Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there’s still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.
So much to unpack there, not the least of which are the sweeping generalization of “landlord” and the truly odd assumption that all landlords “enjoy” every single vacant unit “for themselves”… I mean, I appreciate your outrage, but damn. Stay in school?
They could enjoy the space. It’s their choice no to.
Try going to school.
Swing and a miss, kiddo.
Nope. Die in a fire landlord scum.
Heh. You’re adorable. Keep chirpin’ li’l bird. 😘
I hope all your properties are stripped for copper and the sewers are filled with concrete.
No outrage here. I’m using the word enjoy in an economic sense, as in possessing something and getting some benefit out of it. The concept is called “imputed rent” if you’d like to look it up.
Thanks, and though only a handful of margins actually enjoy the concept in an economic sense, I’m personally aware of the term and its tax implications (as an actual landlord myself). For those that aren’t, however and would like to avoid condescension, I’ll save you a click.
If you would like to avoid condescension, maybe don’t be condescending yourself.
Sorry, friend. I find your suggestion implausible. Your post, while perhaps well-meaning in its origin, begins with unnecessary exaggeration and belies an emotional if not outright personal source for the opinion behind it. Your condescension is baked right in.
I don’t know how you arrive at that conclusion, but okay buddy whatever.
Eh. You might’ve come off as educated-yet-a-little-overzealous at first, but now you’re clearly just a whiner with an Econ 101 textbook on loan and a his rusty lunchbox to rattle at the sky.
Keep on truckin’, kid. You’ll figure it out someday.
That’s a stupid term. Saying that someone living in their own house is earning them “imputed rent” is ridiculous.
It’s not ridiculous at all. Imputed rent is part of why owning your own home is a good investment. You can’t live in your shares of GameStop!
You can’t live in your shares of GameStop!
But no one is saying you can or comparing the two things.
That’s not the point. I’m just trying to explain that imputed rent is real. By owning and possessing housing you are receiving income from it in the form of imputed rent. It is the savings on the rent you would otherwise have to pay if someone else owned the property you possess instead of you.
By owning and possessing housing you are receiving income from it in the form of imputed rent
You’re not receiving income. That’s a completely made up ridiculous term.
There are like 5 places in the world that do it, and at least one of them got rid of it because of how stupid it is ( https://www.ubs.com/ch/en/private/mortgages/information/magazine/2021/abolition-of-imputed-rental-value-what-happens-next.html )
Counting an implied value as income simply because you own something is ridiculous and not something that should ever be considered.
