[dexterdog]

When you are the owner/user and not the landlord you should be paying the taxes because most of the taxes are for use in the local community and most of that is schooling. The landlord gets no benefit from the majority of that stuff. The tenant does.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

That assumes that the landlord lives in a different tax jurisdiction. Possible, certainly, but not inevitable.

[dexterdog]

If he lives in that jurisdiction then he is paying the taxes for the place where he is living.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

But also benefits from the taxes paid on the rental property that help pay for things they and their family use.

[dexterdog]

How does he benefit from the rental property? He doesn't live there an use the services. If he lives somewhere else in the town he pays taxes based on that. He charges rent for the other location to cover the taxes because he doesn't benefit from those taxes. The renter does.

[frumper]

The landlord still pays property taxes on his investment properties. It’s his income tax that is offset.

[dexterdog]

But he passes the cost of those taxes on to the renter because the renter is the one benefiting from the schools/roads/police/fire/etc that the taxes fund.

[frumper]

That is often true. A vacant rental still owes the taxes though. I can only say my time as a landlord I have not always covered those costs with rental income. Sometimes the property is empty or doesn't command enough income to cover all your costs.

[DoctorOetker]

well there's the benefit of having higher educated and presumably higher paid tenants.