How to Solve the Housing Problem (In My View)

The housing crisis could be tackled with a battery of measures including land release, tax cuts on construction and sales, mobilization of public housing stock, and implementation of protections and guarantees for tenants and owners.

Access to decent housing has become a chimera for many. Prices, both for purchase and rent, have reached seemingly unattainable levels for a significant portion of the population. Faced with this situation, various strategies are proposed to try to redirect the market and facilitate access to a roof over one's head for families. The key seems to lie in a multifaceted approach that attacks the problem from different fronts, from supply to the protection of those involved.

## Release Land and Make Construction Cheaper

One of the starting points for solving the housing problem is to increase supply, and that inevitably requires more developable land. The idea is clear: without space to build, there are no new homes. Therefore, it is proposed to streamline procedures for converting rural land into developable land, thus facilitating the expansion of cities and towns experiencing population growth.

But having the land is not enough. The cost of building a house is another determining factor. It is estimated that between **20% and 25%** of the total cost of a new home consists of taxes that go to public coffers. The proposal is forceful: a drastic reduction, or even elimination, of a significant portion of these construction taxes. This would significantly lower the final price of homes.

The sale of homes, especially second-hand ones, also bears a considerable tax burden. Between the Property Transfer Tax (ITP), which in some autonomous communities can approach **10%**, taxes on documented legal acts, and notary, registry, and appraisal costs, the buyer can end up paying an additional **15% to 20%** on top of the property price just for procedures and levies. A substantial reduction of these taxes is advocated, even making them symbolic or non-existent for the purchase of a first home.

Furthermore, the need to limit the acquisition of homes by foreign investors with greater purchasing power or by large real estate funds, both national and international, is raised. The idea is to prevent the market from concentrating in a few hands and prices from being artificially inflated, prioritizing access for regular residents.

## Mobilize Public and Bank Stock

The State, through various agencies, owns a considerable stock of housing and land that remains idle. **Sareb**, for example, manages thousands of properties and plots that, it is argued, are underutilized or paralyzed by bureaucratic slowness. The proposal is clear: mobilize this public stock immediately. This could be done through auctions or by directly allocating these properties to the affordable rental or purchase market, thus using public assets to alleviate the housing emergency.

On the other hand, it is pointed out that banks should not pass on all macroeconomic risk and **Euribor** volatility to citizens. The idea is that the interest rate for the primary residence should be fixed or capped at the conditions existing at the time of signing the loan, with a fixed spread throughout the life of the credit. Banks, if they wish to hedge against interest rate hikes, should do so through their own financial markets, rather than passing the shock directly on to families' pockets. The goal is for a family to know what payment they will make today and in **15 years**, providing greater financial peace of mind.

## Protection and Guarantees for the Tenant

Tenant protection is another fundamental pillar of the proposals. Mandatory inspection of the handover and return of properties is proposed, with an entry report and detailed inventory, including photos and videos of the condition of the property and its furnishings, signed upon key handover. Upon exit, the inspection of damages should clearly distinguish between wear and tear from ordinary use, which should not affect the deposit, and damage from misuse, negligence, or vandalism, which would be deducted from it, always with an official invoice.

A maximum period of **15 days** is established for the return of the deposit, lodged with the official body. If the landlord withholds money without justification, the amount owed would accrue a default interest of **20% per month** in favor of the tenant.

Regarding maintenance and habitability, if a property suffers a serious breakdown and the owner does not repair it within **7 days**, the tenant could deduct the repair cost from the rent or freeze payment without risk of eviction. Strict inspections and heavy penalties are foreseen for unsanitary rentals.

A significant measure is the **100%** tax deduction for rent paid for the primary residence, which would also help to bring undeclared rentals to light. Agency fees would fall exclusively on the landlord, eliminating any charges to the tenant. A Public Registry of Abusive Landlords is also proposed, for owners sanctioned for undue withholdings or lack of habitability, disqualifying them from receiving tax bonuses for **5 years**.

Abusive clauses in contracts, such as the indiscriminate prohibition of pets, are sought to be annulled, establishing in their place the direct civil liability of the tenant for any damages they may cause. Notification of breakdowns through reliable channels such as emails or instant messaging would be valid. If the landlord does not act within **7 days**, the tenant could repair the defect and deduct the cost from the rent, or freeze payment, without being held responsible for that damage to the deposit.

Finally, the rescission clause for "landlord's need" would be protected. The request to recover the property would need to be proven before a notary, and the owner or family member would have to register their residence and inhabit it for a minimum of **2 years**. Fraud in this clause would entail compensation to the evicted tenant equivalent to one year's rent and an administrative penalty of **50%** of the property's cadastral value.

## Protection and Guarantees for the Owner

On the other hand, owner protection against illegal occupation and non-payment of rent is a priority. An express eviction within **24-48 hours** is advocated for cases of occupation, with effective prison sentences. Entering someone else's property without title is considered a serious crime, with proposed penalties of up to **2 years** in prison for the first usurpation and up to **5 years** for recidivism. In cases of foreigners, the nullification of residency permits and expulsion from national territory is contemplated.

For non-payment of rent, a strict **30-day** period is established to rectify the debt. If not paid, automatic eviction would be executed. The debt would not expire, and as long as the defaulter has the outstanding debt, any social aid or public subsidy received would be frozen. The property owner would be allowed to disconnect utilities in cases of confirmed occupation or non-payment, without this being considered coercion, and without the owner being liable for it.

It is argued that social responsibility lies with the State, not the individual. If a tenant falls into vulnerability, the responsibility lies with the State through its public housing stock or direct subsidies, prohibiting the freezing of evictions. Tax incentives of up to **80%-90%** in personal income tax are proposed for owners who rent for long stays and at reasonable prices.

Responsibility for damage and theft in the property should be imprescriptible, generating an executive debt that does not expire and would be covered by automatic garnishment of salaries or tax refunds. The use of minors as "human shields" to prevent evictions is considered a situation of abandonment, with intervention from Social Services and the Public Prosecutor's Office for Minors, potentially leading to the withdrawal of parental authority. A child's vulnerability would not justify the commission of a crime or the expropriation of a third party.

Finally, total freedom in setting the initial rental or sale price is defended, arguing that price caps stifle the market and generate shortages and black markets. The price is regulated by supply and demand.