Alert! I predict new home builds in ‘rental’ communities will be targets of arson during construction.
Don’t allow investors to continue this unethical revenue stream which will lead to anger and chaos.
This is a must. No longer can first time home buyers compete with large firms for a home. With prices already exorbitant, this makes it that much harder for our first time home buyers.
3 Likes
This policy title proposes outlawing “Private Equity” companies from buying single family homes - that would not pertain to individuals who want to own a few houses as rentals. Your “working Americans buying fixer upper homes” would not be impacted if this proposal were enacted - they would still be able to do so.
1 Like
Either that or it will MEGA increase the rents.
Yes, we have to find a way to make a distinction, company employee nimber limit is no good bc you cam create a shell company for every house if needed. This is difficult… we dont want to hurt small American investors whobare building familial wealth with kess than 20-50 properties, but we need a way to prevent it from being circumvented.
Ahh, ok. That would do it.
That’s just the thing. I am trying to convey – and perhaps not very well – that if they are TAXED at point of purchase, it will make it very unattractive to buy the home in the first place. Therefore, the hoarders will be DETERRED from buying the houses in the first place. As far as the ‘vacation home’ people, yeah, they need to be taxed at point of purchase for buying a second home but not as much as if they go on to buy a third, fourth, fifth to "flip’ and rent out. Those next levels, tax even higher at POINT OF PURCHASE. Do we want to solve the problem and free up the market or don’t we?
1 Like
I’ve addressed this below in another reply. But if they are DETERRED from buying the houses at POINT OF PURCHASE, they will have no chance to increase the rent.
Exactly. The big issue is to get them to STOP being able to buy homes cheap. That is why you TAX them at the POINT OF PURCHASE, so it makes it very unattractive, i.e., not very profitable, to buy and rent. As they buy their 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 100th, 15,000th house, they are taxed so heavily, it does not make any financial sense for them to continue. Do we want to stop this or not?
2 Likes
I agree, wealth gets concentrated more and more and the gap grows bigger and bigger.
I would add local landlords should be able to have two homes in the area, but out of state owners get high tax, it would keep more money in the local economy.
1 Like
Came here to post this one, so glad it’s here already!! MAKE Americans homeowners again!!
2 Likes
I agree. Private equity firms, sure, but not citizens that own more than 1 home. We own 2. We bought the house we live in 23yrs ago when we were 24 & 25yrs old. My husband’s mom got cancer and lived too far away. She didn’t have the income/credit to buy but had money for down payment that we didn’t have. So, we bought a tiny home for her 2 houses from us so we can help take care of her and she still has her own independence. We couldn’t afford it alone and neither could she, so we did it together w/our credit/income and her down payment; but we do now have 2 homes in our name. We also help her pay for things when she’s short. There must be some sort of caveat if something like this were to be considered for these sorts of instances where we aren’t living high on the hog but just families help eachother.
4 Likes
I agree with you on this. Individuals should not be “mega taxed” on second houses. It should be scaled. There should be a minimal increase on 2nd and even 3rd properties. But there should be a threshold where the owner of these properties becomes a business and is taxed differently. There is enough housing to go around but not if flippers are buying dozens of fixer uppers.
4 Likes
Sounds like a need for a temporary housing cap as well
And they rent them out at outrageous rates to make huge profits. No thanks. We can find better ways to take care of financially unstable families than to force them to be victimized by quick buck makers.
4 Likes
Companies like Blackrock are buying up not only residential homes but they have also bought out entire neighborhoods. What they can then do, is rent those homes to illegal aliens in your neighborhoods. They will get a pretty penny from the government. So they are also getting government funding for housing them. They could put 20 illegals in a home and there is nothing you can do about it. This not only can hurt your property value but but could hurt you from actually selling your home. I think they are planning to take over neighborhoods and homeowner’s associations. I struggle with renters in my neighborhood who let their dogs bark all day and all night. My once peaceful neighborhood is slowly being taken over by corporate ownership renting them out to whomever they feel like it.
3 Likes
Just a side note, and this is supposedly based on FEDERAL HOUSING “anti-discrimination” laws so you know it’s bogus to begin with. In Colorado, a potential buyer used to be able to write what is condescendingly referred to as a “love letter” to the seller, in order to tell the seller a bit about themselves and why they really need/want the house. (At least) COLORADO OUTLAWED THAT, and I proffer that it was so the MULTI-HOME INVESTORS, large and small, would not be at a disadvantage and could swoop in and bid just like a small family who really needs to get into a lower-priced home to raise their family. It’s criminal all around.
3 Likes
How about any publicly traded company or one one that is multi-national. That is 85% of large companies doing this.
This exactly hurt us in Colorado when we were trying to purchase! Several of the homes we put offers on were rejected and sold for an amount over selling price (bidding wars) to companies. Now, those homes are for rent thru companies.
We wanted to put a letter in to the owner (we’re
a small family with a special needs child) but were told its not allowed anymore for colorado.
Rent and home prices here exploded!
2 Likes
So allow someone/corporation to own up to 5 homes before we ban it. Not counting home builders, that may own 1000 new homes. So, ban anyone from buying a used home if they already own 5.