4 ms·
As in most real-world scenarios, multiple solutions are needed, and it's best to first agree on the goal you want. To me these would be more availability while
by mihaic 4y ago
As in most real-world scenarios, multiple solutions are needed, and it's best to first agree on the goal you want. To me these would be more availability while also disincentivising real estate as an investment vehicle.
I know that's not a direction most people agree on (hitting real estate as an investment), but there really is no other way I see.
- nullc 4y ago"Second homes" isn't targeted. Many (most?) second homes aren't investments-- they're vacation homes, in places which aren't hot markets, and will almost certainly lose money compared to just sticking it in a broad market ETF (even with the home leveraged via a mortgage). > I know that's not a direction most people agree on (hitting real estate as an investment), Most states have substantially lower and/or increase restricted property taxes for a single owner occupied home, so I don't think you can say that taxing investment properties at a higher rate than owner occupied properties a direction people don't agree on, generally. (California is weird in that it restricts tax increases for all properties, including commercial). One problem you run into is that most investment properties are rented out and increased taxes on them will be passed onto the tenants, so any increased taxes on these properties is arguably regressive since the tenants tend to be a lower income part of the population.