I read the article about it, and supposedly it's to stop investors from buying up properties and pushing the prices up and not leaving them available to primary home buyers.
Another politician tried to set the record straight and said it was about supply, and that they're simply weren't enough houses, because they weren't building enough houses.
But in truth, if a flipper buys a house and rehabs it and sells it at market prices, primary home buyers are going to be able to buy it, and it's going to be rehabbed. And I know from experience most people do not want to buy a house that needs a lot of work, they want to buy a house that is moved in ready and they are willing to pay more to have that
I think if we looked a little deeper the truth would be that California is just looking for another way to increase their tax base. There are a lot of ways for them to limit the housing shortage in California and one of them is to not be a sanctuary City, to be honest. That just drives more people into the area, which makes less housing available, which increases the prices because there's a shortage.
But even if there were enough houses, they would still be trying to find some way to get more tax revenue.
The problem with this particular bill is it doesn't just impact investors, it's anybody who doesn't hold a house for at least 3 years. So that means if you buy your house and after a year and a half you get transferred to another state, there's still going to love you that tax again to you even though you were a primary homeowner and owner occupant. It's just another punishing tax by this state
