandererLagomorph799@lemmy.ml

nieceandtows@programming.dev

nieceandtows@lemmy.ml

654

Landlords should have to pay income tax on their rental properties regardless of whether they're rented out or not. (gothamist.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Blaze@discuss.tchncs.de to c/personalfinance@lemmy.ml

185 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there's still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 84 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Income tax on no income sounds fucking stupid. Just up property tax on the 3th or 4th house or apartment by a fuckton, watch everyone panic sell their shit crashing the housing market into oblivion and call it a day. Ez affordable housing.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Denmark applies a property tax to foreign properties at ones disposal. If it's rented, it's waived and tax is levied on the rental income. If it's unoccupied, it's considered a luxury available for your use and thus is taxable property, even though it's in a foreign jurisdiction.

[–] el_bhm@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Multiple holder companies incoming. Now that will need to be plugged up.

Not saying this is a bad idea. But they will find loopholes.

[–] battleoften@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

Require rental properties to be registered and report when vacant.
Block any new single dwelling rental property purchases.
Only allow more rental property purchases when vacancy rate is below a certain threshold in a metropolitan area.

[–] RegularGoose@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't allow companies to own homes. Homes should not be investments.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Then renters will be homeless.

[–] Rekliner@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, there was just recently a big scandal in my city where one guy bought 20 houses with 9 shell companies. Attempted to do shitty flipping jobs. Selling the houses from one company to the next so they didn't immediately jump up in price in the real estate history.

The sad part is: if he hadn't overpriced the market and sold more of them he would've gotten away with it, but he waited too long and got stuck. But until that point nobody knew one guy had 20 houses, it was 2 per company on paper.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Every single one of all the government measures I've seen to "help people" in the current "tight housing market" is designed to prop-up housing prices and rents, never ever anything which would lower rents or house prices.

In my country they even given money to renters rather than, say, impose rent controls or start large projects building public housing and do this all the while claiming there's not enough money for things like Education.

From my own experience working in Finance every single government measure I've seen on this since a decade ago sure looks a lot like using the power of the State for manipulating the housing market to push prices up.