Could incentivizing new developments and alternative asset classes reduce reliance on current housing while garnering broader public support?
Fascinating thread! I wonder if diverting funds toward new construction might leave older, established neighborhoods undervalued. Could a reform that rewards both be the solution? What are your thoughts on balancing development with community renewal?
Based on experience in urban investment markets, I believe that positive incentives in tax reform can sometimes unintentionally shift focus from maintaining and upgrading existing housing. Such shift may occur if investors perceive improved returns from new developments rather than investing in updates for older properties. It is crucial to design incentives that not only encourage new construction but also support the rehabilitation of existing housing stock. In my observation, a balanced tax reform that addresses both new and existing properties tends to sustain broader market confidence while ensuring that the upkeep of traditional housing remains economically attractive.