More than 13K rent-stabilized units in NYC are sitting empty for multiple years, report finds
gothamist.com
A city Independent Budget Office report examines vacancy data from the state’s housing agency amid concerns of "warehousing."

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

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.

    • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]English
      23•10 months ago

      100% on their rental value, which for many landlords is directly tied to massive loans they’re underwater on. That’s why they’d rather have unoccupied rentals with nominally high values than reduce the rental price to match the market and have their loans called in.

      • Zuberi 👀English
        0•10 months ago

        The rental value would be $0.

        Contrary to lemmy.world logic, 0% of 0 is 0

        • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]English
          21•10 months ago

          No, the rental value is the nominal price of the rental. This is extremely simple, a child could understand this. The landlords have gotten loans based on the assumed rental income, which is not $0.

          • Zuberi 👀English
            5•10 months ago

            They aren’t making any income on rent. So what % would an income tax have to be to be >0$ exactly?

            • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]English
              21•10 months ago

              Seriously? OK, you must not really have thought about this before. They are listing their properties for rent but nobody is renting them. They’re listing those properties at the nominal rental value. So the tax would be on that nominal rental cost. This is like, babytown frolics level simple to connect the dots on even if you don’t agree with it - understanding this should have clicked like two replies back.

                • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]English
                  20•10 months ago

                  nominal income

                  nominal income

                  nominal income

                  you’re welcome to disagree but wasting this much time pretending to not understand is just childish, have a very nice day weirdo

                  • Zuberi 👀English
                    7•10 months ago

                    It’s taxed upon selling, for the value of the house, which would tax exactly what you’re talking about.

                    Trying to act like I’m not understanding makes you sound “childish” my dude. Grow tf up and READ. INCOME TAX ON ZERO DOLLARS IS ZERO DOLLARS

                    Edit: This dude’s banner is a 9/11 photo. Nice… I’m arguing with a literal troglodyte over the semantics of a dumb article title.