Joel and Kathryn Friedman, both 71, are counting the days until they can sell their home and move into a 55-plus community.
The retired empty-nesters have been ready to downsize for years, but are reluctant to sell their five-bedroom, 5,000-square-foot Southern California house [mansion] in large part because of at least $700,000 in capital gains taxes they estimate they’d have to pay.
Since 1997, home sale profits over $500,000 (for married couples) and $250,000 (for single filers) have been subject to a capital gains tax of up to 20%. That threshold hasn’t changed since 1997, meaning that — between inflation and soaring home prices pushing an ever higher number of houses above that limit — many more home sellers have to pay the tax now than when it was first implemented.
The Friedmans are among a growing number of older homeowners discouraged by the tax from selling their valuable properties. Housing economists say that dynamic has exacerbated a shortage of family-sized homes on the market, especially in expensive places like California.
The Friedmans’ house is too big for them, and maintenance costs are only rising, Joel said. “There are a million reasons why we’d like to move, but we’re not because the tax is just burdensome,” he said.
But that could change — there’s bipartisan support in Congress for raising the federal tax threshold to boost home sales in a stagnant market.
In other words, their house would sell for at least 3.5 million. Where exactly is the problem?
3.5 million is the increase in value over what they paid. That means they were making well over $100,000 every year for the past three decades, and they are complaining about paying cap gains.
Fucking Boomers.
Although increasing the exemption amount to peg inflation does make sense.
Also, fucking Business Insider for running this obvious tripe.
Not surprising from an outlet created by DoubleClick founders and a guy who is barred from exchanges due to securities fraud.
Also capital gains on a primary residence should decrease somewhat over time.
These arent property speculators or people buying and parking empty homes. They are people who bought a house, lived in the community, probably raised a family and didnt move for 30 years and now want to downsize.
And will make a 3.5 million dollar profit from that transaction.
And?
If they have to pay taxes on that profit as if this was a business venture or investment they should be allowed to deduct 30 years of maintenance costs and loan interest as business expenses.
Ironically a property speculator could dodge this tax by buying a replacement property thanks to like-kind exemptions offered to investors but not private homeowners…
Uh… How is one’s house appreciating in value equivalent to making money? It’s impossible to access most of that money because, you know, they need somewhere to live, and according to the article the difference is supposed to pay for their retirement and healthcare. I have no idea how the math will turn out but 1-2 million for two 71 year-olds looking to live for 15-ish years in Southern California isn’t outrageous at all. The fact it seems outrageous is purely due to how completely fucked up everything has become for the working class over the past few decades.
Which is why nobody here has any sympathy for their situation. They’re doing better than the vast majority of the population. At least they have 3.5 million dollars coming to them.
*3.5 minus however much they’ll need to get another home, move, etc, but more importantly: I’m not asking for anyone to sympathize with them, but the hate in these comments is both woefully misguided and completely unnecessary. Let’s leave dragging each other down to the crabs.
Lemmy users overwhelmingly don’t comprehend wealth. They think these people are some sort of scrouge mcduck mega capitalists.
They’re well off and have ample money for retirement… unless they need extensive healthcare which could still easily bankrupt them.
The fact they will do whats best for themselves financially shouldn’t surprise anyone.
That the best play is something which exacerbates housing issues by delaying downsizing is a real issue that most of the economically illiterate reactionaries won’t grasp.
You’re right, it’s not the same as regular income. Which is why a) we don’t tax the gains at the same rate as income and b) the tax is only assessed when the sale occurs.
And it’s not 1-2 million, it’s approx 4 million (4.8 minus tax) to go along with their social security income (according to the article) and presumably other retirement income
They don’t want to contribute to society, even at a lower rate than wagies.
This is exactly the problem.