The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Are you advocating rent control as well?
I'm not sure where this comes from, but the answer is - As a retired landlord specializing in lower working class tenants - hell yes. There are again particular problems - including the possibility of pricing rents so low that repairs to buildings become impossible but that must be weighed against throwing people out into the streets, and the importance of avoiding the boom bust building cycle that leads to gluts of rental accommodation and landlords being unable to make repairs as they go bankrupt. A regulated rental market is necessary to provide the highest quality housing to those who are unable to afford to buy and don't have the clout or money to challenge their landlords.
aspiring to genteel poverty
SInce you are obviously not one of these, I basically agree with you, except that you would be exempting the poor person from tax increases (which are partly needed to pay increased salaries to city workers etc.) so that their heirs can cash in. One solution might be to allow people below a certain income level to postpone tax increases until selling, and then pay back taxes at that point.
Incidentally, I know people in NY (with strong rent control on older buildings) who have invested quite a bit in improving their own apartments. But this may be due to the combination of rent control with lack of rent control on newer apartments, so that they know they'll probably live in the apartment for the rest of their lives.
I paid the property taxes on my building, not the tenants. Rent control did not limit property tax increases in Ontario. I believe that if you lease a property you typically pay property taxes, but not for renting.
Maybe property taxes on rent-controlled buildings simply doesn't go up much? After all, the "value" (in the normal, vague sense, not the fashion of using it as a synonym for price) of a rent-controlled building, in the sense of the income stream it provides, doesn't go up much, whatever happens to its price. So maybe the law has two ways of determining value, either based on purchase price, or based on rental value.
There was (is?) something similar with faculty housing. NYU attracts potential faculty with inexpensive housing. Back in the 80s, tax reform meant that the difference between the rent and market value (a lot...) would become taxable income. But their lobbyists managed to insert into the law an alternative way of calculating the size of the subsidy, namely the difference between the university price and similar, non-subsidied apartments in the same building. They just happened to have a few rent-controlled tenants from before they bought the building that they hadn't managed to evict.....
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 26 4 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 25
by gmoke - Nov 19 6 comments
by Oui - Nov 20 16 comments
by Oui - Dec 45 comments
by Oui - Dec 31 comment
by Oui - Nov 306 comments
by gmoke - Nov 30
by Oui - Nov 26
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 264 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 25
by Oui - Nov 2016 comments
by Oui - Nov 193 comments
by Oui - Nov 1911 comments
by gmoke - Nov 196 comments
by Oui - Nov 1711 comments
by Oui - Nov 1431 comments
by Oui - Nov 1316 comments
by Oui - Nov 107 comments
by Oui - Nov 830 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 781 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 711 comments
by Oui - Nov 697 comments
by Oui - Oct 3052 comments