A Republican’s bill in the Ohio state legislature aims to drive out institutional owners through heavy taxation.
That's how you know this is a truly desperate situation. Republicans want to raise taxes on corporations.
this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
395 points (98.3% liked)
News
23311 readers
3485 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I know nothing about Ohio specifically, but some Republicans in state legislature aren't completely brain dead or MAGA.
I am going to hop onto my soap box for a minute and say if we want high quality US politicians, we need to better compensate State legislature roles. In Ohio they make 68k, which isn't great, but maybe liveable in Ohio. Looking up CT as a random example, they just bumped the pay from 28k to 40k two years ago and their staffers still earn 2 to 3x their pay.
That's ridiculous. It means only rich people or people funded by rich people can afford to run for state legislature. This doesn't even get into local politics where selectman can earn like 12k yearly... if we want more normal down to earth politicians, we need to fund this shit better.
I have not heard any Republican in a very long time (if ever) suggest heavy taxation on a corporation.
No, but they're still conservatives, which means they will only act in their own self-interest.
load more comments
(7 replies)
You're right. I make triple my state senator and I can only just afford a house here if I wanted to beggar myself with current rates.
68k in Ohio is pretty good for one person or maybe 2, but not more than that. I live in Ohio.
load more comments
(4 replies)
But if we paid them a better wage they wouldn't be so hungry for corporate boots to lick, and the people who rule this country wont stand for that.
I hate modern journalism
here's the senate bill they're talking about https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2224?s=1&r=92
It's a very weak bill, only kicks in at over 50 homes purchased, is not retroactive so existing damage to the market is unaffected, and only affects taxes on interest. Plus a lot of other restrictions to make sure this doesnt affect rental properties at all. Frankly I think this bill is meant to make more affordable property for landlords than anything.
They'll just spin up shell companies to bypass that 50 limit
It's the WSJ, it's the Fox News of print. It's going to have that "mostly true, but also any regulation is bigger than life" vibe.
NYTimes reported on different forms of this bill way back in December when things were still in infancy https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/06/realestate/wall-street-housing-market.html
If signed into law, the legislation, called the End Hedge Fund Control of American Homes Act of 2023, could upend a growing sector of the housing market, and potentially increase the supply of single-family homes available for individual buyers. Homeownership, long a cornerstone of generational wealth in the United States, is increasingly out of reach for Americans as home prices and interest rates soar.
In separate legislation, Representatives Jeff Jackson and Alma Adams of North Carolina, both Democrats, introduced the American Neighborhoods Protection Act on Wednesday. That bill would require corporate owners of more than 75 single-family homes to pay an annual fee of $10,000 per home into a housing trust fund to be used as down payment assistance for families.
The bills were introduced three months after The New York Times published a story examining the impact of corporate-backed investment on Charlotte, N.C., where, in 2022, investors purchased 17 percent of the city’s homes in cash, often outcompeting first-time buyers who rely heavily on mortgages.
Investors buying up 17% of a city with nearly a population of 900,000 people is just nuts. If you say 4 people per household, that's roughly 38,250 homes.
mixed with like converting a large percentage from regular rentals to short term rentals.
The legislators would not propose it if it wasn't great for institutional investors
Our HOA made it much harder for corporate raider types to buy and rent houses in our neighborhood. Took a lot of legwork and paying a lawyer to get the changes passed. Was well worth it, though. Sleep better at night.
I've mentioned this before on Lemmy, and a few pious Ackshualemmys felt the compulsion to preach about how this was just a move to keep home prices up. But it really wasn't. The legal language still allows individual families to rent their homes if they want to. But it strictly limits how many corporate / institutional type landlords can be in the neighborhood.
My main point here is: as much as most of us hate HOAs (including me)...if you have an HOA think about leveraging it to help slow this corporate creep of mass home buying.
My problem with HOA's is that they seem to have no accountability if a power tripping asshole is in charge. If HOA's lost the ability to put leans on properties and was just an organization that neighbors joined of their own volition, it might be better
Then again, if they don't have that power then they can't do what your HOA did.
I will NEVER live in another HOA community. To your point, it just takes a few dicks to ruin it for everyone. Sold my house to an institutional investor just to get out of one. Everyone peering out their blinds, ready to speed, dial the gastopo if a car they dont recognize appears at someone else's residence. The 6am geriatric weed police making sure everyone's lawns are mowed at 90' angles. Can't have a work truck in your own driveway, gotta repaint your house every 10 years now you wanna tell me who I can and can't unload this paper house to? Get bent. Communities usually full of big truck, clean bed freedom lovers too.
load more comments
(1 replies)
My guy YOU are the accountability. Yes, it’s another exhausting and thankless form of governance, but if you hate the board and the despots? Run a flyer campaign, run for the board/leadership, get on the finance committee and run obstruction, abuse the bylaws and force actual proper process and procedure - the power trippers rarely are actual good administrators, and generally hate procedures and checks on power.
It’s not a fun process to fight back, but “refi and run” doesn’t solve the issue of bad HOAs/leadership
its an election system and you can actually call a vote by petition of residents. I get peoples feelings but there are options to stop gross negligence. Its tougher when the person is sorta annoying but not enough to go through the pain of getting rid of them or like people deciding to run themselves and do the work. Its unpaid work and in my experience the ones doing it are more put upon than those that don't. With a few exceptions.
My condo does not allow rentals and never did. Its one reason it was affordable for me.
When I lived in a condo, there was a cap on the total of units that could be rented.
Rentals required an additional administrative charge to the HOA, which essentially acted as a property manager.
Basically, it was so that people who had to move temporarily for extended periods (like being deployed) could keep their house.
Imo, it was a good compromise.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
They paid for a lawyer? I'm jealous. I couldn't even get mine to create a 2024 budget....in April...which is not only needed for a lender to approve the sale, it's a legal requirement to run an HOA. And this was after the president sabotaged the first sale because I renovated it and the appraisal would make his taxes go up. So glad I'm finally out of that place...
It was a huge PITA. Our fees are very low (thank goodness) so we don't have much of a budget to work with. But it was one of those unicorn bipartisan things where almost everyone really wanted to do it. Even some of the nay-sayers changed their minds after all was said and done and they saw how it actually works (and not how they feared it would work).
I'm in NY and I literally have to quit my job and start over in another state because as it is right now there is literally 0 chance I ever own a home here... I've watched prices double in less than 4 years, it's absolutely disgusting....
load more comments
(5 replies)
Democrats and Republicans both pushing a bill that would make the world a little better?
Okay, the Republicans will last minute vote all against this
They won't let Biden take a win, get your head out of your ass
Crackdown. My. Ass. I won’t hold my breath.
I would hope you do have a crack down your ass.
In some instances, extending that crack up to the shoulder blades would seem very appropriate
load more comments
(1 replies)
There's usually one down there yeah
Yep, in Utah the legislators ARE the investors buying the housing. Guess how "good" the renter protection laws are there.
The LDS church (Mormons) is America's fifth-largest private landowner.
You mean the church that hid billions of dollars, while still demanding 10% of their followers income to allow them to take part in religious ceremony? That church? Yeah fuck religions, but especially that one.
How to tell they've almost bought everything they can already.
They've got quite a bit in California for sure.
Yes, just a couple thousand more and then crack away!
"The Government of Canada has announced a two-year extension to an existing ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing. The Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act (the Act) was set to expire at the end of 2024, it will now be extended to January 1, 2027." Between foreign investment on U.S. housing ( who almost always pay cash so are less affected by borrowing costs) and corporate investing firms, the average American Family is pretty much hosed. Allowing unchecked investment practices in housing not only significantly drives up prices, but also property taxes. It also discourages investment in neighborhoods and local culture as investors are not forced or incentivized to maintain their investments (housing) so the houses then fall into disrepair or sit empty. For example, in my neighborhood, the local elementary school is struggling to stay open due to sharply declining enrollment as there are so few families that actually live here. Its full of investment houses that are overpriced and falling apart.
The Canadian law would have more teeth if it wasn't so darn easy to set up a Canadian company to buy houses in the first place (please note: this is not from personal experience, I have not done this personally). The law we need progressively taxes corporate-owned houses to the point of making it unprofitable after they own X houses (pick your own value of X).
Laws can protect people or they protect corporations. It should be both, but it never really looks like both, does it?
The law we need progressively taxes corporate-owned houses to the point of making it unprofitable after they own X houses (pick your own value of X).
That would be awesome!
My value for X is 1.
That article is light on the details. The most unbiased data I could find is from July 2023. Searching percent of REIT purchased or owned single-family residences yields countless results from non-credible websites.
As a result, investors still purchased 27 percent of single-family homes in the first quarter of this year. [2023]
In the fourth quarter of 2022, investors purchased nearly one-third of homes sold in the bottom third by metro area sales price compared to about one-quarter of homes that sold in the top third.
https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/8-facts-about-investor-activity-single-family-rental-market
It seems like it’s not the percent of all residences that is causing the constraint, but that REITs are specifically targeting the most affordable homes in metro and suburban areas.
Makes sense, affordable homes so their investment is less, affordable areas so they're low income and will be dependent on your now rented house, and the markets are rigged thanks to those rent price websites so they'll charge like 2x or more of what the mortgage price would have been as those are typical rent prices now...
To steal a George Carlin transition: "and another group of people I'd love to drag into the woods and disembowel with a wooden cooking spoon..."
Fucking wall street... They're the reason I have to quit my job and leave the state my whole family lives in...
Excellent invocation of Carlin. I’m looking into moving as well. What states are you considering?
I don't want to be too far from family so possibly Connecticut, or if I can somehow find something within my state then possibly "upstate" NY but I can't seem to find much here that also has decent work opportunities close by. At the moment I'm stuck on super overpriced long Island so I definitely need to leave.
Westchester here. I feel your pain. Thinking about braving the cold in Buffalo. Rent and cost of living is insane by comparison.
How much you wanna bet they'll just demolish them all out of spite? Bonus points if they build barely-maintained, high-rent apartments on the now-vacant lots.
If they want to demolish them but they still have to sell the land, I'm okay with that. Cut up the lot to a sensible size and build a couple of affordable homes with decent yards in the McMansion's footprint.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›