How does taxing existing housing magically create new houses to solve the housing crisis?
For the vast majority of people, owning a home is superior to renting. So I think most home policy is in getting people able to purchase, own, and sustain their own home.
Certainly, some people’s situation makes rent better, but it’s much smaller than people who should buy. But it’s too expensive to buy for too many people.
I don’t think someone should be embarrassed, but it’s not like the goal here is to get more people renting and fewer owning.
yeah right - info welcome from those that read giant books on the 2008 credit events.. one thread in that is that it was a clumsy and heavy-handed, politics-origin set of decisions to make "sub-prime" mortgage rates available widely, in order to move the homeownership rates in the general population from sixty-something percent to the glory-lands of ninety-something percent.
Well, in fact lending policy at scale did not do that, and as a side-effect the entire US and possible dollar-based credit system cracked at the base. The strongest economy in the world, actually almost did choke on credit.
Meanwhile, a recent study echoed here on YNews said that "A million homes are being kept empty while housing costs soar" WSJ . How does one reconcile this?
The most generous interpretation is they think everyone wants to be a landowner and this policy would help them.
What they think is happening: investors are buying lots of houses, which is driving up prices, so getting them out of that business would lower prices.
What's really happening: supply shortages are driving up prices, which is making housing more attractive to investors.
A real land/property tax that forces productive use of land is also needed, but repealing prop 13 is probably never going to happen.
That's okay, because it is solving the problem
Either,
A) the family member had another primary residence that they're vacating to make this their primary residence, thus freeing up the old property for someone to buy, or
B) the family member didn't already have a home, and the number of people with a home increases by 1, which is what we're trying to do in the first place
Anyways, this is a well studied problem in China where they tried this, and almost everyone successfully gamed the system that it was a no-op.
> You don't say anything about residing in it.
of course I did, that is what primary residence means: the place in which you primarily reside. Obviously you cannot legally claim a place as your primary residence if it isn't.
whatever laws and regulations China has around that, they aren't the ones in effect here
There is no legal framework in the USA to determine a primary residence.
> whatever laws and regulations China has around that, they aren't the ones in effect here
China has a much stronger system in place for determining and enforcing residency than the USA, if they can't do it, then how will we?
This is false: you can almost never claim a place as your primary residence in the US if it is not.
The distinction carries tax implications, which is why there is indeed law around it in the US (and why you rarely see families doing it to take advantage of already-existing first time homeowner incentives, etc.). Here's another phrasing of this:
You must occupy your primary residence by a certain date after closing, often within 60 days. You must live within your primary residence for the majority of the year[0]
> China has a much stronger system in place for determining and enforcing residency than the USA, if they can't do it, then how will we?
Maybe they do, or can, or don't, or can't, it's totally irrelevant because China's laws don't apply in the example we're discussing.
[0]: https://www.bankrate.com/real-estate/primary-residence-defin...
If the property tax on your $4m SFH in Palo Alto is too high, you'll be very motivated to turn it into a 4-plex. You'll go to city council meetings, and vote against single-family zoning, and fight NIMBY lawsuits.
(Or you'll have to sell to someone who will do all of the above or pay the higher tax that you can't afford)
They pass these costs directly to the renter
The occupants pay real estate taxes