Comment by UncleMeat
7 months ago
My house is already taxed on its current value rather than the value I purchased it for.
There are small edge cases for "the thing I own is worth a gazillion dollars now but I never want to sell it." Those edge cases already exist with the "I grew up in this house and I am emotionally attached to it" situation. It sure seems to me like people having unrealized gains in equities is, you know, vastly more common than finding out that the weird knick-knack that reminds you of your mom is actually a valuable collectable worth millions.
The difference is that land is not produced by anybody and taxing it comes with zero negative effects - it can't dampen production to raise costs, as usual with taxation, because land was produced by nobody. That differs from taxing wealth in things that are produced very differently, because that comes with side effects of discouraging production
Real estate is the edge case, because we don’t usually tax possessions.
Valuable possessions have a tendency to move to areas where ownership is not taxed.
Thus only unmovable assets are taxed simply for possession.
> “My house is already taxed on its current value rather than the value I purchased it for.”
That’s what California’s Prop 13 was supposed to address.
And this is a widely criticized policy that it not the norm across the rest of the country.
That shocked me when I moved to Nassau County, NY--that home owners did not have that protection. Nassau County is allegedly one of the most expensive tax counties in the country. There is definitely a retirement migration of blue collar residents who can't afford the property tax increases on their home when they retire. And in this perverse housing market, what was even 350k 10 years ago is 750k now (I know because I was looking). Forget what retirement age homeowners paid 30+ years ago.