424
submitted 4 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BigBenis@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

How would people here feel about a tax that increases in rate per-property owned? People and organizations can still own as many properties as they want, but at some point they're going to be taxed so much it'll be impossible to profit off of them.

[-] capital_sniff@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Until we actually remove republicans and republican lites from the legislature I highly doubt we'll see any progressive tax reforms, like actually taxing the rich. You could probably find more support for expanding house buying programs. Stuff like lowering the down payment requirements, and or give a large grant for a portion of the house value if it is high and it could be clawed back at sale.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Personally, I'd prefer a monthly fine for unfilled housing, that is based on the rate you are charging for it. Landlord wants to jack your rent up 20%? If you leave, they pay a fine, based on that amount until they fill the unit. The fines go to subsidizing housing costs, so there is a self-balancing system. Right now, with property values increasing at insane rates, owners don't really need to rent to break even, which leaves them free to price gouge their tenants. There is little pressure pushing rates back down, and there is all the freedom in the world to jack them up as high as you want.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The problem right now is one of supply and demand, not because corporations are buying up too many properties. It's the other way around where corporations are buying up properties, because due to not increasing supply, and demand continue rising, it's a good investment.

We need more high density housing all over the place. I live in a nice little town right outside a large US city. We have a train right into the city, and a nice little downtown area that could certainly use more business. They have been trying to put up apartment buildings, but the NIMBY-ism is through the roof. It's like every little attempt to add more housing, people start whining to high heavens how it is killing our "small town" feel. I mean, I get it, I moved here for a reason, but something has got to give.

I can only imagine what's happening in more rural areas where everyone wants their big lots and single homes.

So I don't really oppose increasing taxes per home, but I don't think it's really going to solve the issue of increasing home prices as that's not the root of the issue.

[-] bcgm3@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I'm not sure. Realizing I had no idea how much wealth the truly wealthy possess has been a reoccurring theme from the past few years. I think I'd rather see some hard limitations on who can own what.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

How would people here feel about a tax that increases in rate per-property owned?

That's functionally how the homestead exemption works already

they’re going to be taxed so much it’ll be impossible to profit off of them.

I would simply start a PAC with all my extra money and bribe/coerce politicians into reducing the tax rates.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

That’s functionally how the homestead exemption works already

Unless I'm mistaken, that's just a small tax break you get on the taxes on your primary residence. After that, it makes no difference the number of properties you own, their taxes stay the same.

[-] TwentySeven@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

It's already like that where I live. It's called the homestead exemption -- property taxes are cut in half if it's your primary residence

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

The homestead exemption is not a tax. It is a discount on tax. Therefore there is no penalty for owning extra homes. Landlords not only benefit from the homestead exemption but also get you to pay the property taxes on the house you’re renting.

[-] TwentySeven@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Extra tax on non resident properties vs discounted tax on your residence. As far as I can tell, it's the exact same thing

this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
424 points (98.0% liked)

News

23287 readers
3837 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS