'Flipping Tax' Good Or Bad Thing?

Alan J. Heavens a Inquirer Real Estate Columnist is reporting although not likely to pass there is a "anti-speculation tax," envisioned by the Philadelphia Coalition for Affordable Communities, [which] would raise the real estate transfer tax by 1.5 percent on houses resold less than two years after purchase."

Although I'm not in favor of those who do this because it drives up prices, the question remains is it a good thing they be punished?

NOPE

Here's why
(1) Anyone else could have bought the property in question just as well as these speculators.
(2) Those who 'flip' upgrade the properties for resale instead of renting them out.

So what's the problem?
If Philadelphia imposes an additional 1.5 percent they're not doing future purchasers any favors. They're only making matters worse for future buyers of these properties by increasing the prices on them. The end result is there will be fewer speculators improving properties. I don't see how that's a good thing to improve the housing stock in Philadelphia or anywhere else for that matter.

Each home that is upgraded by those 'flipping' will result in larger property tax revenues to a city year after year.

This as opposed to someone perhaps just buying these properties and not doing anything with them. More likely then not speculators will accomplish far more with these properties.


Instead of Philadelphia's taxpayers being required to shell out for property improvement programs why not let private capital do what otherwise would become a burden to taxpayers?

Besides, this sure beats the hell out of speculators renting them out
because of being forced to wait more then two years to turn them over.

I brought up this situation in Philadelphia because like everything else... 'monkey see, monkey do'. One city does it the next one seems to follow the same idiocy as the other.

How long before the local government in your area comes up with this same tax scheme is only a matter of time.

Trust me !