• Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    this would push investors towards the non-included class of real estate

    You’d have to pay property tax then, and unless your in California your paying that on your “unrealized gains” as well since they’ll re-asses your property every few years and tax you on the newly assessed value.

    • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      True, but all home buyers already pay property tax for the properties they’re buying up, and these properties will be owned by someone, regardless. If an institutional home-buying group doesn’t buy a house to immediately rent out for higher than the mortgage rate, someone else will get a mortgage on it for themselves instead.

      But if these wealthy investors are now not earning as much money from intangible assets with highly elastic demand, such as stocks, they might not have much of an issue switching more investment capital to a tangible asset with more inelastic demand, for a now only slightly lower rate of return: Real Estate.

      The fact that real estate was excluded from taxable assets in this proposal, when the only subject of these taxes are people with over $100m income, is crazy to me. It should be included.