Jump to content

Add Weekly Offline Property Tax


maramizo

Recommended Posts

Short Description:

Add a dynamic offline weekly tax based on property MP.

 

This should only affect houses, not apartments. There is a massive supply of apartments. Maybe apartments will inflate later on, and then we'd need to change them, but currently, this is more directed towards houses due to the low supply.

 

Currently, the best system is given here:

 

 

Background:

Want a big mansion? Pay an offline weekly percent of the market price. We'll call this the "upkeep" cost. This way rich people are taxed for holding properties like these. 

 

We want to encourage the sales of houses, meaning that the introduction of a holding cost would counteract the inflation on the demand on houses (given that you literally lose nothing by seeing the first house you buy). 

 

Detailed Description:

Players are taxed, every offline week (not week of activity) based on properties market price. Active players that can get money and accurately gain and acquire large portions of wealth, that can properly roleplay and give life to the property, naturally have the advantage.

 

This doesn't punish players that can't log on. It punishes players that:

  1. Hog multiple houses. Honestly, guys? Not cool. We all suffer because of it.
  2. Hog a house with poor portrayal. Why do you have a house if you can't afford it?

 

This suggestion needs YOUR input on how much the percentage should be. The initial amount I'd suggest would be around 20%. Meaning a house worth 100,000 would see a 20,000 payment a week, meaning the market price will have to be repaid every 5 weeks.

 

Is it too much compared to IRL? Absolutely. Does it make sense given how much money business make on the other hand? Sure does.  

 

Script related information:

/pinfo would include the calculated weekly tax amount.

Each Monday (?) a loop goes over each property, and deducts that amount from the owner.

If the owner doesn't have enough money, the property is force sold.

Edited by maramizo
  • Upvote 1
  • Applaud 1
Link to comment

I agree but not at those rates. If this is strictly to combat house hoggers just report them. Also regardless of how scummy it is, designing a suggestion to punish players isn’t cool. You claim it’ll only hurt the people abusing the system. But what about Joe Schmoe with a 75k apartment who barely makes enough cash due to what his character does. Why buy the same property 6-7 times over the course of the life of the character. 

Edited by Cocaine Capital
Link to comment

I agree. Although rent would go up, this would prevent people from holding a house for too long.

But in order to properly tax the rich players that hold off property and not the poor players barely being able to afford a house, I think the % should go up, depending on the price of the property or the total assets of the player. For example a property that costs 35k market price, the weekly tax should be around 5k (14,2%), while on a property that costs 120k, the tax should be around 25k (20%).

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Melnik said:

Rates are awful. As if someone is going to pay 20K a week on average for the luxury of having somewhere to sleep...

No. Get somewhere cheaper. Get an apartment. Don't get a house.

 

12 minutes ago, Cocaine Capital said:

I agree but not at those rates. If this is strictly to combat house hoggers just report them. Also regardless of how scummy it is, designing a suggestion to punish players isn’t cool. You claim it’ll only hurt the people abusing the system. But what about Joe Schmoe with a 75k apartment who barely makes enough cash due to what his character does. Why buy the same property 6-7 times over the course of the life of the character. 

 

3 minutes ago, petrosxo said:

I agree. Although rent would go up, this would prevent people from holding a house for too long.

But in order to properly tax the rich players that hold off property and not the poor players barely being able to afford a house, I think the % should go up, depending on the price of the property or the total assets of the player. For example a property that costs 35k market price, the weekly tax should be around 5k (14,2%), while on a property that costs 120k, the tax should be around 25k (20%).

 

This here is a great solution. A tax bracket based on how much $ you're worth, and you pay taxes based on that amount. The more wealthy, the more the upkeep cost is. This would specifically throw off hoarders. What percentages do you guys think make sense? You also have to keep in mind that many people would spread out properties among friends. I've seen it first hand.

 

6 minutes ago, Snowy said:

It's a decent idea. However you have to include that it would affect the whole renting system. 

It would, but mortgages are a thing, and people can simply mortgage out properties rather than flat out own them, giving them a clear cut path to ownership would be much better than having them rent an overly expensive place.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, maramizo said:

Short Description:

Add an offline weekly tax of 10% on property MP.

 

Background:

Want a big mansion? Pay an offline weekly percent of the market price. We'll call this the "upkeep" cost. This way rich people are taxed for holding properties like these. 

 

We want to encourage the sales of houses, meaning that the introduction of a holding cost would counteract the inflation on the demand on houses (given that you literally lose nothing by seeing the first house you buy). 

 

Detailed Description:

Players are taxed, every offline week (not week of activity) based on properties market price. Active players that can get money and accurately gain and acquire large portions of wealth, that can properly roleplay and give life to the property, naturally have the advantage.

 

This doesn't punish players that can't log on. It punishes players that:

  1. Hog multiple houses. Honestly, guys? Not cool. We all suffer because of it.
  2. Hog a house with poor portrayal. Why do you have a house if you can't afford it?

 

This suggestion needs YOUR input on how much the percentage should be. The initial amount I'd suggest would be around 20%. Meaning a house worth 100,000 would see a 20,000 payment a week, meaning the market price will have to be repaid every 5 weeks.

 

Is it too much compared to IRL? Absolutely. Does it make sense given how much money business make on the other hand? Sure does.  

If only for actual houses this could work potentially, it will need to be thoroughly thought out and properly coded. Don't base the selection of properties selected on market price, since there's apartments that have a higher market price than houses for some reason.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, maramizo said:

No. Get somewhere cheaper. Get an apartment. Don't get a house.

 

 

 

This here is a great solution. A tax bracket based on how much $ you're worth, and you pay taxes based on that amount. The more wealthy, the more the upkeep cost is. This would specifically throw off hoarders. What percentages do you guys think make sense? You also have to keep in mind that many people would spread out properties among friends. I've seen it first hand.

 

It would, but mortgages are a thing, and people can simply mortgage out properties rather than flat out own them, giving them a clear cut path to ownership would be much better than having them rent an overly expensive place.


“Get something cheaper” what an awful solution.

 

you already pay a massive up front fee.

 

if you want cheap, you rent and have weekly fees.

 

the up front cost eliminates such a high percentage of income being “taxed”. Did you even think 10% a week through before you made this suggestion 😂

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...