'I have my reasons': Public floods government real estate forum with grievances

Policy proposals spanning housing finance, supply and taxation have poured into the government's online public comment portal ahead of a national real estate forum set for Thursday. While the government is pushing loan restrictions and a property tax overhaul to stabilize home prices, submissions have largely called for easing regulations on genuine end-users and protecting single-home owners.

As of 9 a.m. Tuesday, the portal had received 2,861 policy submissions. Housing finance drew the most responses with 1,254, followed by housing supply with 930 and real estate taxation with 677.

Apartment buildings in Seoul as seen from Namsan. [Yonhap]

The outpouring of opinion appears to reflect the government's recent move to open policy debate to the public, following a series of open forums last week on housing supply, housing finance and real estate taxation.

In the housing finance category — which drew the most submissions — calls to ease loan restrictions on genuine end-users dominated the responses.

Particularly striking were accounts from buyers who said they faced losing their deposits after banks cut lending limits and suspended new loan applications, leaving them unable to cover closing costs. Pleas such as "please save us," "I can't sleep from the anxiety of losing my deposit" and "please let us borrow what we originally planned" were common. Many also asked that existing contract holders and first-time homebuyers be exempted from aggregate lending caps.

A submitter identified only by the surname Choi said it was "devastating" to have to rush to bank branches at opening time and jockey for position just to secure a loan for a move within a single owner-occupied home. "I have a closing payment due in October — why should people planning to move in the second half of the year have to borrow under worse conditions?" Choi wrote.

The online public comment portal for the national real estate policy forum. [Related ministries]

Other finance-related proposals included easing restrictions on group loans for interim and final payments, restoring jeonse-exit loans — currently capped at 100 million won ($67,500) — to normal levels, and reviving a shared-equity mortgage program introduced and then scrapped under the Yoon Suk Yeol administration.

On housing supply, deregulation was the dominant theme. Submissions called for temporary special legislation to revitalize reconstruction and redevelopment projects, abolition of the reconstruction excess profit recapture system, and relaxed restrictions on the transfer of association member status. Some proposed excluding non-apartment housing types from the official dwelling count, while others urged aggressive greenbelt releases — citing areas such as Gangdong-gu — to kick-start new development.

In the taxation category, debate centered on how to tax single-home owners who do not live in their property and owners of ultra-high-priced homes. Of the 677 tax-related submissions received by 9 a.m. Tuesday, 103 touched on single-home ownership.

A recurring argument was that non-resident single-home owners should not automatically be treated as speculative holders.

A submitter identified only as Park, who said she lives near her parents-in-law's home in a jeonse arrangement to help care for them, argued that people may have many legitimate reasons for not living in their own home — job location, children's schools or family caregiving obligations. "Distinguishing between those who are non-resident for speculative reasons and those who have genuine practical reasons will be extremely difficult in practice," Park wrote.

Others argued that single-home owners who relocated for work or study should not face tax penalties. A submitter identified only as Lee, who said he commutes four hours a day round-trip after changing jobs, contended that forcing people to sell their existing home and buy a new one every time they move — or face punitive holding taxes and exclusion from long-term ownership deductions — "is deeply unreasonable."

There were also numerous calls to distinguish single-home owner-occupiers of ultra-high-priced properties from multi-home holders. Another submitter identified as Lee said he and his spouse bought a 1.9 billion won home last year to live in themselves. "I saved diligently for 15 years and took out a loan I can afford to buy a home in the neighborhood I dreamed of," Lee wrote. "Is this speculation?"

Additional proposals called for taxing ultra-high-priced homes only on the value exceeding a set threshold, and for expanding deductions for long-term owner-occupiers to ease the tax burden on genuine end-users. Several submissions also argued that real estate tax policy should remain stable and predictable over the long term, with anti-speculation levies focused on behavior that genuinely signals speculative intent — such as owning multiple properties or flipping homes in the short term.

y2k@heraldcorp.com
hss@heraldcorp.com