4 ms·

There are already flat taxes per parcel. So you are taxing an owner of a rental on their total income rather than the income they earn on the property?

by babesh 6y ago

babesh 6y ago
What if a corporation owns the property? If you do this, I would transfer the property to a corporation and then rent it back to myself for a $1 a year. The corporation would have only $1 of income per year. This is so badly thought out.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
twblalock 6y ago
No, I'm proposing taxing city residents on their income regardless of whether they own or rent. If the owner of the parcel doesn't live in the city then he wouldn't pay a dime of income tax to the city -- he would pay the parcel tax to the city where the parcel is located, and he would pay income tax wherever he lives.
- babesh 6y ago
  Time for the international buyers to buy housing en masse, rent it out, and not pay your income tax. The renters would be stuck paying the income tax and the international buyers would just pay the parcel tax. So renters would be stuck paying for rent and an additional income tax for renting. Hahahahaha.
  - twblalock 6y ago
    That's fine, they will pay the parcel tax and their tenants will pay income tax. It seems wrong to me to make someone pay tax where they do not live. It's not like the owners of rental homes are the people who use the city services -- the people who live in the homes do, and they should pay for them.
    - babesh 6y ago
      Way to screw over renters with an additional tax. That sure sounds regressive to me. The owners are generally much richer than the renters.
- babesh 6y ago
  Another hack. Claim residency in another state or country. Voila your personal income tax for the property disappears and you can live in the home for one day less than six months out of the year. This proposal would be a vacation home rebate. In fact, just keep buying vacation homes. The people stuck living there year round would be screwed. Another hack. Buy the biggest parcel you can find. Then you can build a huge home and pay the same taxes as the 800 square foot bungalow. Build a bunch of huge vacation homes. The help have to pay for the services. You don’t. Yet another hack. Build a house and rent it out on AirBnB. That way you only pay the parcel tax and NO ONE pays the income tax. Genius. It’s a discount to run an AirBnB. Better raise the hotel tax to compensate.
  - seiferteric 6y ago
    Pretty sure that won't work. CA is famous for vigorously going after people trying to doge taxes like this, and the rules for residency/part year residency are pretty stringent for what taxes you will owe.
    - babesh 6y ago
      Look up the law. I know of law abiding people who do exactly this. Live in Vegas and come back to California once in awhile.

There are already flat taxes per parcel. So you are taxing an owner of a rental on their total income rather than the income they earn on the property?

by babesh 6y ago

There are already flat taxes per parcel. So you are taxing an owner of a rental on their total income rather than the income they earn on the property?

babesh 6y ago

What if a corporation owns the property? If you do this, I would transfer the property to a corporation and then rent it back to myself for a $1 a year. The corporation would have only $1 of income per year. This is so badly thought out.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

twblalock 6y ago

No, I'm proposing taxing city residents on their income regardless of whether they own or rent. If the owner of the parcel doesn't live in the city then he wouldn't pay a dime of income tax to the city -- he would pay the parcel tax to the city where the parcel is located, and he would pay income tax wherever he lives.

babesh 6y ago
Time for the international buyers to buy housing en masse, rent it out, and not pay your income tax. The renters would be stuck paying the income tax and the international buyers would just pay the parcel tax. So renters would be stuck paying for rent and an additional income tax for renting. Hahahahaha.
- twblalock 6y ago
  That's fine, they will pay the parcel tax and their tenants will pay income tax. It seems wrong to me to make someone pay tax where they do not live. It's not like the owners of rental homes are the people who use the city services -- the people who live in the homes do, and they should pay for them.
  - babesh 6y ago
    Way to screw over renters with an additional tax. That sure sounds regressive to me. The owners are generally much richer than the renters.
babesh 6y ago
Another hack. Claim residency in another state or country. Voila your personal income tax for the property disappears and you can live in the home for one day less than six months out of the year. This proposal would be a vacation home rebate. In fact, just keep buying vacation homes. The people stuck living there year round would be screwed. Another hack. Buy the biggest parcel you can find. Then you can build a huge home and pay the same taxes as the 800 square foot bungalow. Build a bunch of huge vacation homes. The help have to pay for the services. You don’t. Yet another hack. Build a house and rent it out on AirBnB. That way you only pay the parcel tax and NO ONE pays the income tax. Genius. It’s a discount to run an AirBnB. Better raise the hotel tax to compensate.
- seiferteric 6y ago
  Pretty sure that won't work. CA is famous for vigorously going after people trying to doge taxes like this, and the rules for residency/part year residency are pretty stringent for what taxes you will owe.
  - babesh 6y ago
    Look up the law. I know of law abiding people who do exactly this. Live in Vegas and come back to California once in awhile.