Re “Tax might have raised hundreds of thousands: Actual property gross sales tied to inexpensive housing” (Enterprise, Oct. 12): Diti Kohli’s latest article on switch taxes paid removed from sufficient consideration to the seemingly harms that switch taxes would really trigger to our housing market, our economic system, and our state.
New taxes, mixed with fast-rising rates of interest and excessively tight housing stock, would put the dream of homeownership additional out of attain for too many working households. Provided that between 2019 and early 2020 Massachusetts misplaced the fourth-highest variety of residents due partly to excessive housing prices, rising prices with a switch tax would additional exacerbate the problem.
Whereas the availability chain disaster, inflation, and a labor scarcity are already hurting the enterprise local weather, a possible huge tax improve would additional deter companies from opening up store or increasing jobs right here.
Thankfully, Boston already has a important instrument to assist develop extra inexpensive housing: the Group Preservation Act. Carried out in 2017, it added a 1 % tax surcharge to assist fund tasks similar to inexpensive housing. Like too many communities in Massachusetts, Boston isn’t utilizing the instruments it already has to their full potential. So why return to taxpayers on the lookout for extra?
As a substitute of adopting dangerous insurance policies similar to switch taxes, Boston ought to make the most of instruments it already has at its disposal.
Greg Vasil
CEO
Larger Boston Actual Property Board
Boston