From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   >On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 7:34:34 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:   
      
   >>If property taxes go up, the rent has to go up too because the landlord   
   >>obviously isn't going to _lose_ money renting out the property; if so,   
   >>he wouldn't have bought it in the first place.   
      
   >But property taxes can, and do, go up faster than rents, and the   
   >landlords do end up losing money.   
      
   Aargh.   
      
   The concept of taxation of land is that it's a tax on value the landlord   
   HAS NOT created. Part of the land rent will be paid to government as taxes,   
   part will be retained by the landlord.   
      
   No, taxes on land CANNOT exceed rent with proper assessment.   
      
   The building and other improvement earn rent based on their condition.   
   That is indeed value that landlord has created, and he gets to keep that.   
      
   >In the short term, they still have a mortgage to pay, so they'll have   
   >to eat the loss in the hope rents will eventually catch up.  In the   
   >long term, the property will be abandoned if rents don't catch up.   
   >(Other urban conditions play a part, too).   
      
   No, hancock. Landlord is always part speculator. He buys land, hoping   
   it'll rise in value.   
      
   >>(The property's value may go up over time and his mortgage payment   
   >>shouldn't, but his taxes and maintenance costs will go up to match,   
   >>leaving him with no real profits until the mortgage is paid off.)   
      
   >It's quite variable.  In the grand scheme of things it averages out as   
   >you describe, but on an individual basis it's very variable.   
      
   Not on an individual basis. Some people sold at the height of land   
   speculation and made out quite nicely. It depends on timing the market.   
      
   You want to even out land speculation and dramatic rise and fall in   
   land value? Tax land.   
      
   >Sometimes a neighborhood becomes very desirable and rent goes up far   
   >faster than taxes and costs and the landlord makes out very well.  Other   
   >times the reverse happens.   
      
   Then assessors just aren't doing their jobs if assessments fail to keep   
   up with rising land value. You keep bringing up bad assessment practices   
   as if that's adverse to the concept. Well, there's bad assessment RIGHT NOW.   
      
   >In addition, some smart landlords manage to get low cost financing which   
   >keeps their costs down.   
      
   Doesn't everyone with a mortgage refinance when interest rates drop?   
   If they fail to use their consumer power, well, that's not society's problem.   
      
   >Others know how to keep maint costs low, perhaps by doing the work themselves.   
      
   Maintaining the building and improvements doesn't affect one's own   
   land value. Can bring in better tenants and higher rents just from having   
   a superior building.   
      
   >Then, of course, there are foolish landlords who pay way too much   
   >to maintain their properties.   
      
   That's not society's problem any more than your previous example of   
   property owners that fail to refinance when interest rates drop.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)