Ask HN: Why not introduce foreign Real Estate tax in California? - goldfishcaura
======
WildUtah
Why not?

The same reason everything in California is screwed up: Proposition 13
prohibits fixing it.

------
nugget
There isn't much room for California to raise income or sales taxes, which
means property taxes are next. A popular referendum will modify prop 13 and
the State will inch up property taxes little by little, buoyed by one widely-
publicized, world-is-ending, save-the-children 'crisis' after another (first
health care, then pensions, and after that, your guess is as good as mine). In
reply to your question: they will be busy taxing everybody, not just
foreigners.

------
kqr2
This question is most likely a follow-up to the recent discussion _Vancouver
house prices are falling_ :

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13569550](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13569550)

------
whb07
To discourage foreigners buying property? A giant reason for home prices in
California being so high are all the regulations restricting zoning, building
codes, etc. Real changes would never really happen to "increasing affordable"
homes really, as no rational homeowner wants to see their home values
decrease.

On the side for demand, it's clear California's coast is the "chic" place for
people to be. Not to mention relatively safe investment spot to stash foreign
money away.

------
raldi
Because we shouldn't discriminate against people based on where they were
born. It's not like it was their choice.

~~~
Inconel
I agree with you if the OP is suggesting a tax on foreign born Americans.

On the other hand, if the OP is talking about foreign non-Americans, I'm not
sure I automatically believe that they have an absolute right to access or
participate in the US real estate market.

~~~
jaclaz
>On the other hand, if the OP is talking about foreign non-Americans, I'm not
sure I automatically believe that they have an absolute right to access or
participate in the US real estate market.

But of course they can - in your view - participate to it, as long as they are
willing to pay a premium surcharge.

~~~
Inconel
Well, yes I should have been more clear. My main contention was that those who
aren't American shouldn't necessarily be allowed to participate in the US real
estate market under the same terms as Americans are allowed to.

I'm not nearly knowledgable enough on the topic to know what the overall
effect on the RE market would be if such a foreign tax was instituted, but
assuming it was found to be favorable, I wouldn't consider such a tax to be
some great injustice.

~~~
gonvaled
What if the foreigner is living and working in the US? Is he allowed to play
with the same rules as american citizens? Only on the property market, or also
for renting? Other markets affected? Should we also be doing the same in our
countries, namely disincentive foreign (also american) investment? Also from
american companies?

The US has already huge geopolitical advantages (the dollar for starters, and
massive stock-holding in companies around the world, some of them acquired
with doubtful means - read "wars"). You have elected a president with the
explicit goal of increasing the game-rigging in your favor, now that you are
not winning (I expressly do not write "loosing") as much as you used to.

We have now other countries which are starting to profit from globalization,
fact which has been used a selling point of capitalism by the US in order to
secure neo-liberal agenda in international organizations for decades:
"capitalism is good because it allows everybody to improve their life
standards by working hard".

If the US continues on this course of "our way or the high way", I guess we
will all loose, but the US has a lot to loose too. International trade can be
closed by other parties too, we can expropriate ownership of foreign nationals
on companies operating in our territories, we can increase legal burden of
foreign companies operating here, ...

Keep on playing the game, even when you are not winning, and stop changing the
rules mid-game - rules which were written mainly by you and your cronies.

Do not wine, and stop being a bully.

~~~
Inconel
I tried to make it clear in my previous comment that I didn't necessarily
support such a tax, but I don't find anything inherently wrong with a country,
any country, limiting or otherwise taxing foreign real estate ownership.

I would expect that any legal resident of the US would be exempt from such a
tax, not just citizens, if they weren't, I would have a problem with the tax
even if it had the desired affect of lowering housing prices. But again, I
want to stress that I don't have the knowledge to determine this.

As to what other countries should do, I have no idea. Certainly I believe they
have every right to determine that for themselves. I believe some countries do
have varying requirements or limits on foreign land/RE ownership. Perhaps I am
mistaken.

~~~
gonvaled
> but I don't find anything inherently wrong with a country, any country,
> limiting or otherwise taxing foreign real estate ownership

The only thing inherently wrong with that is that the US has been advocating,
and profiting, from the policy of relaxing rules for foreign investors for
decades, to the point that most of the world is now partially owned by US
interests.

So, while the US actors were the only ones which were in a position of
profiting from those rules, since other economies were not developed enough to
really expand into foreign markets in a massive scale, lax rules for foreign
investment were perfectly fine.

Now that most of the world (thanks in part for the progress in IT) is in a
position of profiting from those lax rules, the US is turning inward and
tilting the playing field, again.

