379
Landlords should have to pay income tax on their rental properties regardless of whether they're rented out or not. (gothamist.com)
submitted 1 year ago by CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work to c/economics@lemmy.ml
120 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there's still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yes there’s both but the wealth tax is much less significant than the imputed rental income

What I really dislike about it is that if you have a house and rent it out you pay a tax on that rent. If you live on it you pay a tax on a rent that doesn’t exist. It almost incentivizes you to rent your house rather than living in it.

[-] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 1 points 1 year ago

It does exist, but it's not obvious because it's income in the form of the rent you don't have to pay because you are both the owner and possessor of the house. It's kind of like how, in the USA at least, if I get free tuition because a parent or spouse works at the university I attend, I will owe income tax on the tuition I'm not paying. Or, if I have some debt that gets cancelled somehow, I will owe income tax on that amount.

this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
379 points (85.6% liked)

Economics

1720 readers
2 users here now

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ml