4 ms·

> A vacancy tax no more compels someone to rent their property than an income tax compels me to be unemployed. This analogy doesn’t make sense to me. Perhaps y

by mdmglr 4y ago

> A vacancy tax no more compels someone to rent their property than an income tax compels me to be unemployed. This analogy doesn’t make sense to me. Perhaps you can clarify.

meepmorp 4y ago
You're not required to rent, but you would pay the tax if the property is unrented. You still have the option of not renting, but that's no longer a cost free choice.
- barelysapient 4y ago
  The property owner already pays property taxes so it’s not ‘free’.
  - meepmorp 4y ago
    Yes, but that cost is independent of rental status. The purpose of the tax is to introduce a cost associated with rental status.
camgunz 4y ago
People automatically equate taxation with fines and coercion, but they're separate concepts. The best example is the income tax. If we slap taxes on things we don't want people to do, then why do we literally tax work, a thing we want almost everyone to do? So taxes aren't fines or fees, and they don't force you to stop doing something you want to do or do something you don't want to. People still buy groceries despite sales taxes (which, again, we want people to buy stuff). Thus, the argument that a vacancy tax compels rental property owners to rent their places falls. I'm not compelled by income tax to be unemployed, nor am I compelled by sales taxes to purchase no goods, nor are owners compelled to rent their places.
- hgdfhgfdhgdf 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - camgunz 4y ago
    The authority to establish speed limits is based on what Amendment? The authority for States to proscribe abortion is based on what Amendment? The authority of States to proscribe selling alcohol to minors is based on what Amendment? The authority of States to require that you enter a contract with an insurer before operating a vehicle is based on what Amendment? (Sorry these textualist posts are just extremely tedious. 300m people in the richest country in history aren't governed solely by a document that is literally a pamphlet. There's case law and statutes. Your best bet here if this is a good faith question is to ask Google)
    - ashwagary 4y ago
      I'm not arguing against this tax or its legality but find the rest of your comment interesting. >The authority of States to proscribe selling alcohol to minors is based on what Amendment? Commerce clause says congress has the right to regulate commerce. >The authority of States to require that you enter a contract with an insurer before operating a vehicle is based on what. Amendment? Little know fact, states only have the right to require insurance if a vehicle is being used for commerce. Personal use transportation does not legally require DMV registration or insurance but the vast majority of people dont know this and voluntarily opt-in to being regulated by laws specifically created to protect paying passengers (taxis) and paid cargo carriers (semis) from accidents.
      - camgunz 4y ago
        > Commerce clause says congress has the right to regulate commerce. The _Federal_ govt can regulate _interstate_ commerce. The way they enforce minimum alcohol age and speed limits is by threatening to withhold highway subsidies. The way States have the authority is the 10th Amendment + there's not a Constitutional right to ingest whatever you want (actually seems like a core freedom, but let's not get sidetracked). Generally this creates a system where States are free to restrict "rights" the Constitution is silent on. > Little know fact, states only have the right to require insurance if a vehicle is being used for commerce. Personal use transportation does not legally require DMV registration or insurance This is super wrong. Here's Indiana's statute [0]. Nothing about commercial use only. States have total authority here as long as their constitutions permit it. [0]: https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-4-1.html https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-...
- JuniorBalleg 4y ago
  [dead]
- JesusLovesEwe 4y ago
  >If we slap taxes on things we don't want people to do, then why do we literally tax work Because we don't have a choice. You need resources to survive, you need to work to acquire resources. The government wouldn't hesitate to tax breathing if they were confident we wouldn't hang them for it.
- dogma1138 4y ago
  Taxation is very much used to incentivize certain behaviors and penalize others. Hence why we have tax efficient retirement savings, why certain expenses are tax deductible whilst others aren’t and why certain goods such as tobacco and alcohol might have additional taxes levied on them.
  - camgunz 4y ago
    Incentivizing is neither forcing nor compulsion. Taxing someone for doing something or not doing something does not force them to do the opposite.
beej71 4y ago
It's like the ACA. It was never illegal to not have health insurance. You wouldn't go to jail. Technically you weren't even penalized. You were just taxed at a higher rate. SCOTUS was on board with that, since Congress has the power to tax. It's not illegal to not have kids. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. It's not illegal to be employed. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. It's not illegal to keep a vacant rental. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. All of those are compelling in the same way: "Do this thing and we'll tax you less."

by mdmglr 4y ago

> A vacancy tax no more compels someone to rent their property than an income tax compels me to be unemployed. This analogy doesn’t make sense to me. Perhaps you can clarify.

meepmorp 4y ago

You're not required to rent, but you would pay the tax if the property is unrented. You still have the option of not renting, but that's no longer a cost free choice.

barelysapient 4y ago
The property owner already pays property taxes so it’s not ‘free’.
- meepmorp 4y ago
  Yes, but that cost is independent of rental status. The purpose of the tax is to introduce a cost associated with rental status.

camgunz 4y ago

People automatically equate taxation with fines and coercion, but they're separate concepts. The best example is the income tax. If we slap taxes on things we don't want people to do, then why do we literally tax work, a thing we want almost everyone to do? So taxes aren't fines or fees, and they don't force you to stop doing something you want to do or do something you don't want to. People still buy groceries despite sales taxes (which, again, we want people to buy stuff). Thus, the argument that a vacancy tax compels rental property owners to rent their places falls. I'm not compelled by income tax to be unemployed, nor am I compelled by sales taxes to purchase no goods, nor are owners compelled to rent their places.

hgdfhgfdhgdf 4y ago
[flagged]
- camgunz 4y ago
  The authority to establish speed limits is based on what Amendment? The authority for States to proscribe abortion is based on what Amendment? The authority of States to proscribe selling alcohol to minors is based on what Amendment? The authority of States to require that you enter a contract with an insurer before operating a vehicle is based on what Amendment? (Sorry these textualist posts are just extremely tedious. 300m people in the richest country in history aren't governed solely by a document that is literally a pamphlet. There's case law and statutes. Your best bet here if this is a good faith question is to ask Google)
  - ashwagary 4y ago
    I'm not arguing against this tax or its legality but find the rest of your comment interesting. >The authority of States to proscribe selling alcohol to minors is based on what Amendment? Commerce clause says congress has the right to regulate commerce. >The authority of States to require that you enter a contract with an insurer before operating a vehicle is based on what. Amendment? Little know fact, states only have the right to require insurance if a vehicle is being used for commerce. Personal use transportation does not legally require DMV registration or insurance but the vast majority of people dont know this and voluntarily opt-in to being regulated by laws specifically created to protect paying passengers (taxis) and paid cargo carriers (semis) from accidents.
    - camgunz 4y ago
      > Commerce clause says congress has the right to regulate commerce. The _Federal_ govt can regulate _interstate_ commerce. The way they enforce minimum alcohol age and speed limits is by threatening to withhold highway subsidies. The way States have the authority is the 10th Amendment + there's not a Constitutional right to ingest whatever you want (actually seems like a core freedom, but let's not get sidetracked). Generally this creates a system where States are free to restrict "rights" the Constitution is silent on. > Little know fact, states only have the right to require insurance if a vehicle is being used for commerce. Personal use transportation does not legally require DMV registration or insurance This is super wrong. Here's Indiana's statute [0]. Nothing about commercial use only. States have total authority here as long as their constitutions permit it. [0]: https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-4-1.html https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-...
JuniorBalleg 4y ago
[dead]
JesusLovesEwe 4y ago
>If we slap taxes on things we don't want people to do, then why do we literally tax work Because we don't have a choice. You need resources to survive, you need to work to acquire resources. The government wouldn't hesitate to tax breathing if they were confident we wouldn't hang them for it.
dogma1138 4y ago
Taxation is very much used to incentivize certain behaviors and penalize others. Hence why we have tax efficient retirement savings, why certain expenses are tax deductible whilst others aren’t and why certain goods such as tobacco and alcohol might have additional taxes levied on them.
- camgunz 4y ago
  Incentivizing is neither forcing nor compulsion. Taxing someone for doing something or not doing something does not force them to do the opposite.

beej71 4y ago

It's like the ACA. It was never illegal to not have health insurance. You wouldn't go to jail. Technically you weren't even penalized. You were just taxed at a higher rate. SCOTUS was on board with that, since Congress has the power to tax. It's not illegal to not have kids. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. It's not illegal to be employed. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. It's not illegal to keep a vacant rental. You won't go to jail. You're not penalized. You're just taxed at a higher rate. All of those are compelling in the same way: "Do this thing and we'll tax you less."