4 ms·

> Citizen pay for this via income taxes and their employer's corporate tax 100% correct. The property tax rate in Vancouver is 0.35%, which is a small fractio

by nshelly 11y ago

> Citizen pay for this via income taxes and their employer's corporate tax 100% correct. The property tax rate in Vancouver is 0.35%, which is a small fraction of what other cities across North America pay, while income taxes are significantly higher on the middle class. NYC suburbs, for example Weschester, charge 1.93% of assessment, and even in California, property tax is 1.25%. Some Texas counties are 2+%. In the absence of a reasonably high property tax, like in Vancouver, homes become much more like an expensive savings account. This is especially the case as interest rates falling below 0 in much of the Western world (some banks in Switzerland charge you to put your money there). And day-to-day services like police, schools and ambulatory are paid for by locals through income and sales taxes. UCLA professor says CA could get rid of income taxes through a 3% property tax. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-adv-welch-california-tax-reform-20140530-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-adv-welch-califor... My suggestion to reduce property speculation is to reduce income taxes drastically (1/2 to 1/3), raise property taxes to at least 1.5% (5x) and provide basic tax assessment increase controls for owner-occupied dwellings, up to say $1m in value.

crdb 11y ago
> My suggestion to reduce property speculation is to reduce income taxes drastically (1/2 to 1/3), raise property taxes to at least 1.5% (5x) and provide basic tax assessment increase controls for owner-occupied dwellings, up to say $1m in value. Exactly. Unfortunately, the short term effect in most countries would be a brutal recession, probably some banks going under/being nationalised, a flight of capital out of the country, and so on - enough to dissuade any administration to try. It does not help that most politicians are from the middle upper class and own large amounts of property. Few will have the courage to devalue their own net worth by double digit percent. Thus I think it exceedingly unlikely that we will ever see a shift from production taxes and consumption taxes to "dead" asset taxes. In fact, the historical precedent is the other way round. There are many others, but France's ISF (wealth tax, of 1.5% of the government-assessed asset value per year) is one of the reasons you can buy a large castle there for less than a studio in Sydney.
- nugget 11y ago
  < It does not help that most politicians are from the middle upper class and own large amounts of property. Few will have the courage to devalue their own net worth by double digit percent. > This is the real reason. As I've mentioned on other threads, California's main business is and always has been real estate.

by nshelly 11y ago

crdb 11y ago

> My suggestion to reduce property speculation is to reduce income taxes drastically (1/2 to 1/3), raise property taxes to at least 1.5% (5x) and provide basic tax assessment increase controls for owner-occupied dwellings, up to say $1m in value. Exactly. Unfortunately, the short term effect in most countries would be a brutal recession, probably some banks going under/being nationalised, a flight of capital out of the country, and so on - enough to dissuade any administration to try. It does not help that most politicians are from the middle upper class and own large amounts of property. Few will have the courage to devalue their own net worth by double digit percent. Thus I think it exceedingly unlikely that we will ever see a shift from production taxes and consumption taxes to "dead" asset taxes. In fact, the historical precedent is the other way round. There are many others, but France's ISF (wealth tax, of 1.5% of the government-assessed asset value per year) is one of the reasons you can buy a large castle there for less than a studio in Sydney.

nugget 11y ago
< It does not help that most politicians are from the middle upper class and own large amounts of property. Few will have the courage to devalue their own net worth by double digit percent. > This is the real reason. As I've mentioned on other threads, California's main business is and always has been real estate.