Personally I think the landlords would just increase the rent while saying their interests are literally the only ones that need protection from the state because they generate all the revenue but can’t blame them for trying.
Then tenants will keep more money, in any case where there’s any competition in housing.
And in any case where there’s no competition in the housing supply, tenants will still be unharmed because they’re already paying the maximum amount that landlords can get away with.
Rents will presumably rise accordingly, and then be captured in the form of a tax that is both very difficult to evade and no longer harms economic efficiency
I think that’s a rather hopeful view of the situation, but, on the other hand, I guess it would also help real estate bubbles from forming so there’s that at least.
Personally I think the landlords would just increase the rent while saying their interests are literally the only ones that need protection from the state because they generate all the revenue but can’t blame them for trying.
Counterintuitively, a LVT wouldn’t distort prices because the supply of land is fixed.
Generally speaking landlords charge as much in rent as the market will bear. If they could get away with charging more they would already be doing so.
Right, and when tenants aren’t paying taxes?
Then tenants will keep more money, in any case where there’s any competition in housing.
And in any case where there’s no competition in the housing supply, tenants will still be unharmed because they’re already paying the maximum amount that landlords can get away with.
It’s risk free for tenants.
Rents will presumably rise accordingly, and then be captured in the form of a tax that is both very difficult to evade and no longer harms economic efficiency
I think that’s a rather hopeful view of the situation, but, on the other hand, I guess it would also help real estate bubbles from forming so there’s that at least.