I beg to differ. You, as the landlord, don't necessarily set the rent price--the market does. If the market is going for lower than your monthly upkeep cost (including property tax) then you will be paying the tax and other expenses.

It is implausible for this to happen at scale. Presumably all properties in competition for the same clients will have comparable tax and each landlord will implicitly factor taxes into their prices. This should have an effect, similar to collusion (by with no malice), of effectively raising the cost.

The taxes get factored into the price of the land and the house, not rents. If demand for housing falls such that rent does not make owning a house worthwhile, it gets sold (or force-liquidated through foreclosure), and the new owner at a lower cost basis will let it out at market rates.

> The taxes get factored into the price of the land and the house,

So you have checked with every property owner and verified this?

I actually rent now, from my father (because he makes bad real estate decision despite having his real estate license). After talking with my landlord, who I know well and often talk to, I learned that in this area there are laws about how low rents can be. In his specific situation he is not allowed to rent the property for less than 125% of the price of his mortgage payment which must include the property taxes. Apparently, this is to insure there is money repairs.

So as for houses in Omaha I am fairly certain you are factually in error. I suspect other jurisdictions have other things going on in general, but it seems reasonable that most people do simple things like take their expenses into account which includes tax.