How about just reform land use and take away the NIMBY/city-level veto over denser forms of housing? This is a far larger and far lower-hanging fruit than trying to tax 2-3% of units onto the market. After the housing construction industry collapsed after 2007-2008, we underbuilt several million housing units and are now suffering the results of low vacancy rates. You can't redistribute your way out of a shortage, but you can build your way out of one.
> After the housing construction industry collapsed after 2007-2008, we underbuilt several million housing units and are now suffering the results of low vacancy rates.
What does that have to do with NIMBY/city-level veto over denser forms of housing? I don't see how your argument flows from the 1st sentence to the 2nd and then the third.
contractors can afford to build more apartments/units if NIMBYs and zoning power (to prevent dense housing) are reduced. They can sell more units per square meter of land.
Contractors can afford to build housing when their is demand and profit involved. They didn’t stop building after 2008 because of zoning, they stopped building because demand fell off a cliff. Once demand recovered, the industry was depleted of talent and capital to get started very quickly, zoning had very little to do with it.
How about just reform land use and take away the NIMBY/city-level veto over denser forms of housing? This is a far larger and far lower-hanging fruit than trying to tax 2-3% of units onto the market. After the housing construction industry collapsed after 2007-2008, we underbuilt several million housing units and are now suffering the results of low vacancy rates. You can't redistribute your way out of a shortage, but you can build your way out of one.