Let me understand this: An additional tax of 3/4 % on homes over $500,000, that are not primary homes because “they are empty and people are not contributing back to the communities while the people who spend 365 days/year are priced out.” News alert here: There are plenty of $500,000 plus homes being bought and sold. The shortage of homes is in the $250,000-300,000 range. Why not address why new homes are expensive: cost of land, materials, labor, fees, permits, energy, etc. and market forces. Those homes are selling with larger margins.
As far as “not contributing,” paying 12 months of taxes, part-time use, no kids in school. Yeah, let’s charge them more for using less! Then “not having the right to keep it out of the rental market without paying something back into the state.” Now they want to tell homeowners what they can do with their property. Million dollar lake and mountain rentals coming onto the market will surely help hourly workers struggling to make ends meet.
How about New Hampshire having a living minimum wage, not the lowest in New England? How about statewide incentives for senior and workforce housing, higher density allowances where appropriate, encouraging manufactured housing, first-time buyer assistance? How about some protection for those legacy lakefront owners who are being priced out of grandpa’s camp because of extraordinary increases in property values, something like current use relief?
Want to address taxes at the statehouse, try the school funding mess, stop trying to kill public education with vouchers, quit wasting time on wildlife for pets and bathroom bills? Stop cutting business taxes, the latest is a $25 million hit to New Hampshire. They don’t need it. They need educated workers that live nearby.