Deputies: the ruling party defended the current rental law and there was no agreement with the opposition

After a month of debate, in which more than a hundred exhibitors were heard, the deputies that make up the General Legislation Commission failed to reach an agreement about the new rent law. The Front of All, Together for Change and the Federal interbloc presented three different opinions and Although the ruling party won the majority, nothing ensures that it will finally prosper in the venue.The positions are basically two. On the one hand, the ruling party claimed the current law to the point that its opinion preserves its central axes: it establishes that the validity of the contracts is three years and that the update of the values ​​is annual with the ceiling set by the Lease Contract Index (ICL), a formula prepared by the Central Bank that considers in equal parts the variation in inflation and wages. On the other hand, the opposition, with its nuances, agrees that, given the current inflationary contextthe parties should have greater autonomy when entering into contracts, without prefixed indices. Likewise, both Together for Change and the Federal interbloc propose to roll back two years the term of the contracts, as stipulated in the Civil Code. The only point in common between pro-government supporters and opponents has been rule out the possibility of repealing the current rental law, as raised at first by Together for Change. There is still no date for the treatment of the opinions in the enclosure, so the end is open: no block has yet the majority, but in today’s meeting it was clear that Together for Change, the Federal interblock and Together We Are Río Negro are closer in their positions.It was also clear that the ruling party, contrary to what was expected, will defend the current law -questioned by owners and a large sector of tenants- and will not introduce substantive changesdespite the fact that, at the time, the president of the Chamber of Deputies Serge Massa had asserted that the law “failed” called for discussing a new project that provides “certainties” to the owner and “guarantees and tranquility” to the tenant. “This law establishes a floor of rights for the tenant,” he emphasized Cecilia Moreaupresident of the commission. In the same sense, the pro-government deputy expressed Jose Luis Gioja. “The one who is above always imposes himself on those who are below, that is why the State must always be present to do justice and protect those who have the least,” he emphasized. “The current rental law has been unfairly punished by interests of different kinds. This law works, the problem is that it has not been applied”, he insisted. In his opinion, the ruling party introduces two novelties. One of them, assign to the Commission for the Defense of Competition the attribution to settle in the conflicts that arise in the interior. The second is the incorporation of a series of tax incentives to promote the supply of real estate for rent, which was withdrawn after the sanction of the law. This caused prices to skyrocket and, in many cases, to be above inflation. “The law that was passed in 2020 was well-intentioned, but it didn’t work because it was out of touch with reality. Both owners and tenants stated during the public hearings that this rule was harmful to them, and we must solve it”, emphasized the deputy. karina banfi, author of a project to repeal the law. “After listening to more than 100 exhibitors, I understood that the current legislation had positive things,” he admitted, although he warned that, by virtue of that rule, “today in the Capital there are only 5,000 properties for rent because there is no offer and rents had an increase of 54% in the last year”. The opposition agrees in implementing tax incentives to promote the rental housing market but, unlike the Front of All, maintains that this chapter should be the subject of another bill. “Otherwise, these opinions should be dealt with by the Budget Committee,” he stated. Maximilian Ferraro (Civic Coalition).The meeting of the commission where an agreement was not reached today for the Rental Law The opponents also agree on limiting the intervention of the State in the rental market. “The role of the State is very important, but to improve the macroeconomic situation, in such a way that access to mortgage loans is guaranteed. That will allow a solution to the housing problem in our country”, said the deputy Augustine Sundayof Together We Are Río Negro. The legislator outlined the axes of the opinion that the deputy endorsed Graciela Camano, of the Federal interblock. In general terms, he proposed that the contracts once again have a term of two years and that the adjustment of the rental price can be freely agreed between the parties.s with staggered increases agreed with the signing of the contract, without predetermined rates“This is what happens in practice in most of the contracts that are signed informally,” emphasized Domingo, who proposed that rent increases be capped at the rate of inflation.

See also  The Marvel Cinematic Universe ' DOCTOR STRANGE 2 ' Release Date , Cast Latest update You need to Know

tax incentives

In its opinion, the ruling party proposed a chapter of tax incentives with the purpose of increasing the real estate market for rental housing. The first of them points to the monotributistas, today prevented from having more than three exploitation units; otherwise, they must pay taxes under the general regime. The official opinion enables them to exceed this limit as long as it is real estate affected to the rent for family housing. In addition, the ruling party establishes that those owners of used real estate that are affected to the rent for housing for 12 years may register said properties in the construction incentive regime, which establishes a series of tax benefits. Finally, it proposes that those properties intended for housing will not be covered by the personal property tax when its value does not exceed $30 million.

Previous post Welcome aboard: it took them a while to guess who he looked like and the answer was unusual
Next post The Playrix response to the war