4 ms·

If it's not occupied isn't it losing money at least by bleeding to property taxes?

by dnautics 5y ago

onion2k 5y ago
Yes, but property values in London are increasing at a rate that more than pays for that (many times over actually).
- simfree 5y ago
  Same in Seattle, my block has a 2017 constructed home that has never had occupants, owned by a non-resident from China. He owns at least a few other empty new homes in the inner suburbs as well. About once every 2 weeks his son pops by to make sure the house has not burned down or had a pipe burst.
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    Can I rent one of his houses?
- maffydub 5y ago
  Do you have any data on that? Currently living in zone 2 north-east London and house prices have seemed pretty flat for the last couple of years. Flats have had a surge due to current stamp duty holiday... and prices outside London seem to have increased a lot with people anticipating a permanent move to remote/hybrid working. Taxes on empty properties aren't high, but you still need to consider maintenance... and there's an opportunity cost of leaving a house empty rather than renting it out. Just interested in your data - thanks! Update: found https://www.actiononemptyhomes.org/pretty-vacant https://www.actiononemptyhomes.org/pretty-vacant in one of your sibling posts - was that what you were referring to? I just read it (on my phone, so might have missed it), but didn't see any numbers for investment returns here... and there was a fairly-extensive section talking about London property being used for money-laundering instead - is that what you're referring to?
__app_dev__ 5y ago
In CA (at least Los Angeles) there are some tax laws in place that allow a home owner to make more in tax breaks by not renting a house or building vs renting it out. I don’t know the details as I'm a renter but from speaking with a few Realtors they mentioned the companies the worked at did this.

4 ms·

If it's not occupied isn't it losing money at least by bleeding to property taxes?

by dnautics 5y ago

If it's not occupied isn't it losing money at least by bleeding to property taxes?

onion2k 5y ago
Yes, but property values in London are increasing at a rate that more than pays for that (many times over actually).
- simfree 5y ago
  Same in Seattle, my block has a 2017 constructed home that has never had occupants, owned by a non-resident from China. He owns at least a few other empty new homes in the inner suburbs as well. About once every 2 weeks his son pops by to make sure the house has not burned down or had a pipe burst.
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    Can I rent one of his houses?
- maffydub 5y ago
  Do you have any data on that? Currently living in zone 2 north-east London and house prices have seemed pretty flat for the last couple of years. Flats have had a surge due to current stamp duty holiday... and prices outside London seem to have increased a lot with people anticipating a permanent move to remote/hybrid working. Taxes on empty properties aren't high, but you still need to consider maintenance... and there's an opportunity cost of leaving a house empty rather than renting it out. Just interested in your data - thanks! Update: found https://www.actiononemptyhomes.org/pretty-vacant https://www.actiononemptyhomes.org/pretty-vacant in one of your sibling posts - was that what you were referring to? I just read it (on my phone, so might have missed it), but didn't see any numbers for investment returns here... and there was a fairly-extensive section talking about London property being used for money-laundering instead - is that what you're referring to?
__app_dev__ 5y ago
In CA (at least Los Angeles) there are some tax laws in place that allow a home owner to make more in tax breaks by not renting a house or building vs renting it out. I don’t know the details as I'm a renter but from speaking with a few Realtors they mentioned the companies the worked at did this.