this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
540 points (98.9% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
540
Amsterdam landlord ordered to lower rent for tiny, leaky room from โ‚ฌ1,950 to โ‚ฌ95 per month (nltimes.nl)
submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure this is exactly the argument, I understood it as: "You rent out so cheap you don't want to make a profit, and if you don't want to make a profit you can't make deductions in relation to your properties." Which I don't find great either.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Mh, I don't think this only affects deductions. Otherwise people could just waive their right do deduct costs related to the housing units discussed in the article. I don't think this would make a huge difference, i.e. I don't think the deductible costs are that significant.

However, if you don't pay your janitor or your nanny properly, but provide them with cheap housing instead, you can (illegally) save a lot of money.

Anyway, that's my guess, but I'm very open to new knowledge. :)