Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 30, 2010 at 11:54 AM in reply to: Can a landlord add “fees” to circumvent rate increase maximums? #598421
AK
ParticipantArrowood is practically within walking distance of the back gate — do a map recon.
I don’t think there’s much else in the way of new construction around Oceanside, and inventory of good resale homes seems kinda low at the moment.
ParticipantArrowood is practically within walking distance of the back gate — do a map recon.
I don’t think there’s much else in the way of new construction around Oceanside, and inventory of good resale homes seems kinda low at the moment.
ParticipantArrowood is practically within walking distance of the back gate — do a map recon.
I don’t think there’s much else in the way of new construction around Oceanside, and inventory of good resale homes seems kinda low at the moment.
ParticipantArrowood is practically within walking distance of the back gate — do a map recon.
I don’t think there’s much else in the way of new construction around Oceanside, and inventory of good resale homes seems kinda low at the moment.
ParticipantArrowood is practically within walking distance of the back gate — do a map recon.
I don’t think there’s much else in the way of new construction around Oceanside, and inventory of good resale homes seems kinda low at the moment.
Participant[quote=DWCAP]DUDE, that snoops post was WAY less informative (wrong) than the original post. yah, in most of the country most people will not get hit with the tax. But here in CA, were most 2/2 condos built in the 1980’s go for more than the median house everywhere else, it is relevant, and true.
Plus this tax applys to other passive income, like rents, and not just capital gains.
Not saying it is a terrible thing to tax passive income similar wage income, but it most certainly is a true tax. I have no idea where they got the “mostly False”, except that they chose their example really really carefully to not include the exempetions. This is ‘mostly true’, but dont forget your 250k/500k exemptions.[/quote]
I admit that the original post did discuss the 250/500 exemptions, but the original article (OCRegister editorial) buried it very stealthily at the end, after describing it as an “equity tax.”
Participant[quote=DWCAP]DUDE, that snoops post was WAY less informative (wrong) than the original post. yah, in most of the country most people will not get hit with the tax. But here in CA, were most 2/2 condos built in the 1980’s go for more than the median house everywhere else, it is relevant, and true.
Plus this tax applys to other passive income, like rents, and not just capital gains.
Not saying it is a terrible thing to tax passive income similar wage income, but it most certainly is a true tax. I have no idea where they got the “mostly False”, except that they chose their example really really carefully to not include the exempetions. This is ‘mostly true’, but dont forget your 250k/500k exemptions.[/quote]
I admit that the original post did discuss the 250/500 exemptions, but the original article (OCRegister editorial) buried it very stealthily at the end, after describing it as an “equity tax.”
Participant[quote=DWCAP]DUDE, that snoops post was WAY less informative (wrong) than the original post. yah, in most of the country most people will not get hit with the tax. But here in CA, were most 2/2 condos built in the 1980’s go for more than the median house everywhere else, it is relevant, and true.
Plus this tax applys to other passive income, like rents, and not just capital gains.
Not saying it is a terrible thing to tax passive income similar wage income, but it most certainly is a true tax. I have no idea where they got the “mostly False”, except that they chose their example really really carefully to not include the exempetions. This is ‘mostly true’, but dont forget your 250k/500k exemptions.[/quote]
I admit that the original post did discuss the 250/500 exemptions, but the original article (OCRegister editorial) buried it very stealthily at the end, after describing it as an “equity tax.”
Participant[quote=DWCAP]DUDE, that snoops post was WAY less informative (wrong) than the original post. yah, in most of the country most people will not get hit with the tax. But here in CA, were most 2/2 condos built in the 1980’s go for more than the median house everywhere else, it is relevant, and true.
Plus this tax applys to other passive income, like rents, and not just capital gains.
Not saying it is a terrible thing to tax passive income similar wage income, but it most certainly is a true tax. I have no idea where they got the “mostly False”, except that they chose their example really really carefully to not include the exempetions. This is ‘mostly true’, but dont forget your 250k/500k exemptions.[/quote]
I admit that the original post did discuss the 250/500 exemptions, but the original article (OCRegister editorial) buried it very stealthily at the end, after describing it as an “equity tax.”
Participant[quote=DWCAP]DUDE, that snoops post was WAY less informative (wrong) than the original post. yah, in most of the country most people will not get hit with the tax. But here in CA, were most 2/2 condos built in the 1980’s go for more than the median house everywhere else, it is relevant, and true.
Plus this tax applys to other passive income, like rents, and not just capital gains.
Not saying it is a terrible thing to tax passive income similar wage income, but it most certainly is a true tax. I have no idea where they got the “mostly False”, except that they chose their example really really carefully to not include the exempetions. This is ‘mostly true’, but dont forget your 250k/500k exemptions.[/quote]
I admit that the original post did discuss the 250/500 exemptions, but the original article (OCRegister editorial) buried it very stealthily at the end, after describing it as an “equity tax.”
ParticipantOK, so it is a real tax … but it’s not like it’s the end of the world. It creates a modest tax burden for a small number of people but it doesn’t even come close to rolling back the 1997 capital gains exemption that helped fuel the housing bubble.
Plus this will apply mostly to people who’ve benefited handsomely from low property tax assessments over the years, and only if/when they sell. As a new homeowner I say tax the so-and-sos, because they’re the ones who want to take away my mortgage interest deduction to pay for their Medicare-funded power recliners.
Come on folks, this isn’t the end of the world. I can’t see this as enough to influence sales decisions one way or another …
ParticipantOK, so it is a real tax … but it’s not like it’s the end of the world. It creates a modest tax burden for a small number of people but it doesn’t even come close to rolling back the 1997 capital gains exemption that helped fuel the housing bubble.
Plus this will apply mostly to people who’ve benefited handsomely from low property tax assessments over the years, and only if/when they sell. As a new homeowner I say tax the so-and-sos, because they’re the ones who want to take away my mortgage interest deduction to pay for their Medicare-funded power recliners.
Come on folks, this isn’t the end of the world. I can’t see this as enough to influence sales decisions one way or another …
ParticipantOK, so it is a real tax … but it’s not like it’s the end of the world. It creates a modest tax burden for a small number of people but it doesn’t even come close to rolling back the 1997 capital gains exemption that helped fuel the housing bubble.
Plus this will apply mostly to people who’ve benefited handsomely from low property tax assessments over the years, and only if/when they sell. As a new homeowner I say tax the so-and-sos, because they’re the ones who want to take away my mortgage interest deduction to pay for their Medicare-funded power recliners.
Come on folks, this isn’t the end of the world. I can’t see this as enough to influence sales decisions one way or another …
ParticipantOK, so it is a real tax … but it’s not like it’s the end of the world. It creates a modest tax burden for a small number of people but it doesn’t even come close to rolling back the 1997 capital gains exemption that helped fuel the housing bubble.
Plus this will apply mostly to people who’ve benefited handsomely from low property tax assessments over the years, and only if/when they sell. As a new homeowner I say tax the so-and-sos, because they’re the ones who want to take away my mortgage interest deduction to pay for their Medicare-funded power recliners.
Come on folks, this isn’t the end of the world. I can’t see this as enough to influence sales decisions one way or another …
-
AuthorPosts
