Why do you say that the government cannot dictate how much you charge in rent for the use of your home? The state of Oregon recently passed statewide rent control. I don’t know the details, but I presume that, if you live in Oregon, that you would be precluded from charging as much as you can get.
Really? I did not know that. So nobody in China owns 100% of a business? Are you sure about that?
Unless there’s been a major change I missed that remains the case.
1 Like
First part of the new oregon law: Evictions.
Landlords will be limited to when they can issue eviction notices after the first year of tenancy.
The legislation largely does away with no-cause evictions, except during the first year of tenancy. In that first year, landlords have to give 30 days’ written notice for eviction.
After the first year, landlords can end month-to-month rental agreements with 90 days’ notice for a “qualifying landlord reason,” which includes:
More people will be evicted just prior to the end of the 1 year period is my prediction of what will happen.
Tenants can still be evicted for cause; if, for example, they fail to pay rent or deliberately damage the unit.
Don’t pay rent or cause damage, they can still be evicted.
Landlords can only raise rents once a year for tenants, and when they do, rent increases are capped at 7 percent plus the yearly change in the consumer price index.
In 2019, landlords are allowed to increase rents by up to 10.3 percent, according to a maximum rate released by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services. The rate was calculated by the department’s Office of Economic Analysis.
The 7-percent plus CPI cap gives property managers wide latitude in raising rents each year, according to a Statesman Journal analysis.
Landlords can raise the rent every year by at least 7%. Look for rents to go up maximum amount yearly.
Properties built in the past 15 years are exempt from the 7 percent plus CPI limit , as landlords get 15 years from the day their unit’s first occupancy certificate is issued before they are subject to the cap.
Full effect won’t take place for 15 years as anything under 15 years (14 next and so forth) is exempt from the limit in increases.
Watch for more older building to be torn down, or significantly renovated to qualify for the 15 year exemption. Under the eviction, the no cause has a clause that renters can be evicted for major renovations.
Also under the law, if someone voluntarily moves out, next person who moves in gets rent at market value (no cap on increase from person moving out to new person movint in. Applies to vacant rentals for eviction with cause.
If you evict without cause, the 7% cap applies to new person who moves in.
Personally I don’t think it will stand up to a constitutional challenge.
2 Likes
Thanks. FWIW, I oppose rent control and government control over how much a person is allowed to charge or earn.
The government should act to stop predatory practices. Landlords can be predatory. There is nothing inherently good about allowing people who engage in predatory activity to do whatever they want.
I’m not opposed to regulations that require fair treatment for all, but how is it fair to limit how much a landlord can charge? Why should a landlord have to rent to one tenant when another would gladly pay more? That seems like government-sanctioned theft.
Increasing rental prices can be predatory based on the fact that moving is inconvenient and costly. It would be less predatory if you let the tenants know how much the rent would increase each year before they move in (however some landlords would still take advantage of people’s optimism).
Rent control for new leases would only be justified in an area with a supply of housing much lower than the demand.
So have a regulation that requires a landlord provide written, 90-days notice of what the new rent amount will be.
It works both ways. If a landlord overestimates his rental property’s value, it can sit vacant for months. You see, that is the power of the free market. Free people can determine if the price is reasonable or not.
Why should the government have a say in how much he can charge? It’s contrary to liberty and it’s counterproductive.
There are a lot of verialbes in determining what a rent increase should be.
For example if federal income taxes go up on the corporation – should they be able to pass that along to the tenants? How about if as Obama said – electricity rates will necessarily rise – should the increase in common area bills the owner pays be passed along? how about if property taxes go up? How about if a major repair to the building/parking lot is need?
Poor people are more likely to be exploited than rich people as poor people can’t afford expensive lawyers. Poor people also have less options. Unless you’re an anarchist, no one believes in limitless liberty.
I don’t think rent control should be arbitrary. The government can take a data-driven approach to such things in which you give businesses and individuals room to make money. This isn’t a binary choice between two extremes.
Ok, so you prefer a fascist-style of economics and governance wherein the government tells business and property owners how they have to run their operations. Thanks for your feedback.
lol, that’s not what fascism means.
I believe in capitalism…but there should be consumer protection from predatory business practices.
A characteristic of fascism is rejection of free-market capitalism in favor of an economy managed by government.
Well, if you support rent control, you’re not a supporter of free-market capitalism. Essentially, you are a fascist.
No, you’re just being unsophisticated. There’s an infinite amount of economic positions between anarcho-capitalism and authoritarian communism or a fascist state.
We will agree to disagree.
Incorrect. “Cooperative” is not a characteristic of fascism.
Yes, in theory. I call it regulatory socialism.
