976
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
976 points (98.8% liked)
People Twitter
7796 readers
372 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
sounds overcomplicated, why not just rebrand the so called "land contract" into renting?
edit: wouldn't land contracts required idiotic amounts of identification as opposed to renting which requires none?
Because landlords dont want land contracts. They make more on rent.
All we have to do is set up an owner-occupant exemption to a massive property tax hike. Landlords won't be eligible for that exemption.
Landlords will use land contracts to get around that hike. They'll be pushing for tenants to become owners in order to avoid the tax man.
No. It's an agreement between two parties. They require no more identification than any other agreement between two parties.
Technically, the agreement should be registered with the county as it affects the deed of the property, but that isn't strictly necessary for the first three years.