"Kyle" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Isn't that what being a landlord is about? Why make it so nice and
spend too much money? Tenants should only be renting temporarily
anyway and try to buy a home.

Not necessarily. There are financial situations where it is better for
someone(s) to rent instead of buy a house, and take the difference
between what they'd pay on a mortgage and what they're paying in rent
and plow it into an investment with a higher return than real estate.


This situation applies in places like the Bay Area where you have over
priced houses and low rent relative to the value of the houses. Assume the
landlord just purchased a rental and if you look at his cash outflow he is
actually paying you to rent out his property! In other words, its better to
be a renter rather than a landlord until the next real estate cycle where at
some point you need to buy.


Yes, you miss out on the tax deductions you receive as a homeowner, but
apparently there is a way to ameliorate that loss in other ways.

I'm not entirely sure how it works, but I do know a financial adviser I
knew (and trusted) 15 years ago wanted me to go this route, but I moved
so it became a moot point.


There is renters' credit in California and if you have a home business that
portion used in the rental could be written off in the tax return.