3 ms·

> Again, obviously tenants need rights, but it seems like many jurisdictions have overshot the sweet spot Tenants need rights and landlords need tenants. In so

> Again, obviously tenants need rights, but it seems like many jurisdictions have overshot the sweet spot Tenants need rights and landlords need tenants. In some cities (SF) the demand outstrips supply sufficiently that you won’t easily find housing but in other cities (NYC) there’s such a diversity in housing options that you’ll always be able to find a closet to rent somewhere. I think it’s hard to say that tenants have too much rights. There’s no reason to enter the business of land letting unless you are comfortable with the regulations. Laws and their purpose come before profits.

londons_explore 4y ago
I think you missed OP's point... There are plenty of landlords right now happy to rent an apartment to a couple each with 6 figure salaries and no debt. But if they can't find such a couple, they'd rather leave their apartment empty. There are lots of landlords like that, and the end result is there are lots of empty apartments and lots of other people who can't find housing.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > There are lots of landlords like that, and the end result is there are lots of empty apartments and lots of other people who can't find housing. The solution for that are serious vacancy taxes. If people are unwilling to assume the risk of hitting a "dud", they can always sell their property to some large-scale landlord.
- pydry 4y ago
  That's why those landlords need to be taxed more : so they lose a great deal of money if they don't rent. (if they sell up because they can't stomach the taxes, reducing home prices that is also a positive outcome)
  - londons_explore 4y ago
    Landlords taxed too much for vacant properties would just knock the property down and keep the land. Then later, when they want to recoup their investment, they rebuild. Most properties it isn't the building that is valuable, but the inner city land where one can build a building.
    - pydry 4y ago
      >Landlords taxed too much for vacant properties would just knock the property down and keep the land. Unless that was what was taxed. >Most properties it isn't the building that is valuable, but the inner city land Precisely my point. If you slap taxes on land you increase the available supply.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- ericd 4y ago
  The vacancy rate in the US is not high, at least according to statistics. I don’t know where this “lots of vacant apartments” narrative is coming from.
refurb 4y ago
It most definitely backfires in SF. When i gave up my rent controlled apartment my landlady said she was leaving it empty. Why? Because she was retiring soon and in a 4-unit building the value of it goes up by $100,000 - $250,000 for each unit that is empty. Why? Because rent control locks in rent and this future income. Evictions can takes up to a year or more and mandatory payouts are often in the tens of thousands if you do evict without cause (say owner wants to move into a unit). If the unit is empty someone can move in right away or rent for market rent. The units were renting for ~$3,000 per month, so as long as she sold it within 9 years she wad ahead of renting the unit out. I agree that landlords need to go in eyes wide open, but the challenge is rules can change after you get tenants. And the big lesson here is landlords respond to incentives too. If regulations make it cheaper to do something negative, they’ll do it. Most people would.

londons_explore 4y ago

I think you missed OP's point... There are plenty of landlords right now happy to rent an apartment to a couple each with 6 figure salaries and no debt. But if they can't find such a couple, they'd rather leave their apartment empty. There are lots of landlords like that, and the end result is there are lots of empty apartments and lots of other people who can't find housing.

mschuster91 4y ago
> There are lots of landlords like that, and the end result is there are lots of empty apartments and lots of other people who can't find housing. The solution for that are serious vacancy taxes. If people are unwilling to assume the risk of hitting a "dud", they can always sell their property to some large-scale landlord.
pydry 4y ago
That's why those landlords need to be taxed more : so they lose a great deal of money if they don't rent. (if they sell up because they can't stomach the taxes, reducing home prices that is also a positive outcome)
- londons_explore 4y ago
  Landlords taxed too much for vacant properties would just knock the property down and keep the land. Then later, when they want to recoup their investment, they rebuild. Most properties it isn't the building that is valuable, but the inner city land where one can build a building.
  - pydry 4y ago
    >Landlords taxed too much for vacant properties would just knock the property down and keep the land. Unless that was what was taxed. >Most properties it isn't the building that is valuable, but the inner city land Precisely my point. If you slap taxes on land you increase the available supply.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
ericd 4y ago
The vacancy rate in the US is not high, at least according to statistics. I don’t know where this “lots of vacant apartments” narrative is coming from.

refurb 4y ago

It most definitely backfires in SF. When i gave up my rent controlled apartment my landlady said she was leaving it empty. Why? Because she was retiring soon and in a 4-unit building the value of it goes up by $100,000 - $250,000 for each unit that is empty. Why? Because rent control locks in rent and this future income. Evictions can takes up to a year or more and mandatory payouts are often in the tens of thousands if you do evict without cause (say owner wants to move into a unit). If the unit is empty someone can move in right away or rent for market rent. The units were renting for ~$3,000 per month, so as long as she sold it within 9 years she wad ahead of renting the unit out. I agree that landlords need to go in eyes wide open, but the challenge is rules can change after you get tenants. And the big lesson here is landlords respond to incentives too. If regulations make it cheaper to do something negative, they’ll do it. Most people would.