this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
377 points (85.5% liked)
Economics
1716 readers
11 users here now
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you read the article, they state exactly what you just said. NYC has many unoccupied apartments which are not being filled because the renters concluded that the rent would not pay for cost of upkeep. They're not selling the properties either, though.
This is occurring in the midst of homelessness being on the rise. A law like this would be to either force the renter to put the property on the market, or fill the vacancy.
Honestly if a potential rental unit won't cover the costs associated with renting it, I can't think about how salable it's going to be. Seems like a market failure and my guess is that it probably has to do with the extensive regulations on rentals in NYC and how hard it is to get rid of a bad tenant.
It may not be salable to a renter but it's probably going to still be salable to people who actually need a place to live.
Also, yes, plenty of landlords would be screwed into a situation where they'll lose money either way and will just lose more money from holding onto the property than from selling.
What you are describing is the same problem though. If you sell it and someone comes in and renovates it for use as a primary residence, then it is no longer affordable housing.