After the National Tax Service announced this year’s comprehensive real estate tax (special property tax) on November 22, the next day, on the 23rd, the state of notification of the property tax for 2021 housing by provinces and cities continued to report. As the aftermath of the property tax continues, fear-inducing reports such as “the property tax is spreading across the country” and “the monthly rent is accelerating” are also continuing.
Citizens’ Association for the Democratic Press <종부세 보도 (01)-경제지·세계·조선·중앙, 종부세 폭탄·쇼크 쏟아내다>pointed out media reports that inflate figures or use provocative terms such as bombs, shocks and panics to frame the ‘tax bomb theory’. Next, we looked at another type of sidewalk that reinforced the tax bomb theory and examined which apartment complexes were mentioned the most in the tax articles.
‘Tax bomb theory’
JoongAng-Dong-A “average of 1,520,000 won per household”?
JoongAng Ilbo <종부세 평균 600만원, 1주택도 152만원 낸다>(Reporters Nam-joon Kim, Hyun-sook Cho, and Kwang-woo Kang, on November 23) cited “An analysis of the People’s Strength Representative Yoo Kyung-joon, who served as the head of the National Statistical Office,” saying, “The Ministry of Strategy and Finance did not disclose the average tax burden for single-family homeowners.” The JoongAng Ilbo reported that “one householder in one household has to pay an average tax of 1,151,577 won,” and “a 55.5% increase from last year’s 97,4513 won.” Next, he said, “Fearing public opinion about the ‘special tax bomb’, the government disclosed only the average figure of 1.4 billion won or 1.7 billion won or less, instead of the total statistics of single-homeowners.
Dong-A Ilbo <“1주택 종부세 부담 낮아진다”더니…1인 평균 97만→152만원”>(Reporter Joo Ae-jin on November 23) also said, “The average burden of a single homeowner has increased by 55% from 970,000 won last year to 1.52 million won last year. We conveyed the contents of Yu’s SNS.
72.5% of 1 householder per household, average tax of 500,000 won
Since the property tax is a tax levied on high-priced houses, on average, the tax payable per person appears to be high. In 2021, the number of individuals and corporations to be notified of the property tax will be 947,000. If you divide this by the total tax amount of 5.7 trillion won, you can say that you pay 6 million won per person.
However, this is a calculation that does not take into account the purpose, purpose, and actual implementation of the introduction of the tax. To determine whether beneficial owners and single-homeowners for fear of tax failure were overtaxed, they would have to be taken apart and averaged.
Kyunghyang Newspaper <올해 종부세의 89% 다주택자·법인 부과>(Reporter Ahn Gwang-ho on November 23) explains differently from the JoongAng Ilbo and Dong-A Ilbo.
The Kyunghyang Shinmun reported on the same day that the Ministry of Strategy and Finance revealed that “44.9% of those with a market value of 2 billion won or less (announced price of 1.4 billion won, or less than 300 million won on tax base) among single households per household accounted for 44.9% of the tax burden they pay this year. is an average of 270,000 won.” He added that “one household per household will receive a tax credit for the elderly and long-term holding, and the tax burden will be reduced by up to 80%.”
JTBC <‘종부세 내는 1주택자’ 10명 중 7명은 50만원>(Reporter Lee Ji-eun on November 22) also reported that “the published price is 1.7 billion won, excluding the ultra-high-priced apartment in Gangnam, and the market price is 2.5 billion won or less”, “about 7 out of 10 single-family homeowners, and their average property tax is 500,000 won.” Then, senior citizens and long-term owners will receive a 20-80% reduction in the property tax, and “there is also an upper limit on the tax rate that does not allow the tax to exceed 1.5 times from last year.”
The average tax amount for one household per household varies from 270,000 won to 60.2 million won, with a maximum difference of 223 times. The average amount of tax for 72.5% of single householders in one household is 500,000 won. In a situation where the majority of first-generation single-family homeowners are paying a small amount, it is necessary to examine whether it is a trick of the media to exaggerate the ‘special tax bomb’ to add up the 223-fold difference in the amount of the tax.
Single-family property tax increased more than 3 times?
The Chosun Ilbo reported on the 22nd of November that the tax rate had risen sharply with the top article on the front page. Chosun Ilbo <“종부세 작년보다 3배 뛰었다” 곳곳서 한숨>(Reporter Jeong Seok-woo on November 22), taking the case of a resident (one-homeowner) of Recenz Apartments in Songpa-gu, Seoul, paid 500,000 won in tax last year, but was notified of 1.77 million won this year, which is more than triple this year. If you add up the property tax paid, the property tax this year will be 7.4 million won” and “last year it was 4.8 million won,” he said. “There are a lot of people who, like Mr. Kim, have been notified of the estate tax, which is two to three times higher than last year, even for single-family homeowners,” he said.
MBN <1주택도 50% 껑충 “위헌 소송” 반발>(Reporter Jang Myung-hoon on November 22) also reported that “the tax on property taxes has increased significantly even for first-generation, one-homeowners.
The Hankyoreh, “One household, one homeowner may rather reduce the burden”
JoongAng Ilbo <25억 1주택자 679만원, 세부담 상한 걸려 296만원으로 조정>(Reporter Son Seon-yong on November 23) summarized the tax-related details in a question-and-answer format and said, “Last year, the house price was 2.21 billion won (announced price 1.55 billion won), but this year it was 3.59 billion won (published price 2.51 billion won).” The upper limit of the tax burden was explained by taking the case of a right-handed first-generation single-family homeowner. The JoongAng Ilbo said, “If it is the way it was, you will have to pay a tax of 679 million won. However, since the upper tax limit of 1.5 times is applied, the actual amount to be paid is reduced to 2.96 million won.
Hankyoreh <집값 치솟은 다주택자 부담 3배… 1주택자 상당수 세액 공제>(Reporter Lee Jeong-hoon on November 23rd) reported that the tax burden for multi-households increased significantly due to the increase in the tax rate, but “in the case of a single-family homeowner, the tax burden was rather reduced.” In the case of homeowners, the property tax amount decreased from 2.9 million won last year to 2.7 million won this year.
A single homeowner in a household is not exempt from the property tax. Since the property tax is levied on high-priced housing, it is levied on owners of houses with an official price of KRW 1.1 billion and a market value of KRW 1.6 billion or more, even if it is one homeowner per household. Nevertheless, it is reducing the tax burden by providing various deductions to first-generation, one-homeowners. If the property tax has risen significantly even with this burden reduction system, it is probably because the publicly announced housing price and market price, that is, the amount of assets held, has risen significantly. Would it be convincing if you explain that ‘the property tax has risen a lot even though you are a single homeowner’ while ignoring the surge in house prices and asset values?
‘98% of the people are not irrelevant’ to the theory of transferring the burden to tenants
Dong-A Ilbo “Because of the monthly rental conversion tax”
Dong-A Ilbo <사설-종부세액 1년 새 3배, 그래도 ‘세금폭탄’ 아니라는 정부>(November 23) wrote, “The ‘balloon effect’, which shifts the burden of tax on to tenants, is also showing signs of escalation.” Even looking into the future, he continues to explain that everything that happened before was due to taxation. The Dong-A Ilbo said, “Since the announcement of the tax increase last year, the number of contracts to convert jeonse into monthly rent has been steadily increasing. I have heard the rationale. He also argued that “the wealth tax has been turned into a middle-class tax, which again increases the burden on tenants.” The increase in monthly rental transaction volume and the increase in monthly rent are all due to the tax on the property.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport <2019년 주거 실태조사 결과 발표>According to (June 01, 2020), the proportion of monthly rental households among Jeon-wol rental households increased rapidly until 2016, and has remained at a similar level since then. According to the Dong-A Ilbo’s argument, the increase in monthly rents between 2012 and 2016 is also the cause of the property tax. However, the reasons for the increase in the monthly rent at that time were the preference of lessors to switch to monthly rent in the guarantee department and the sharp rise in the price of Jeonse.
economist <“선택지가 월세밖에 없어요”… 서울 아파트, 월세 거래량 사상 최고치>As can be seen from (November 22, Reporter Kim Doo-hyun), the increase in monthly rental transaction volume this year can be seen as “the reason for the sharp rise in the price of rent after the new lease law was implemented in July of last year, which included the right to apply for contract renewal and the monthly rent cap system.” There is. Tenants who could not afford the soaring jeonse prices flowed into the monthly rental market, and at the same time, it is also cited as the cause of “the difficulty in lending for jeonse funds due to the government’s recent emphasis on strengthening household debt management”. The Dong-A Ilbo’s claims are nothing but fragmentary phenomena and forcibly connected to the desired claims.
The media insists that the tax on slavery belongs to the common people
the Korean economy <사설-“종부세, 98% 국민과 무관” 기재부 차관의 중대 오류>(November 22), he argued that the slave tax is relevant to all citizens. Since “a significant number of homeowners and homeless people who are not currently eligible can purchase a house subject to the property tax at any time,” she explained that the property tax is a concern of all the people who can be seen as potential buyers, taking into account the ‘impact on the rental market’ insisted it should. The Korean economy said, “The increased property tax will increase the burden on tenants along with the distorted ‘Three Lease Act’. It’s not just about %,” he emphasized.
JoongAng Ilbo <사설-종부세가 부동산 시장 불안을 부채질해서야>(November 23rd) also argued, “It is the logic of economic life that the price of anything rises when you raise the tax.” The reason, he added, “is that the increase in tax is passed on to the price.” “The soaring property tax spreads not only through the sale price, but also through the jeonse and monthly rent surges,” he said. Here, “If small and medium-sized businesses happen to own land, they lose the ability to hire them and their management becomes difficult due to the tax on the property.” The JoongAng Ilbo, which drew laughter with ‘irresponsible prophecy’ during the 2017 presidential election <이정재의 시시각각> ‘Korea in a month’ and ‘Korea in 3 weeks’ come to mind. This column was warned by the Internet Election Reporting Deliberation Committee and the Election Articles Deliberation Committee for biased content, although it had a clue that it would never happen in reality.
“Transfer of tax to tenants” Chimsobongdae
November 24 CBS Radio <김현정의 뉴스쇼>(November 24), Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Noh Hyung-wook, who appeared on the show (November 24), explained, ‘It is not easy to raise the price of an existing house, and there are concerns about the amount to be contracted.’ It depends on the supply and demand situation in the entire jeonse market.
News 1 <노형욱 “종부세 월세전가 과장… 전세매물 쌓여 올리기 힘들다”>(Reporter Kim Hee-jun on November 24) also said, “The number of apartments for sale in Seoul announced by the government increased from 11,000 on the 1st to 30,000 as of the 17th, and the number of apartments for sale in the metropolitan area increased from 27,000 to 66,000 during the same period. “There are about 1.7 million public rental housing units that are not subject to property tax, and about 1.1 million privately registered rental housing units,” he said. It is difficult to gain strength by claiming that the property tax will adversely affect the Jeonse and monthly rental market.
Kyunghyang Newspaper <종부세 내는 1가구 1주택자 73%는 평균 50만원 부담한다>(Reporter Park Sang-young on November 23) said, “In order to stabilize real estate prices and alleviate asset inequality, there must be no wavering in the stance of strengthening the holding tax. Along with the critique of the Solidarity for Participation, I also introduced a proposal by Oh Geon-ho, chairman of the Welfare State Policy Committee, which said, “Let’s use the increased property tax to expand public rental housing.”
To emphasize that the tax on high-end homes is a bomb, the media claiming that the tax is passed on to the tenants is a typical sleeping bag. Of course, the increase in tax burden may affect the cheonsei and monthly rental market, but this is not the essence. In a situation where asset polarization is deepening, the media should pay more attention to how the tax will be used for the underprivileged class, rather than protecting those who have the property tax bomb.
Apartments that appeared the most as an example of a property tax
1st place ‘Banpozai’… 3 out of 5 are examples of multi-family dwellers
How many apartments are cited in the tax reporting example? From November 22 to 23, when the National Tax Service sent the notice, there were 14 articles that accurately specified the apartment complex name in 6 daily newspapers and 2 economic daily newspapers, and in the evening news of 3 terrestrial broadcasters and 4 general programming channels on November 22. and the name of the apartment complex was mentioned 44 times. Among the 44 mentions, the example of multi-homeowners appeared 28 times and the example of single-homeowners 16 times.
The most mentioned apartment is ‘Banpozai’ in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Of the 7 references, 6 were used for multi-homeowners and 1 for single-homeowners. Among the multi-homeowner cases of ‘Banpozai’, 5 was presented as a case of two-homeowners along with ‘Sangdo The Sharp’ in Dongjak-gu, Seoul, and the other case of ‘Banpozai’ multi-homeowners was presented as a case of two-homeowner ownership along with ‘Suseong Kolon Haneulchae’ in Suseong-gu, Daegu. Seocho-gu in Seoul, Dongjak-gu in Seoul, and Suseong-gu in Daegu are all subject to adjustment. With these calculations, the Dong-A Ilbo <서초 반포자이-동작 상도더샵 2주택자 종부세 작년 2120만→올해 6139만→내년 9290만원>(November 23, Koo Special School reporter) I put the same title.
If you own a Banpozai house (59㎡), you will receive a tax of 1.3 million won from Maeil Economic Daily. <“주택 한 채인데 종부세 수백만원”…금리인상 겹쳐 ‘불면의 밤’>(Reporter Jeon Gyeong-woon, Byung-jun Ahn, and Jun-ho Yoo on November 22) was introduced. This is because, despite the large difference in the amount of tax between multi-homeowners and single-homeowners, using the case of high-priced apartments and multi-homeowners can inflate the property tax to be shown as an example. The title of ‘one house but millions of won in estate tax’ is also a case in which the actual case is suspected of being inflated.
‘Mapo Raemian Prugio’ in Mapo-gu, Seoul, ‘Acro River Park’ in Seocho-gu, Seoul, ‘Jamsil Jugong 5 Complex’ in Songpa-gu, Seoul, and ‘Tens Hill’ in Seongdong-gu, Seoul were mentioned more than 3 times. Most of them were used as examples of multi-family dwellings. Even in the same apartment, the amount of tax spent on the sidewalks for multi-residents was significantly different compared to the sidewalks for single-homeowners.
Maeil Economic Daily <“주택 한 채인데 종부세 수백만원”… 금리인상 겹쳐 ‘불면의 밤’>If you own two apartments, Acro River Park (84 m²) and Maporaemian Prugio (84 m²), you wrote that the tax amount for this year is 88.34 million won. However, the Dong-A Ilbo <정부 “1주택 종부세 부담 낮아진다”더니… 1인 평균 97만→152만원>(Reporter Joo Ae-jin on November 23) In the case of a single house owner who owns Acro River Park (112 m²) this year, the property tax was 17.34 million won, and Maeil Economic Daily <종부세, 여 예측 크게 웃돈 95만명… 주택보유가구 7.5%가 낸다>(Reporter Jeon Gyeong-woon on November 23), this year’s tax for a single home owner who owns Maporaemian Prugio (84.6㎡) came out to 669,000 won.
The property tax was introduced for the purpose of stabilizing house prices, realizing taxation, and balanced development of local finances. According to the data released by the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, in 2021, the number of people (individuals and corporations) who will be notified of the property tax on housing sales is 947,000, and the amount of tax is 5.7 trillion won. Of the 5.7 trillion won, 88.9% is paid by multi-family dwellers and corporations. To make it a public concern by attaching the label of ‘special property tax = tax bomb’, it is only a matter of concern for some of the wealthy in real estate. However, if the media inflates the examples of taxation that can be felt by only citing examples of multi-family dwellers, areas subject to adjustment, and high-priced apartments, the purpose of the introduction of the taxation will be overshadowed and the goal will be far from being achieved.
Owning three apartments in Seocho, Gangnam, and Songpa emphasizes the ‘billion-dollar property tax’
Dong-A Ilbo <서초 반포자이-동작 상도더샵 2주택자 종부세 작년 2120만→올해 6139만→내년 9290만원>“The ‘tax bomb’ has become a reality,” he said, emphasizing the ‘billion-dollar property tax’, saying, “There is a forecast that the number of multi-family homeowners paying billions of dollars in property taxes will increase next year due to the soaring house prices and the realization of official prices.” In addition, I gave an example of owners of three or more houses.
“Acro River Park in Seocho-gu, Seoul (official price 3.395 billion won, exclusive 84.92m²), Eunma Apartment in Gangnam-gu, Seoul (approved price 1.72 billion won, exclusive 94.43m²), Jamsil Jugong 5 complex in Songpa-gu, Seoul (public price 1.85600 billion) It is estimated that owners of 10,000 won (82.5 m²) will pay 259.78 million won this year. will be
Although the price difference is large depending on the number of floors and the view even in the same complex and the same area, if you look at the recent actual transaction prices confirmed by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s open system, Acro River Park 4 billion won (13 floors, 84.97 m²), Eunma Apartment 2.78 billion won This is a case of holding a high-priced real estate of KRW 9,638 million in simple sum of KRW 10,000 (6 floors, 84.43 m²) and KRW 2.858 billion in Jamsil Jugong Complex 5 (8 floors, 82.51 m²). The actual asset value far exceeds the quoted price suggested by the Dong-A Ilbo. However, the Dong-A Ilbo was concerned that “the tax burden for owners of three or more houses is greater.” It is desirable to use it as an example that fits the purpose and purpose of the tax, rather than using it in the frame of a ‘tax bomb’ by saying it is a ‘billion-dollar tax.’ Although the entire nation is encouraging the fear of the taxation of the taxpayer, I would like to ask if this is not a case where it is difficult to view such a case as holding the purpose of real residence.
Only the quoted price lower than the market price is mentioned
The media offered the public price of a high-priced apartment as an example of taxation. The published price is the price of land or building, etc., which has been investigated and calculated by the government, and is the basis for various taxes, including comprehensive real estate tax. The quoted price is lower than the actual transaction price. As a result, there are criticisms that the tax is low compared to the real asset size, so the government is pushing for a ‘realization of the published price’. Although the tax base for comprehensive real estate tax is the published price, the published price is lower than the actual transaction price and market price.
Among the 44 cases in which apartment complex names were cited during the analysis period, there were 3 cases in which market prices and asking prices were mentioned in addition to the actual transaction price. Hankyoreh <집값 치솟은 다주택자 부담 3배… 1주택자 상당수 세액 공제>(Reporter Lee Jeong-hoon on November 23) gave the case of a second homeowner who owns Banpozai, Seocho-gu, Seoul and Sangdo The Shop, Dongjak-gu, Seoul. It has increased in value.”
Korea Economy <“7000만원 종부세, 갈라서면 500만원… 가가 이혼 강요하나”>(Reporter Shin Kyung-hoon Noh Kyung-mok Kim So-hyun on November 22) also shows a price other than the actual transaction price, but it is different from the Hankyoreh. The Korean economy has brought up a case where even though it is a single-family homeowner, there is a tax burden of hundreds of millions of won ‘next year’. Taking the example of the owner of “Nine One Hannam, Yongsan-gu, a super expensive house in downtown Seoul”, “C’s house sold for around 6 billion won has not yet been sold, but considering the increase in house price, there is a story that ‘20 billion won will be received’. “If the market price is valued at 20 billion won, the tax rate will reach 18 billion won and the tax on the property will reach 648 million won a year.” The tax was inflated to ‘648 million won’ due to the unidentified remark that ‘it can be sold for 20 billion won’. He added, “If you own a house for 10 years, you sit down and a third of the total value of the house is blown away,” or borrowing the mouth of the owner of Nine One Hannam as an example, “I feel like I am being robbed of assets from the state.”
Stop the ‘tax bomb’ and come up with a solution to asset inequality
Despite the numerous objections, some media’s framing of tax bombs continues. A wide variety of cases appear in the media as a basis for and as a result of the tax bomb frame, such as the tax charged is too high, more people pay than expected, and even one homeowner pays too much.
If the tax charged is too high, then the value of the real estate he owns is high. If more people pay than expected, it means that more people than expected own property with high asset value. The claim that even single-homeowners pay a lot of tax is close to distortion and is limited to cases with ultra-high-priced houses. The estate tax is not a tax levied on everyone who owns real estate. In the case of housing (one household per household), it is levied on owners of houses with an official price of 1.1 billion won and a city value of about 1.6 billion won, and measures are in place to protect the beneficial owners. 44.9% of first-generation single-family homeowners who pay the property tax are holders of houses with an official price of 1.4 billion won and a market price of 2 billion won or less, and the average tax amount is 270,000 won.
LAB2050 announced in July <한국의 부동산 부자들: ‘한국 부동산 계층 DB’로 본 계층별 사회경제적 특성>According to the report, the top 2% of households with real estate assets in Korea own an average of KRW 3.76 billion, accounting for 19.25% of the total household real estate assets. Expanding to the top 30%, they account for 79.8% of all household real estate assets, while the bottom 30% own very little real estate.
Real estate republic, the reality of asset inequality lies before our eyes. With the soaring house prices, the burden of housing costs on the common people is increasing. It is necessary to promote the stability of house prices by strengthening the property tax, etc., and to improve the equity of the tax burden to alleviate asset inequality and promote balanced regional development. If strengthening the property tax and property tax is not desirable, the media will have to come up with alternatives on how to solve the current inequality, not just baseless accusations. We are waiting for media reports that will present a genuine alternative beyond the useless trickle-down effect and development supremacy.
※ Monitor target: November 22-23, 2021 Kyunghyang Shinmun, Donga Ilbo, Chosun Ilbo, JoongAng Ilbo, Hankyoreh, Hankook Ilbo, Maeil Business Newspaper, Korea Economic Daily / November 22, 2021 KBS <뉴스9>, MBC <뉴스데스크>, SBS <8뉴스>, JTBC <뉴스룸>(Parts 1 and 2), TV Chosun <종합뉴스9>, channel A <뉴스A>, MBN <종합뉴스> Evening News
