3 ms·
You don’t need a price “control” per se. Just tax landlords’ profits progressively, with very steep top marginal rates. If it seems controversial to use that m
by jacobolus 7y ago
You don’t need a price “control” per se. Just tax landlords’ profits progressively, with very steep top marginal rates.
If it seems controversial to use that money for some other purpose, return the money as rent subsidies equally among all resident renters.
- AnthonyMouse 7y agoThen all the high income property owners will trade their properties in your city for some other properties in some other city, the properties in your city will all be owned by the retirement funds of middle income people from all over the country who don't pay the high tax rates, and nothing about rents or real estate prices would meaningfully change. Also, to the extent that the tax was actually effective, it would reduce the incentive to build new housing and thereby raise housing costs. > If it seems controversial to use that money for some other purpose, return the money as rent subsidies equally among all resident renters. So you charge them money in tax and give it to the renter, what happens when they respond by raising the rent by that amount?
- JamesBarney 7y agoCurrently people invest in real estate expect a certain% return and if it's lower than that they invest in the stock market(or real estate elsewhere). Now imagine we tax half their profits. This would cause two things. Landlords would convert rental units to owner occupied. Because rental units will now have half the value of a rental unit as it would as owner occupied. Then all rental unit developers would stop building until the scarcity of rental units drove up the leasing cost to make being a landlord profitable again.