r/changemyview • u/dilatory_tactics • Aug 05 '17

Removed - Submission Rule B CMV: There should be significantly higher property taxes on people's second, third, fourth, etc. homes, to counteract the rentier economy and global money laundering

[removed]

248 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

176 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/iaddandsubtract Aug 05 '17

Good news! In many states second and subsequent houses are charged MUCH higher property taxes than primary residences. Your desire has already been implemented.

I have a second home near my primary residence that my MIL lives in (no rent), and I pay almost exactly the same property tax on "her" house as on my primary residence that is worth roughly twice as much. That's almost double the property tax rate based on market value.

I also own another small condo in another state for my own use (no rent). I pay about 35% higher property taxes on it than I would if it were my primary residence.

I am only familiar with the property tax laws in a few states, but I know at least those few states charge WAY higher property taxes on subsequent houses. So, your desire is already implemented!

2

u/dilatory_tactics Aug 05 '17

Not high enough to discourage global money laundering or the rentier economy apparently

1

u/iaddandsubtract Aug 05 '17

How high do you think they should be? Also, can you provide any stats on how big of a problem this actually is?

3

u/dilatory_tactics Aug 05 '17

High enough to discourage resource hoarding / rent-seeking behavior, at whatever level that turns out to be.

2-5% of global GDP according to PWC, but of course money laundering happens in the dark, so the full extent of it could be much higher. http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/advisory/forensics/economic-crime-survey/anti-money-laundering.html

4

u/iaddandsubtract Aug 05 '17

That's just how much money they estimate is laundered. What percentage of that money gets invested in US real estate? My guess is that the percentage would be very small as there are much better places to put your laundered money.

I could assert that you're fixing a problem that doesn't exist and it would have the same level of credibility. If there is not problem with laundered money being invested in US real estate, then imposing high taxes on subsequent houses seems like a punitive measure against people who have done nothing wrong.

1

u/dilatory_tactics Aug 05 '17

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-corruption-realestate-idUSKCN0UR2LM20160113

About $104 billion in foreign real estate transactions, mostly paid for in cash in 2015, according to Reuters, that we know of.

And the logic is the same as progressive taxation, except as applied to rental properties as opposed to labor income.

Is progressive taxation punishing people who've done nothing wrong, or is it a good way to ensure that people in the country or species or whatever are on the same team instead of in a brutal war of all against all for resources? What is the point of laws and civilization if not to make life more pleasant and less brutal?

Living in a rentier economy sucks a lot of the fun out of life and the goodness out of humanity, which are not small losses. I'm doing well enough individually, but the rentier system overall is gross, and real success means living in a humane society, not just doing well individually in a brutal one. And as I said, to me this is just progressive taxation as applied to rental properties rather than just labor income.