this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
350 points (97.8% liked)

Canada

7196 readers
558 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 50 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I think the most novel proposal we put forward in the report is taxing the total real estate holdings of large landowners, as opposed to individually taxing each property using the aforementioned brackets. This could entail situations where large landowners own a portfolio of properties, each falling below that $3 million threshold, but that cumulatively add up to tens of millions of dollars. In this scenario, by taxing the total holdings instead of each property separately, these owners would no longer be able to avoid paying those progressive property tax rates.

There's a few interesting bits to this article, but I like this one the most. Property taxes on the cumulative amount of property a person or company owns is huge. It provides a punishment for buying up large amounts of property.

[–] yads@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

People already pay taxes on cumulative properties. You need this plus the progressive tax idea.

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm 100% on board with this. Hell, why not both?

We could also do a residence + 1 option where your house and 1 other property are taxed reasonably. The any property beyond that is taxed as escalating rates that ramp up significantly for each additional property.

[–] xT1TANx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the corporations will never allow it

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

How, exactly, does a human population become so meek that they are willing to let a piece of paper control them?

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the concern is that:

  • The rich would try to skirt this with numbered or shell companies, or family or other relations.
  • The rich would pass this onto tenants.

Now, the solution is to a) couple this with rent control, b) exempt purpose-built rentals from this endeavour, and c) punish serial transgressions with confiscation.

Frankly, I think the idea of punishing malfeasance by landlords with confiscation to be just awesome: if you're a predatory slumlord, we take the house and repurpose it as RGI public housing. Do I worry about the government becoming predatory? Yes, yes I do, but in this case it's a lesser-of-two-evils thin.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Corporations shouldn't be allowed to own residential property in the first place. Make it illegal.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Housing cooperatives are non-profit corporations that own property so that they can provide residential services to the members and owners of that corporation.

You know, I'm actually not 100% sure what the difference between a condominium and a cooperative is, but condos are also corporations.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree but then one of two things has to happen.

  1. No one is allowed to own property
  2. Corporations need to stop being classified as people

Guess which one would come first? Be honest.

There are already strong cases to be made that corporations aren't people, especially if you look into how flimsy that argument was in the first place, but I take your point.

[–] errorgap@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Slumlords and overpriced rentals can be storage issues though. It can be a nice place, but if you're paying $2k+/mo for a 1b1b that's way too fucking much even if it's in good condition