4 ms·

> Keeping an apartment empty and outside the housing services supply market should be cripplingly expensive. Jerusalem tried this. Lots of apartments owned by

> Keeping an apartment empty and outside the housing services supply market should be cripplingly expensive. Jerusalem tried this. Lots of apartments owned by wealthy foreign landlords who only occupy the apartments once or twice a year, if that, on holiday, transforming large sections of the city into ghost neighborhoods. https://www.timesofisrael.com/jerusalem-ups-ghost-apartment-taxes-as-housing-costs-soar/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/jerusalem-ups-ghost-apartment-... It hasn't worked. Odds are that the tax on empty apartments simply isn't high enough. So the question is, how do you determine the tax rate to make it adequately "crippling" to absentee owners? Should it be some factor of the property's value? Won't matter, it'll be factored in as part of the cost. Should it be some kind of wealth tax? Not really possible, since as foreign owners, most of their wealth is located abroad. It makes sense on paper but it's fairly difficult to carry out in practice.

true_religion 8y ago
Zoning should take into account rental status. So an area can be zoned for primary home ownership or home rental. Thus if you have your secondary unoccupied residence in that zone, then it would be a zoning violation so you must live in it or rent it out.
- solatic 8y ago
  Most of the ghost homes are owned by foreigners for whom that is their sole residential property in Israel. Penalizing the purchase of additional units is ineffective. Furthermore, even if you could figure out a way to set up zoning regulations to achieve these aims, how would you penalize violations? Fines are just factored into the cost of ownership, just like the taxes on empty apartments.
  - true_religion 8y ago
    If you continue to commit a business zoning violation then your business is taken away or obstructed. As far as the government is concerned what follows is just normal beaurocracy
aeternus 8y ago
Use a land value tax, and update it frequently. If rents are going up in an area, then the land value is increasing and taxes should go up accordingly. This also removes the disincentives around making property improvements. It makes little sense for cities to penalize people for renovating and improving property. It also adds healthy competition among landlords/owners and encourages higher density in places where land value & demand is high.
- solatic 8y ago
  Israeli property tax is different than in the US. In the US, property taxes are levied upon property owners, but in Israel, property taxes are levied directly upon residents - owners who are landlords pay no property tax in Israel so long as tenants are paying the tax. The advantage of the Israeli system is that it allows the government to offer steep discounts on property rent to protected classes, i.e. senior citizens who get a 75% discount on their property taxes because nobody wants to kick Grandma and Grandpa out of their homes, offering steep tax discounts to low-income tenants, etc. In such an environment, switching to a land value tax is regressive.
  - aeternus 8y ago
    A better solution would be to take the total amount spent on that senior citizen property tax discount and instead give it to all seniors in the form of a general tax credit. You don't need a strange form of property tax to help out seniors. In fact it seems unlikely the property tax benefit is at all fair since it likely benefits those with large homes. A general tax credit could be distributed more fairly and would allow seniors to choose to spend it on rent, but also allow the option of moving somewhere different/cheaper, or spend it on a greater want/need. The land value tax is still important as it incentivizes development and density where it makes sense. Landlords cannot sit back and rent-seek. If developers around them are making the area nicer, they will soon be priced out unless they follow suit. Similarly, as demand & density increase, area tax revenues also increase allowing for the building of infrastructure to handle the higher density.
    - 8y ago
turtlecloud 8y ago
There just needs to be more squatters to avoid empyy apartments

true_religion 8y ago

Zoning should take into account rental status. So an area can be zoned for primary home ownership or home rental. Thus if you have your secondary unoccupied residence in that zone, then it would be a zoning violation so you must live in it or rent it out.

solatic 8y ago
Most of the ghost homes are owned by foreigners for whom that is their sole residential property in Israel. Penalizing the purchase of additional units is ineffective. Furthermore, even if you could figure out a way to set up zoning regulations to achieve these aims, how would you penalize violations? Fines are just factored into the cost of ownership, just like the taxes on empty apartments.
- true_religion 8y ago
  If you continue to commit a business zoning violation then your business is taken away or obstructed. As far as the government is concerned what follows is just normal beaurocracy

aeternus 8y ago

Use a land value tax, and update it frequently. If rents are going up in an area, then the land value is increasing and taxes should go up accordingly. This also removes the disincentives around making property improvements. It makes little sense for cities to penalize people for renovating and improving property. It also adds healthy competition among landlords/owners and encourages higher density in places where land value & demand is high.

solatic 8y ago
Israeli property tax is different than in the US. In the US, property taxes are levied upon property owners, but in Israel, property taxes are levied directly upon residents - owners who are landlords pay no property tax in Israel so long as tenants are paying the tax. The advantage of the Israeli system is that it allows the government to offer steep discounts on property rent to protected classes, i.e. senior citizens who get a 75% discount on their property taxes because nobody wants to kick Grandma and Grandpa out of their homes, offering steep tax discounts to low-income tenants, etc. In such an environment, switching to a land value tax is regressive.
- aeternus 8y ago
  A better solution would be to take the total amount spent on that senior citizen property tax discount and instead give it to all seniors in the form of a general tax credit. You don't need a strange form of property tax to help out seniors. In fact it seems unlikely the property tax benefit is at all fair since it likely benefits those with large homes. A general tax credit could be distributed more fairly and would allow seniors to choose to spend it on rent, but also allow the option of moving somewhere different/cheaper, or spend it on a greater want/need. The land value tax is still important as it incentivizes development and density where it makes sense. Landlords cannot sit back and rent-seek. If developers around them are making the area nicer, they will soon be priced out unless they follow suit. Similarly, as demand & density increase, area tax revenues also increase allowing for the building of infrastructure to handle the higher density.
  - 8y ago

turtlecloud 8y ago

There just needs to be more squatters to avoid empyy apartments