Wouldn’t leasing or renting be more accurate depending on what’s involved and the circumstances?

    • phubarr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Functionally, there’s no difference. The amount they demand is based off your house’s value, and they take it away from you if you don’t pay. The label is just a detail. And it’s not a trivial cost, I inherited a small, aged, worn out house and I pay over $300/mo just to exist in it. The tax office wildly overestimated it’s value and there’s nothing I can do about it.

      • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        When you’re renting, you’re always also paying this tax indirectly. Functionally it’s a tax for having a roof over your head, whether you own it or not*. So it has nothing to do with ownership.

        I guess you can argue somewhere in the direction of “tax is theft”, but that’s a different discussion.

        *kinda opposing my previous statement, I guess it would be more accurate to say that paying the tax directly to the government is kind of a proof of ownership.

        • phubarr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          It’s interesting to note that Puerto Rico doesn’t have property tax. When you pay off your home, the tax collector’s office just leaves you alone.