Overall I think these ideas are super interesting and may be good in the long run. But I'm also curious about what the unintended consequences will end up being.
> One example is the Immigrant Investor program, where those wishing to immigrate would make an interest-free loan to government of $400,000 in exchange for landed immigrant status. UBC geographer David Ley has shown that investor immigrants in the Vancouver region represent nearly 10 per cent of the Vancouver region’s population. That population paid, on average, $1,400 in income tax 10 years after immigrating. This is less than refugees. > … > A property surtax is an elegant and legally safer way to reduce foreign capital flows into Canada’s cities than the new foreign buyer’s tax. A one per cent surtax would work like this: if you own a $1 million house, you will receive a surtax bill for $10,000. If you have already paid equivalent income tax, are on a disability pension, or if you are a retiree on CPP, the tax is a full deduction—you’ve already paid, thanks.
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/a-roadmap-fo...
How's that possible - do they all become non-resident after receiving their passports?
The interest-free loan of $400,000 to the Canadian government was also a weak test for 'investors'. The Canadian banks would front the money on behalf of the immigrant, if they prepay the interest on the loan. I was told by a banker that this was at a pretty high rate of around $120,000. This amounted to paying $120k to a bank in exchange for a clean citizenship path. Lots of people benefited from this system (banks, property owners, developers) so it went on for a long time. Ottawa ended the program in 2013, but one of the problems is that Québec hasn't--they control their own immigration policy to an extent. So it became common for investor immigrants to apply to Québec but then move to Vancouver.[1] In theory, immigrants that bring a lot of wealth with them sounds great, but I was also shocked by the stat showing that they paid less taxes than refugees after 10 years.
[1] Quick reference:
http://www.news1130.com/2015/04/01/investor-immigrants-using...
> “Quebec gets the benefits from that loan, which lasts for five years. It’s a very lucrative program as far as Quebec is concerned but the downside is that the people don’t actually end up living there. There’s plenty of data that shows 90 per cent of those arrivals actually end up living elsewhere. I think it’s fair to estimate that a large majority end up living in Vancouver.”
TL;DR People who try to launder money and escape capital controls in China have a high overlap with people who cheat on their taxes in Canada.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouv...
We can play similar games in the US with abandoned houses - there are probably enough abandoned homes in Gary, Indiana to house the entire US' homeless population. Said homes, unfortunately, happen to be in Gary.
I don't know enough about England towns and cities to make a judgment, but it looks like The Guardian got their data from here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tab...
Most people won't go through the trouble though.
What I'd do is just rent out the room, and not pay the fee.
Land value tax. No income tax. People who add no value get nothing.
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/a-roadmap-fo...
The only thing I can really think of is that it might force people to divest in a very down market where it is difficult to find renters, but it doesn't seem like a huge tragedy for people who have at least two dwellings to be forced to sell one of them or else eat losses.