But what if no empty house?!
😫😫😫
Having to sell to whom though. Blackstone or another private equity firm who buy on massive amounts of credit then jack up rents via monopoly pricing?
Allow one primary house, and a second one, tax the rest to fucking oblivion if not sold within a reasonable time frame
Why should someone be allowed a 2nd home without penalty in a country with housing scarcity?
I’d say at least a 50% value tax on that as unnecessary consumption
Because it’s not unreasonable to have a primary home and maybe a vacation home, or a family home, or a rental. More than that is absurd.
The scarcity would decrease pretty fast, coupled with a situation where private companies can’t own houses and apartments, that would pretty much solve itOf course it’s not unreasonable, but if you want that luxury, you should pay from taking that supply from someone who needs it
It’s not unreasonable, but if after taxing 3rd and 4th homes (etc.) to oblivion the issue persists, then also second homes should be taxed high. I truly believe that extreme would not be needed once it’s made humanely forbidden to own multiple homes without intention of ever living in them.
Worth adding that it should not be the number of homes what should be taxed, but based on the market value of those properties.
Why not just tax based on the number of homes, isn’t that a better idea?
If someone owns three £10M mansions, they’re potentially depriving two families of homes but way of scarsity, but frankly if you can afford a £10M mansion is it really an issue, as you’re not being deprived of a home?
If they instead own one £10M mansion and forty £200k flats/terraces, they’re potentially depriving forty families of homes and so should probably be charged twenty times as much to dissuade people from buying up the cheapest homes.
I think you possibly intended to reply to a different comment
My comment was talking about heavily taxing 2nd properties (and implicitly any more after that)
I did mean to reply to your comment. Just trying to say that I don’t need 2nd homes to be taxed much more higher that 1st homes if the issue can be fixed without getting to that point. Although it shouldn’t be off the table if it’s necessary to guarantee people can have access to homes.
I mean we should start high on the second home and go way up from there IMO
Yeah that would make sense
Yes it is unreasonable.
Found the landlord! /s
I wish I owned my home but unfortunately, I don’t have rich parents :(
But you’re prepared to allow people to have a second home when you realise that most people can’t even afford the first. That’s generous I don’t think I’d be that generous.
