Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Buying & Selling Real Estate
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated over 2 years ago, 04/28/2022

User Stats

5,854
Posts
6,747
Votes
Dan H.
Pro Member
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
6,747
Votes |
5,854
Posts

California proposes additional 25% tax for flippers

Dan H.
Pro Member
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
Posted

There is a bill proposed by Chris Ward district 78 called the California Housing Speculation Act that proposes charging a 25% additional tax (an income surtax) on the profit (above the regular tax collected on the profit) if a home is sold within 3 years of purchase.  The bill's author believes that the flippers are driving up the price of homes by purchasing them instead of the end buyer and selling them at a profit.

I am not a flipper, but I believe that flippers revitalize the properties while end buyers mostly do not. Without flippers, neighborhoods would get old. flippers and BRRRR investors play a large role in gentifying an area. It is my experience that neighborhoods like flippers and BRRRR investors. They typically know the property is run down and appreciate the improvement to the area that is accomplished by the rehab.

In addition, the rehab/revitalization of a property involves work and has risk.  People deserve to be compensated for their work and any risk that they take.

If the politicians go after flippers what is to say they will not go after BRRRR investors next or even turnkey rental property providers? BRRRR investors rehab properties to extract money but it also leads to higher rents than if we rented the unit in its old, run-down state. In addition, the property is owned by an investor instead of owner-occupied buyer.

To me it is an attack on property investors. If they attack any form of property investor, recognize your form could be the next to be attacked.

It is my view the bill is short-sighted (similar to rent control rules) and proposed to provide the optics of trying to address the problem of rising property values and lack of affordability.  I suspect Chris Ward has minimal understanding of Real Estate and is proposing this primarily to obtain votes.  I doubt he really would desire the consequences of reduced flippers.

  • Dan H.
  • Loading replies...