Re:L.A. council members propose taxing landlords who leave h...
by TomVDB on Friday June 21, 2019 @02:17AM
(#20240283)
Malice assumes that somebody is doing something wrong/illegal.
That's not the case for this proposal: they simply have different tax rates for different situations.
There are many other ways today in which tax treatment depends on property was used or based on assumptions by the IRS that the tax payer must prove when challenged.
For example: if you sell a house today, you can get favorable tax treatment if during the last 5 years before the sale, you've used it as your primary residence for at least 2 years.
If you didn't, no problem, no malice, you just don't get to benefit from that tax benefit.
That's not the case for this proposal: they simply have different tax rates for different situations.
There are many other ways today in which tax treatment depends on property was used or based on assumptions by the IRS that the tax payer must prove when challenged.
For example: if you sell a house today, you can get favorable tax treatment if during the last 5 years before the sale, you've used it as your primary residence for at least 2 years.
If you didn't, no problem, no malice, you just don't get to benefit from that tax benefit.