Tax Plan Targets Vacation Homes, Not Real Issues

A city council member has a habit of blaming outsiders for problems.
The latest plan, dubbed an “empty homes tax,” seeks to make owners of unused houses pay extra money.

Why the Tax?

• Affordable housing crisis: The city lacks enough affordable homes.
• Revenue boost: Additional funds could support housing or other municipal needs.

Who Gets Hit?

The tax targets people who own houses but rarely live in them.
Owners could:

• Sell the property.
• Rent it out.

If they choose neither, the city will collect more money starting in 2028 and onward.

The Debate

• “Empty” = Negative: The term implies wrongdoing, though governments have long encouraged property use for public good.
• Broad scope: The plan would tax homes used only part of the year, even if for vacations.
• Some owners view these as privileges and feel justified in using them personally.
• Potential alternatives:
• Target only truly unused homes, hitting speculators while protecting legitimate users.
• Limit new vacation homes—though this may miss significant revenue.

Council Member’s View

• “Few residents affected”: The member believes the tax mainly impacts outsiders.
• Decision pressure on vacation owners: Pay, sell, rent out, or move in permanently.
• Broader impacts:
• Residents who might want to move later face constraints.
• Legal costs could arise if lawsuits challenge the measure (a similar tax was ruled illegal in another city, still on appeal).

Future Possibilities

• Taxing unused bedrooms could follow if the city starts taxing whole homes.
• The city’s high cost of living fuels demand for housing, limiting its revenue options.

Bottom Line

Blaming outsiders is tempting, but the political process can quickly label anyone as an outsider. The “empty homes” tax is a contentious proposal that may reshape how the city addresses its housing crisis and fiscal needs.