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

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 68 points 2 years ago (89 children)

Landlords should pay 100% tax on their empty rentals.

You'll see how fast they will accept any and all new tenants, at a much lower price.

Which would also flood the market with housing, lowering the prices even more until renting becomes an actual beneficial option compared to buying and paying off a loan.

Real estate would also not be seen as an investment anymore.

[–] Manmoth@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (52 children)

Real estate should be considered an investment. It's one of the few things people invest in that is actually valuable. It's the speculative and labrynthine financial markets that are the problem in that regard.

The only reason mega-renters like Blackrock and Vanguard are able to monolithically buy property in the first place is because of dubious speculative earnings and government bailouts.

It's not surprising that home ownership was actually a lot higher 60 years ago.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Real estate should be considered an investment.

Housing can be affordable, or it can be an investment. Not both.

[–] Manmoth@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Why would I build a house if I can't make money on it?

[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because you want a nice house to live in?

Building should be profitable, owning should be of limited profitability.

[–] Manmoth@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

All you've done is move the point I'm arguing to the building process instead of renting.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website 3 points 2 years ago

Building is separate from owning.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (48 replies)

load more comments (84 replies)