5 ms·

I'm totally in favor of a vacancy tax, every city should have them. Dude is like, "People are just leaving to live cheaper elsewhere, we can't fill these units

I'm totally in favor of a vacancy tax, every city should have them. Dude is like, "People are just leaving to live cheaper elsewhere, we can't fill these units!". Have you tried lowering the rent? Of course not.

29athrowaway 3y ago
But the tax should be weighted. The higher the crime rate, the lower the tax rate. So now the city has to do something about crime, littering, defecation, intoxication, looting, etc. otherwise they get no money. But that won't happen ever because the voting criteria in SF is "donkey people good, elephant people bad". The donkey people have no incentive to be competent because they take their vote for granted.
- Twixes 3y ago
  Sounds like a great metric to game though. Undercounting crime is not far fetched at all. Such a metric needs to be maintained independently from the local government (or independently verifiable).
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
philsquared_ 3y ago
Landlords are surprised when they have to deal with what every other business has to. Supply and Demand, and changing market conditions... He has the supply and not enough demand. Sit on your thumbs or lower your price?
mikewarot 3y ago
If they lowered the rent... That would be a permanent loss because of the punitive restrictions on raising it. That would be effectively writing off part of the property value forever. I'd wait for as long as possible to avoid that kind of loss.
IronWolve 3y ago
Same with retail space, they wont lower the rent so units remain empty for years... To make it fair for the small mom/pop owned units, maybe if they have to lower the rent, they should be able to lower the property value (and thus property tax), since its based off rent. I've seen older units being sold as condos, because the owner just wanted out of the situation.
thunky 3y ago
> I'm totally in favor of a vacancy tax There already is a "vacancy tax": the landlord is losing money when the property is vacant. They can't do that forever so that "tax" will naturally force them to adapt to the market (lower rents or sell).

29athrowaway 3y ago

But the tax should be weighted. The higher the crime rate, the lower the tax rate. So now the city has to do something about crime, littering, defecation, intoxication, looting, etc. otherwise they get no money. But that won't happen ever because the voting criteria in SF is "donkey people good, elephant people bad". The donkey people have no incentive to be competent because they take their vote for granted.

Twixes 3y ago
Sounds like a great metric to game though. Undercounting crime is not far fetched at all. Such a metric needs to be maintained independently from the local government (or independently verifiable).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

philsquared_ 3y ago

Landlords are surprised when they have to deal with what every other business has to. Supply and Demand, and changing market conditions... He has the supply and not enough demand. Sit on your thumbs or lower your price?

mikewarot 3y ago

If they lowered the rent... That would be a permanent loss because of the punitive restrictions on raising it. That would be effectively writing off part of the property value forever. I'd wait for as long as possible to avoid that kind of loss.

IronWolve 3y ago

Same with retail space, they wont lower the rent so units remain empty for years... To make it fair for the small mom/pop owned units, maybe if they have to lower the rent, they should be able to lower the property value (and thus property tax), since its based off rent. I've seen older units being sold as condos, because the owner just wanted out of the situation.

thunky 3y ago

> I'm totally in favor of a vacancy tax There already is a "vacancy tax": the landlord is losing money when the property is vacant. They can't do that forever so that "tax" will naturally force them to adapt to the market (lower rents or sell).