this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
1649 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5778 readers
2273 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Darohan@lemmy.zip 72 points 4 months ago (6 children)

The more properties you own, the more tax you pay on the price of the next one - excluding if you only own one, but escalating quickly after like 3 or 4.

[–] Kayana@ttrpg.network 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Possible formula: Tax for n-th house = n-th Fibonacci number + 5 * max(0, n - 2). So low numbers like three get penalized by that linear part, and high numbers grow exponentially due to the Fibonacci number.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Ok now it's starting to get confusing enough to fit into our tax system. Can we add more variables? Lol

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 months ago

This is so obviously what needs to happen. The fact that it hasn't says everything you need to know about current governments.

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Texas is that way to a point. Your primary residence gets enormous tax breaks. Any property after that, fuck you, pay up. The downside to that is that it contributes to the high cost of rent as the owner passes it along to the tenant.

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago

Does it increase per property owned though? They can't keep passing on the tax increase to the tenant if at a certain point they own 1000 houses and now their tax on the last one is 7 times higher than the rent on it.

That's what we should be doing any house after your second gets increased a ton per house. Make it untenable for people to own rental properties. I don't mind someone having a vacation house or two if they can afford it. But nobody needs 10 vacation houses, they're rental or investment properties at that point so fuck them.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Are you talking about a homestead exemption? I think most places have something like that but it's just a discount on the house you live in so not an increase on the other properties. They would just get normal tax rates for any additional properties. I think making it an exponential tax would make a huge difference.

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Yes homestead. I'm not sure how other states do it.

Texas increased from ten thousand to twenty five thousand to forty thousand to a hundred thousand in a short period.

So semantics. I say increase for other houses, you say discount for primary house. Either way you choose to phrase it, you pay less for your primary residence and more for other properties.

[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My city somewhat does this. You get a significant tax break on your primary residence, so if you rent out your house you pay more.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

But if you rent out 1000 houses you pay the same tax rate and if you were to rent 3. Op was saying that it should go up per house. So by the time you have like 3 or 4 you can't afford more.

[–] chimasterflex@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Serious question, couldn't you bypass this by just setting up different LLCs that only have one or two properties under them?

[–] Wild_Mastic@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

They already do this. In my old job, the boss had 0 properties, he just used company money, company cars etc and had multiple of them

[–] Dalvoron@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

Linear housing, quadratic taxes