Economics

1821 readers

1 users here now

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

372

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 CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work to c/economics@lemmy.ml

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

The point I'm trying to make is that if renting the property out is a net loss and whoever owns it is required to rent it out, there's almost no reason for a person who intends to comply with the law to want to own the property. Forget selling - why would anyone even take it for free if it was just a permanent money sink?

[–] JayDee@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

Forget selling - why would anyone even take it for free if it was just a permanent money sink

Because it's a place to live in without having rent being arbitrarily dictated by some random dude. It's instead a tax you pay based on who you vote for.

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 2 points 2 years ago

...why would anyone even take it for free...?

So they could live in it. Why does it have to be a money sink for the new owners if they get it for a good price (or even for free)?

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 years ago

Perhaps landowning as an "investment" is a shit idea, and that propety should be owned by HUD, or whatever regional equivalent.