What's going on Canada?
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
π Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL)
unknownFootball (CFL)
unknownBaseball
unknownBasketball
unknownSoccer
unknownπ» Universities
π΅ Finance / Shopping
π£οΈ Politics
π Social and Culture
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
Someone bought a century home in Saint John and is allowing it to rot. The buyer apparently lives in Toronto and doesn't care that the building is falling apart.
This is shitty. Someone has the money for "an investment", which means other people don't get somewhere to live.
Yeah, landlords suck fucking ass. They're a bunch of greedy dickbags who want money for doing no work, by definition.
All non primary residences should have a massive tax slapped on them, not just these dumb foreign home buyer / vacant home taxes that nibble away at tiny edges of the problem instead of the core issue.
If we're having a housing crisis then why are we allowing people to hoard more than 1 home?
There is no landlord. This property is empty. Nobody is living there.
Took awhile to interpret what you meant here. I guess I never thought about it but by definition the noun landlord is tied up in some capacity with tenants paying a rent.
Intuitively, landlord sounds really simple. Lord being a ruler of a household and land in this context being a territory marked by political boundaries i.e 'someone's yard', you'd think they'd mash up easily to become 'Ruler of the house on the land' i.e landlord, but it's entirely more than that. In all definitions I've found it's tied into tenancy.
Kinda weird and I don't like it.
I meant it more collequially and was including real estate investors squatting on land in the same category since it doesn't really roll off the tongue
Vacant home taxes can work if they are serious numbers. I want to see a vacant home tax at 25% of the property value annually.
No issue there, but why just vacant homes? Why are we not taxing all non primary homes when so many people who want and should be able to afford a primary home, cannot?
Any tax that targets landlords will simply be passed on to the tenants, making rent more expensive.
Vacant building taxes seem to me to be a more effective tool to increase housing availability.
In Winnipeg there are some very visible buildings that have dozens of apartments that have been boarded up for years. The owner is a speculator in another city who refuses to do anything with the buildings. It's just sitting there falling into disrepair.
the pass off to tenants are simply not true, there is a threshold and after that threshold buying a home is cheaper than renting. And not occupied rental unit is actually "expensive" to the landlords, so they will be forced to sell.
There are many things that affects how that would be applied, and the fall out of how you implement such tax.
Simply untrue, if a landlord has to pay more tax on a non-primary residence, they're going to have to rent it out for far more than a mortgage payment would cost a first time home buyer, meaning that the first time home buyer will have an easier time justifying outbidding them at sale time.
Also impossible for a landlord to pass that on in any property that is rent controlled with long term tenants, likely forcing them to sell their second and third homes, putting more on the market and driving prices down.
Not a bad idea, so long as the secondary property has utility. I'm thinking cottagers and those with Cabins in the woods can be taxed out of their long weekend/summer stays, but it doesn't add to where homes are needed.
Calm down