Personal Finance

3806 readers

1 users here now

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

736

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 [email protected] to c/[email protected]

386 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

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

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

This article title makes ZERO sense. Empty house tax, sure.

But an "income" tax on no rent being paid?

Why would that EVER be passed by the people who own all of the houses? Don't waste the poors' time lol

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"Income tax on no income" is exactly what imputed income is, as mentioned by OP. Free perks from an employer are, for example, (in the US), taxed as income.

https://www.hrblock.com/tax-center/income/what-is-imputed-income/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That's just not solid logic

load more comments (3 replies)