I think there is no difference between imputed rent and forced market rent . In the end it serves the same purpose
Imputed rent is in fact based on market rent with a lag. This would be changed on periodic basis
Transfer pricing is a good example. There is a big risk that the used prices are completely different to market prices or to what market prices would be if the market would be open. Forced prices are not market prices, market prices are set by the market, not by the taxman or a politician.
But that is a bit off topic.
So the deadline for a referendum is tomorrow, I haven’t really heard anything was there any organization trying to get signatures?
There is a change in the constitution necessary which not only needs be voted but also needs a Ständemehr IIRC
2 Likes
Ah yeah, missed that it was linked to Fedlex
Still, as an investor I don’t understand the new laws. Why the hell only interest on debt to real-estate investment for rent can be deducted? It makes no sense. Either all interest on tax income producing debt or none should be allowed to be deducted!
I will vote NO, as I invest in stocks on credit. I do own real estate and I don’t care if they would just do an addition of the non tax income producing value and the value that produces it and then allow deductions of interest in the same ratio. It would make everything more complicated as it already is, but at least it would be fair.
I don’t like the actual system. A car enthusiast can deduct interest on debt for his car without producing taxed income, everybody can. Unless they come up with a better solution I will vote no. One bullshit tax is replaced by another bullshit tax!
2 Likes
Real estate investment are always treated differently versus other investments/debts. Isn’t it why real estate debt is called mortgage while other stuff is called credit, loan , debt , whatever
For RE, one can get 5X leverage and 2nd pillar support. It’s all to support people buying homes.
2 Likes
At the moment any kind of debt is treated the same way. It would not make any sense to do otherwise. Debt is debt, no matter what the collateral is.
In the actual system all debt can be deducted, in the new system only debt in ratio of value of rented out property compared to self occupied property can be deducted. But in both systems there is no difference if it is mortgage, margin loan or your mother-in-laws step sister that gave you the money.
2 Likes
The ratio is of rented out properties divided by total wealth.
AFAIK the goal is to heavily reduce leverage (it’s one of the systemic risks in Switzerland with a very high household debt).
There’s still some deduction possible for first time owners, but with a decaying deduction (max 10k for couples, dropping by 1k every year so that at year 10 no deduction is possible, half of that for singles).
Exactly. And instead of rented out properties it should be taxable income generating properties. Real estate is treated different for no reason. Wonder how REIT are treated…