Tax Reform Plan Is a Housing Massacre for Ordinary Citizens, Hidden Intent to Push Them to Lower-Tier Areas

The fundamental reason housing has not stabilized, it is argued, is that the balance between supply and demand has broken down. The claim is that the government has failed to offer a fundamental solution while supply remains insufficient.

For housing prices to fall, many people would need to be selling, but the current situation is the opposite, according to the analysis. The speaker emphasized on an EBS broadcast that the preference for Seoul housing has intensified to the point that even elementary school students in Busan want to live in Seoul. This phenomenon is driving up Seoul housing prices, as even people in regional areas develop the desire to own homes in Seoul. In the end, demand keeps flowing into Seoul, but supply cannot keep up.

The policy was intended to provide affordable long-term leases to help tenants become economically self-reliant, but as a result, tenants are refusing to move out. The analysis is that this fails to achieve housing stability and instead backfires by hindering tenants' independence.

Concern has been raised that building 20,000 households on the former Taereung golf course site, along with development in the surrounding Seoul National University Hospital area and the Mia-Mia 3-dong and Mia 3-district areas, will cause severe traffic congestion in Seoul. The speaker explained that Seoul already lacks land for housing, so the city tries to put homes anywhere there is space for people to live. It was pointed out that such high-density development could place enormous strain on existing infrastructure and cause serious problems such as road paralysis.

The analysis holds that Seoul has not achieved housing stability, and that older complexes such as Sarum and Jangmi have also begun to rise in price. This suggests it is time to selectively invest in valuable assets. Complexes like Mi-mi-sam are also seeing prices rise on expectations that large complexes will be built and transformed into new apartments through development, with 10-pyeong units fetching 1 billion won. It was added that Seoul has many complexes whose prices could more than double.

Tiger Consulting explained that it takes full responsibility for every stage of a client's real estate process. It emphasized that it handles everything in one go, from selecting properties and escaping existing homes to jumping into new ones, including the brokerage, loans, and other necessary matters along the way. It stated that its distinguishing feature is a comprehensive consulting service that even decides where the client ultimately goes.

Trading volume will decline, but a small number of asking prices and actual transactions are expected to form a new market price. It was also forecast that during the shift to "one good house," demand for "less good" homes will surge and flow into Gyeonggi-do and lower-tier areas of Seoul.

To do so, a strategy of selecting one to three specific complexes and intensively tracking and analyzing them was proposed. The speaker explained that successful investment can be achieved through deep understanding and continuous observation of specific complexes.

New wealthy buyers keep emerging, and they are said to demand homes that meet special needs, such as a direct route from the parking lot to the house. Such homes will be continuously consumed and traded, so the analysis holds that the upward trend in the ultra-high-priced market will continue.

The speaker asserted that these areas will trade very well despite the regulations because demand there is steady. This reflects the particular nature and high preference of the ultra-high-priced housing market.

This shows the meaning of high-end Seoul housing as a symbol of social standing and success that goes beyond simply providing living space.

It was said that the Banpo area once had an eyesore due to remaining buildings, but the Seoul Metropolitan Government recently approved their demolition. The speaker explained this reflects continuous civil complaints that residents no longer want to see unsightly structures. It was added that the legal framework allowing such unnecessary buildings to remain is itself becoming untenable.

It was mentioned that Seoul's redevelopment permit situation, which had been suppressed for the past four years, is recently changing. The speaker said that Seoul's real estate market has changed considerably over the past four years, and that the city's look is now transforming as older apartments are replaced with new ones. The diagnosis is that Seoul's core redevelopment areas are stirring and development speed is accelerating, suggesting rising expectations for urban regeneration and improved residential environments.

The analysis holds that the ultra-high-priced housing market will become a "league of their own" that ordinary people cannot access. Even so, demand always exists, and ultra-high-priced homes in core areas such as Banpo and Sinbanpo are predicted to keep selling well. The wealthy need not worry, but the "less good one home" that ordinary people must buy will become more expensive and harder to purchase as demand grows. This means polarization in the housing market will deepen.

It was claimed that if people do not buy homes now, they will be forced into lower-tier areas with many new and cheaper units, such as Gwangju. Because the policy cuts taxes for those who live in the homes they own, tenants in upper-tier areas will move to lower-tier areas, while homeowners in lower-tier areas will move up, causing an "exchange of status." The analysis interprets this as an intent to force the housing mobility of ordinary citizens and level down housing standards.

This chain reaction was emphasized as likely to threaten housing stability for every class, from upper-tier areas down to the lowest-tier areas.

The analysis holds that owners of "less good" multiple homes will face a tax bomb under the government's tax reform plan. By contrast, those who hold "one good house" in core Seoul areas will choose one of two options. The first is a "hold" strategy of keeping the current home, and the second is selling all homes and trading up to a better one. The prediction is that since they must pay heavy taxes either way, they will be inclined to hold even better homes.

Voters angered by such conduct were warned that they will seek political retribution in the next election two years from now.