Personal Finance

3803 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 2 years ago

MODERATORS

WandererLagomorph799@lemmy.ml

nieceandtows@programming.dev

nieceandtows@lemmy.ml

676

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

submitted 2 years ago by Blaze@discuss.tchncs.de to c/personalfinance@lemmy.ml

335 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

[–] tracyspcy@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

hehe considering market propaganda in education, on every media it is hard for me to not challenge my "belief" on a daily basis.

unfortunately in your comment you repeating neoliberal propaganda, please check guardian article on "free market zone libertarian experiment" tldr it led to low wage sweatshops and workers repression (and spoiler even this libertarian experiment relied on governmental support)

[–] JasSmith@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I argued that the solution is both, not one or the other. You provided me an example of an extreme in the other direction. I also think libertarianism and anarchy does not work. Please re-read my comment.

I think the solution lies somewhere between government and markets.

[–] tracyspcy@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Countries which prevent markets from operating efficiently tend to do really poorly over time. The more authoritarian, the worse they perform.

In general it means less government control over the markets. And less means libertarian concept (see article again). If you mean something in between , there is need in very detailed scale to find difference between current regulated markets, non regulated markets (libertarian nonsense) and balance that you want.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

You're really going to have to define your metrics for "tend to do really poorly over time".