Quote:
Originally Posted by 68style
I don't own any secondary properties, so I don't have any investment in whatever is decided... but doesn't that just make rents higher? Any cost to an owner of a secondary residence just gets folded up into the rent to cover it. There seems to be an expectation developing that people who own secondary properties should lose money monthly and offer affordable rents even though it might only cover 50-75% of their monthly mortgage cost... but that is never going to be the case and why would it be?
|
The primary concern for investors is ROI. When the ROI from a given form of investment is too low to be attractive (compared to other forms of investment), investors will take their money elsewhere. With secondary properties, ROI primarily comes from:
1. capital gain from the property
2. rental income from the property
To prevent investors from getting good ROI through RE without royally screwing the renters, a policy would have to focus on #1 without massively affecting #2.
So I guess the means to achieve this is to tax the bejesus out of capital gains from secondary properties?