The guilt of having a home, the punishment of having none

Home > Opinion > Columns

The guilt of having a home, the punishment of having none

Published: 27 Oct. 2025, 00:03

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Ha Hyun-ock

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

Real estate in Korea — viewed as a home, an asset, a high-yield investment and a symbol of social status — has become a national “trigger button.” The web of competing interests between Seoul and the provinces, between those with and without homes, between owners of one and multiple properties, between apartments and other housing types and between high-priced and ordinary homes is dense and fraught. The housing market resembles a minefield: pressing the wrong button can set off an explosion, and the aftermath is always fierce.

The government announced on Sept. 7 plans to break ground on 270,000 new homes annually in the greater Seoul area through 2030 to ease the region’s housing shortage. The photo shows apartment complexes in Seoul as seen from Mount Namsan, central Seoul, on that day. [YONHAP]

The government’s “Oct. 15 measures” for stabilizing the housing market have pushed that very button. By designating all of Seoul and 12 districts in Gyeonggi as speculative-overheating zones, adjustment target areas and land-transaction permit districts, the administration imposed a triple layer of regulation. The market was stunned. A complete ban on “gap investments” and indiscriminate lending restrictions — amounting to a near-shutdown of transactions — overlapped with images of senior officials’ own real-estate dealings, fueling public anger and frustration. The measures were denounced as a ladder kicked away for the benefit of “their world.”

The regulated zones soon acquired a sarcastic nickname: “government-certified investment areas.” The new rules signaled the beginning of another form of polarization. Predictably, last-minute buyers rushed in under “limited-supply” marketing, while many others, such as temporary two-home owners, became collateral victims of sweeping and indiscriminate controls.

A television in a Seoul real estate agency airs a news report on the government’s new measures to stabilize the housing market on Oct. 15. All 25 districts of Seoul and 12 areas in Gyeonggi have been newly designated as regulated zones, including speculative-overheating and adjustment target areas. [YONHAP]

The result makes the term “capitalist market economy” sound hollow. Market logic and function have vanished. The constitutional rights to freedom of residence and private property have been trampled. Even with their own money, people can no longer freely buy or sell homes. To block gap investing, the government has tightened the two-year residency requirement, and even those with ample cash must now seek bureaucratic approval to purchase property. Compared with that, the requirement to submit a financing plan seems trivial.

Collateral value and repayment ability now mean little when borrowing from a bank. Government-set limits define the law. The maximum mortgage amount fixed at 600 million ($417,000) won under the June 27 measures has been cut further: homes priced between 1.5 billion and 2.5 billion won are capped at 400 million won in loans, while those above 2.5 billion are limited to 200 million. The higher the property value, the lower the borrowing limit — a paradoxical rule by any standard.

Layer upon layer of restrictions has effectively destroyed the ladder of opportunity. For young people who cannot receive parental gifts or inheritances, buying into regulated areas is now nearly impossible, even with high incomes. Lee Chan-jin, the Financial Supervisory Service governor, said he planned to transfer one of his two homes in Seocho, Seoul, to his child to reduce holdings, but such transactions now face heavy scrutiny. As former Vice Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Lee Sang-kyeong noted, those who have saved will have to wait until prices stabilize and fall before buying. To catch up with the soaring market, they might have to ride the “Kospi 5000" wave just to accumulate seed money.

This strong suppression of demand starkly contrasts with the position expressed by President Lee Jae Myung during his presidential campaign in May. At the time, he pledged to “respect the market through stable housing policies” and said that when prices rose, he would “not suppress demand but expand supply to maintain reasonable levels.” He also asked, “Even if there is a price gap between regions, must we strain ourselves to forcibly lower prices when people simply wish to buy and sell at higher prices?”

Now, the president vows to mobilize all available policy tools and capacity to curb unproductive speculative demand. His earlier promise not to “use taxes to control home prices” appears increasingly untenable. Officials have begun treating higher property taxes as a foregone conclusion, fanning expectations of heavier burdens. The government seems ready to stop price increases through “tax bombs” — the return of punitive taxation.

Policies filled with prohibitions and punishments that defy individual aspirations inevitably distort the market. Repeating the slogan “A house is for living, not for profit,” the government stigmatized multi-home owners as speculators, leading to the rise of the “one smart home” phenomenon and, ultimately, to the colossal “Oct. 15 measures.” Few can predict what kind of new monster future regulations might create. What is clear is that those who have managed to climb the broken ladder will pay the price for “the guilt of owning a home,” while those left below will suffer “the punishment of having none.”

House listings are posted on a real estate agency in Seoul on July 1. [NEWS1]

For homeowners, punitive taxation looms alongside the ruling party’s push for lease-renewal rights of up to nine years. For those without homes, the dream of ownership is fading amid rigid regulations. As long-term jeonse (lump-sum) leases increasingly give way to monthly rent, many risk falling into the ranks of the “rent poor.”

Preventing the vicious cycle of “homeowner guilt and homeless punishment” requires courage — the courage to acknowledge the failure of punitive housing policy and to correct it.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.