JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become a megalandlord

Re:JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become... by Aunche on Saturday December 31, 2022 @09:32AM (#34196737)

So you want to punish developers building apartment complexes in high-demand cities, while billionaires can enjoy their hundred million dollars tax free? NIMBYs tend to be private homeowners, so this would defeat much of the purpose of the LVT.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become... by consp on Saturday December 31, 2022 @10:08AM (#34197067)

> So you want to punish developers building apartment complexes in high-demand cities

I don't know about the US but in other places you can actually buy an apartment which would solve that problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become... by californical on Saturday December 31, 2022 @10:55AM (#34197536)

You could develop a giant complex and sell the units to individuals instead of renting!

Or there could also be a different tax rate depending on density. Single family home would be taxed the highest. Lower taxes for townhomes. Lower still for apartments.

The rate would still increase with number of units that a single entity owns, but by a smaller amount for more-dense housing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become... by impossiblefork on Saturday December 31, 2022 @11:34AM (#34198006)

This is the system we have in Sweden, although it has a problem in that it sometimes happens that developers saddle the resulting condominium association with debts, which are sometimes substantial.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JPMorgan to spend $1B on rental homes in the US to become... by zirgs on Saturday December 31, 2022 @12:19PM (#34198470)

Developers can sell apartments to private citizens or other corporations. They don't have to rent out apartments themselves.

[ Parent | on HN ]