3 ms·

Investor-only home purchases should be regulated or taxed out of existence. There are at least two such homes in my neighborhood. They're just sitting there emp

by bmitc 4y ago

Investor-only home purchases should be regulated or taxed out of existence. There are at least two such homes in my neighborhood. They're just sitting there empty, slowly degrading I'm sure, while people are doing everything to try and get in a home.

choward 4y ago
There should be different zoning and taxes for different types of homes. A primary residence only zone for example. There is a huge difference between primary residents and vacation/rental homes and their role in society. In the same way "ride sharing" is a loophole to have a taxi company without the regulations, Airbnb found a loophole for running a hotel company without the regulations. The homes rented out for days at a time should not count toward the housing supply and only be allowed on designated areas just like hotels.
- bennysonething 4y ago
  So people who want to rent shouldn't be allowed to live near people who buy? Why?
  - brianwawok 4y ago
    It’s a PC friendly way to say you don’t want to live by poor people.
    - filoleg 4y ago
      I honestly believe that the grandparent comment didn't have such intent in mind. However, even though OP likely didnt have such intentions, I agree with your overall assessment of what would happen. If their proposal was implemented on scale, it would have naturally ended up in a situation that you are describing. And for that reason (+a lot of other unwanted second-order effects others have mentioned), I am definitely not into the idea of such zoning at all.
  - kyleee 4y ago
    that's an uncharitable response; poster explicitly mentioned short term rentals and vacations homes being problematic, not all renters as you've stated
vasco 4y ago
Some places tax empty homes more, which seems like the real problem. If you have it rented all the time, potentially to low income tenants, I'm fine with it paying normal rates.
- culopatin 4y ago
  Yep, we need houses for rent too, not everyone wants to settle for 5+ years at a place or pay closing costs every 2 years.
- Fatnino 4y ago
  I live on a street of 1950s era one story 3bed 1bath homes. Right now there is one for rent for $3900/mo and another for sale for $2.5m
CPLX 4y ago
Abolishing the ability of people to rent houses probably won’t go the way you think it will.
- ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
  Presumably the empty housees in OP's neighborhood are not being rented.
  - CPLX 4y ago
    Yet
    - joshspankit 4y ago
      This is a dangerous counter argument, imo. I’ve personally seen houses get purchased (sight unseen) by “investors” (some money launderers, some who actually intend to flip but can’t), then those homes sit empty for long enough to become unliveable. Unseen leaks, infestation, whatever. If we’re lucky it gets bought in a tax sale and renovated, but it’s just as likely to get torn down and not rebuilt. That whole process depresses the area, causes costs to neighbours, and of course removes that property from the rental market entirely.
      - credit_guy 4y ago
        But why would any investor do that? Rational people want their investments to appreciate in value, not depreciate. As for you seeing "money launderers", that's quite strange. Money laundering is a serious crime. People who perpetrate it generally prefer to keep quiet on the matter, they don't go around advertising what bad boys they are. How did you know the people buying some houses were "money launderers". But let's say you knew somehow and they did as you say. Even for money launderers, it does not make sense to sink money in some properties that will end up being torn down. The whole point of money laundering is to transform money of a criminal provenance into "clean money" that can be used to do stuff, not into run down properties.
m0llusk 4y ago
This all happened because of a strange economic imbalance. Essentially zero interest rates made money basically free to the wealthy. Homes are a special commodity as everyone needs one and land use regulations limit quantity. Thoughtfully regulating land so there is always at least some available nearby for residential development can ease that pressure. Zero interest rates were never sustainable and have contributed to a global asset bubble that includes housing and various other economic sectors. We don't need some special rules against investor home ownership. Simply maintaining reasonable fiscal and land use policies should be enough to restore a reasonable balance.

by bmitc 4y ago

choward 4y ago

There should be different zoning and taxes for different types of homes. A primary residence only zone for example. There is a huge difference between primary residents and vacation/rental homes and their role in society. In the same way "ride sharing" is a loophole to have a taxi company without the regulations, Airbnb found a loophole for running a hotel company without the regulations. The homes rented out for days at a time should not count toward the housing supply and only be allowed on designated areas just like hotels.

bennysonething 4y ago
So people who want to rent shouldn't be allowed to live near people who buy? Why?
- brianwawok 4y ago
  It’s a PC friendly way to say you don’t want to live by poor people.
  - filoleg 4y ago
    I honestly believe that the grandparent comment didn't have such intent in mind. However, even though OP likely didnt have such intentions, I agree with your overall assessment of what would happen. If their proposal was implemented on scale, it would have naturally ended up in a situation that you are describing. And for that reason (+a lot of other unwanted second-order effects others have mentioned), I am definitely not into the idea of such zoning at all.
- kyleee 4y ago
  that's an uncharitable response; poster explicitly mentioned short term rentals and vacations homes being problematic, not all renters as you've stated

vasco 4y ago

Some places tax empty homes more, which seems like the real problem. If you have it rented all the time, potentially to low income tenants, I'm fine with it paying normal rates.

culopatin 4y ago
Yep, we need houses for rent too, not everyone wants to settle for 5+ years at a place or pay closing costs every 2 years.
Fatnino 4y ago
I live on a street of 1950s era one story 3bed 1bath homes. Right now there is one for rent for $3900/mo and another for sale for $2.5m

CPLX 4y ago

Abolishing the ability of people to rent houses probably won’t go the way you think it will.

ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
Presumably the empty housees in OP's neighborhood are not being rented.
- CPLX 4y ago
  Yet
  - joshspankit 4y ago
    This is a dangerous counter argument, imo. I’ve personally seen houses get purchased (sight unseen) by “investors” (some money launderers, some who actually intend to flip but can’t), then those homes sit empty for long enough to become unliveable. Unseen leaks, infestation, whatever. If we’re lucky it gets bought in a tax sale and renovated, but it’s just as likely to get torn down and not rebuilt. That whole process depresses the area, causes costs to neighbours, and of course removes that property from the rental market entirely.
    - credit_guy 4y ago
      But why would any investor do that? Rational people want their investments to appreciate in value, not depreciate. As for you seeing "money launderers", that's quite strange. Money laundering is a serious crime. People who perpetrate it generally prefer to keep quiet on the matter, they don't go around advertising what bad boys they are. How did you know the people buying some houses were "money launderers". But let's say you knew somehow and they did as you say. Even for money launderers, it does not make sense to sink money in some properties that will end up being torn down. The whole point of money laundering is to transform money of a criminal provenance into "clean money" that can be used to do stuff, not into run down properties.

m0llusk 4y ago

This all happened because of a strange economic imbalance. Essentially zero interest rates made money basically free to the wealthy. Homes are a special commodity as everyone needs one and land use regulations limit quantity. Thoughtfully regulating land so there is always at least some available nearby for residential development can ease that pressure. Zero interest rates were never sustainable and have contributed to a global asset bubble that includes housing and various other economic sectors. We don't need some special rules against investor home ownership. Simply maintaining reasonable fiscal and land use policies should be enough to restore a reasonable balance.