The Threat Coming by Land

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by evgen on Sunday September 13, 2015 @07:41AM (#10211045)

So since your home, which by your own admission is primarily a domicile and not an investment vehicle, is now worth more you can take out a loan based on the increase in value over what you paid for the house and use that to pay the additional taxes. You are being taxed on the appreciation in value to your home that you basically had nothing to do with and therefore have a very weak claim regarding a just right to this increase in value.

tl;dr is "boo hoo, cry me a river"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by terryf on Sunday September 13, 2015 @08:43AM (#10211181)

So you're basically saying it's ok to tax people on gains, that are entirely theoretical and over which they had no control themselves?

You might have a point if you consider a home something that is entirely fungible - but for a lot of people it is not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by gaius on Sunday September 13, 2015 @09:03AM (#10211246)

If a house drops in value, is it also the government's responsibility to refund the difference?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by FifteenChractrs on Sunday September 13, 2015 @12:42PM (#10211917)

There shouldn't be property taxes at all. It's asinine. Taxes for goods and services is more than enough. Not owning property, or the privilege of employment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by kspaans on Sunday September 13, 2015 @02:18PM (#10212249)

Wouldn't that be really regressive? A poor person's spending on goods is going to be a larger proportion of their income than a rich person's.

Admittedly, rich people could buy fancier goods which could be taxed more, but would that make up the difference?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by erentz on Sunday September 13, 2015 @11:19AM (#10211648)

Since tax is tied to the value of the property when the house loses value taxes go down.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by gaius on Sunday September 13, 2015 @08:26AM (#10211138)

That is clearly nonsense; why should anyone be forced to monetize their assets? The increase in value is entirely "on paper".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by imrehg on Sunday September 13, 2015 @09:39AM (#10211350)

As much as I understand, that "forced monetization" can exist, such as in the case of stock options - those can incur tax right away (alternative minimum tax), and usually will have to sell some of your just got stocks to be able to pay for that (if you don't have other assets to cover it).

For example, point 2 at http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/10/10-tax-tips-stock-options-p...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Threat Coming by Land by walshemj on Sunday September 13, 2015 @10:27AM (#10211502)

Well that is why the USA's laws on taxation of options need to be reformed.

[ Parent | on HN ]