4 ms·
> “Spain also smashes foreigners owning a property in Spain.” In which way?
by marc 1mo ago
> “Spain also smashes foreigners owning a property in Spain.”
In which way?
- Grombobulous 1mo agoUsually when people say stuff like this it translates to “the tax rate is slightly higher than [insert less desirable location here]” or "my marginal tax rate seems really high since I have a very high income"
- germandiago 1mo ago> "my marginal tax rate seems really high since I have a very high income" You can read my comment above. If it was only that... it is way more than that. But hey, a high income is not a reason to overtax over 50% to anyone. That is crazy just based on the idea of "because they earn more" IMHO.
- Grombobulous 1mo agoI don’t think your comment above did your argument a lot of favors. ~50% taxation rate is not even a particularly uncommon tax rate for top earners. Basically every developed country has that. From 1932 to 1981 the top federal tax rate in the United States was over 60%, peaking above 90%.
- germandiago 1mo agoRape and murder is not uncommon either and I think we can agree it is not something desirable.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- Grombobulous 1mo agoIce cream is also not uncommon. Wait, what were we talking about again?
- germandiago 1mo agoWe were talking about the fact that: > ~50% taxation rate is not even a particularly uncommon tax rate for top earners. Basically every developed country has that. > From 1932 to 1981 the top federal tax rate in the United States was over 60%, peaking above 90%. It sounded like you equate common = good or acceptable. I dispute that. I replied that slavery is bad (abusive taxing can be seen as a way of slavery), independently of how much you earn. So I asked you if murder and rape are good just because they are common, to see if you would be able to link it to the fact that because that level of taxing is normalized, it is not ethical. You clearly understood it. Instead of ackowledging that maybe it is not ethical, you started gaslighting. But if it is ethical, explain to me under which justification you make taking things via coercion from people is a good thing, as if they belonged a different category. In which idea do you base that? Because I have a terrible difficulty understanding these things.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- x0x0 1mo agoSpain charges you tax if you rent the property out. If you don't rent the property out, it imputes a rent and you are charged tax on the imputed rent. The cadastral value is (finger in the air) 40% of the value of the property; you pay (non-eu resident) 24% of between 1.1% and 2% of the cadastral value. So 0.1%-0.2% of property value annually.
- thfuran 1mo ago0.2% is significantly lower than the property tax rate I pay on my house, and taxing vacant property seems like a good idea to try to disincentivize inefficient use of limited urban real estate.
- x0x0 1mo agoYou won't get any disagreement from me.
- elric 1mo agoSo what? Lots of places do this. It's not unique to Spain and it's simply a tax ob real estate.
- gib444 1mo ago> So 0.1%-0.2% of property value annually. You're highlighting how amazingly low that is right? In the UK (edit: England) unoccupied council tax charges can be in the region of £3000-8000/year (200% of the normal council tax bill)
- germandiago 1mo agoIn England there is a policy for "no empty house". But tell me what happens in England if someone occupies a house. What I know is that they are kicked out and quickly. In Spain? Just stop the electricity or water for them or look at all the laws that make them "vulnerable" and you are going to pay for them until they kick them out. Things got so bad that now people when they rent they make an insurance against this kind of intrusion. Before this was not a problem.
- germandiago 1mo agoRead my comment above.