this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
981 points (98.4% liked)

solarpunk memes

2827 readers
29 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Right, so you'll hope it'll stabilise prices, penalise people for moving home if it doesn't work, penalise people for moving home regardless if they bought before this measure

The general idea is you tax things you want to stop, do you think it's a good idea taxing selling one house to buy another to live in? I thought it was investment properties you didn't like.

  1. Why go after the paper gains of people moving from one primary residence to a different one?
  2. Taxes on investment houses are directly passed on to tenants, raising rent

People who bought a very cheap house twenty years ago might have a million dollar capital gain and a $30,000 income. If they wanted to move they couldn't sell that house and buy another under your scheme

I quite like the current policy in Canberra, Australia, where land tax is levied on rental properties, but not if you rent it at a lower rent

[โ€“] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I will reiterate, that this back-of-the-napkin idea only works with other policies to stabilise house prices. Because yeah, right now, it wouldn't make sense. Would need to be phased in over a long-time (certainly taxing people now on capital gains since they moved in decades ago would be entirely unfair).

Though, it still rubs me the wrong way currently that the haves are getting a way better deal than the have nots. Again, in theory, you could sell up and put yourself in the same position as someone who can't afford a house, by renting, and have a bunch of capital gains tax free, whereas they have to pay a higher tax rate on their total income - that is the normal tax rates - even though they're poorer. Seems unfair (but I'm not suggesting the fix is immediately taxing capital gains on owner occupiers).

Canberra seems to have a few good rental laws then, as last I heard rent increases are capped at 2% beyond inflation. Which at least means they haven't had the stupid rental increases all the othe cities have seen the last few years.