A few days ago, Zhaoqing, Guangdong Province made it clear that "from May 1, commercial housing will be priced according to the area of the suite to promote sales", this policy once again brought the "cancellation of public sharing" back to the public issue. In fact, this is not the first time in the process of abolishing the public apportionment, and it will not be the last. Hefei proposed to "actively explore pricing according to the area within the suite", Shandong proposed that "the shared area needs to be clearly defined in the contract", and Chongqing has implemented "using the area in the suite as the basis for valuation" for many years, but the payment of deed tax and property fees is still calculated according to the construction area. This time, Zhaoqing City only requires "publicity and sales based on the area in the suite", which does not mean that the shared area does not need to be paid.
In the nearly 30 years since the introduction of the "public pool" system from Hong Kong to the mainland, its existence has been controversial. The cancellation of the public stall has been mentioned from time to time, but it is difficult to have real action, what is the difficulty? Where is the point of criticism for our criticism?
First of all, the shared area of general commercial housing is between 20% ~ 30%, which is by no means a small proportion, and buyers need to pay a considerable amount of fees for these non-residential spaces, which is a lot of money for most people. Moreover, after so many years of implementation, its calculation method is not transparent, it may be "black-box operation" by developers, and property rights and income rights are not uniform. At the same time, in the subsequent calculation of property fees, heating fees and other expenses, they will often be charged according to the construction area including the shared area. Take the heating fee as an example, even if you live in an 80-square-meter space, you have to pay an extra 20 square meters, and the people are miserable about it.
However, there are many issues involved in going from having a pool to not having a pool. The existing tax, property fee and other systems are based on the construction area, if suddenly changed to the calculation of the area in the suite, it will involve a lot of data adjustment and system updates. At the same time, the separation between the old and the new is also a problem that needs to be solved, and how to ensure the smooth transition between the old and new policies is also an issue that needs serious consideration.
Different people have different opinions on whether to support the abolition of the pooled area. On the one hand, some people believe that the abolition of the public sharing will make the unit price of the house rise, and the buyers will not really benefit; On the other hand, some people believe that the abolition of public sharing will reduce the cost of property management and heating costs, and will save a lot of money for home buyers in the long run. What do you think about the abolition of the pooled area?