‘Honest’ real estate policy

Home > Opinion > Columns

‘Honest’ real estate policy

Published: 30 Jan. 2026, 00:03

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Kim Won-bae

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

A comment by chef and judge Ahn Sung-jae on Netflix’s “Culinary Class Wars 2” (2024–) drew wide attention. He praised a dish as being “honest,” referring to cooking that brings out the natural flavor of ingredients in a simple manner, with the chef’s intent clearly realized in the dish and conveyed directly to the diner. The same concept can be applied to the current government’s real estate policy. What is needed is not stronger regulation but an “honest” policy.

President Lee Jae Myung speaks during a Cabinet meeting at the presidential office on Jan. 27. He said, “We must correct [...] our society’s allocation of resources, which has become abnormally concentrated in real estate.” Earlier, on Jan. 25, President Lee was unusually active on X, posting four messages in a single day to make clear that heavier capital gains taxes on multihomeowners are set to take effect on May 9. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

On Jan. 23, President Lee Jae Myung posted on his X account, indicating that the government would not extend the suspension on heavier capital gains taxes for multihomeowners, which is set to expire on May 9. On Sunday alone, he posted four more messages in succession. “No government can defeat the market, but no market can defeat the government either,” he wrote. “The benefit of holding on should not exceed the cost of holding on.”

The presidential office explained the remarks as a matter of “normalizing the abnormal” and “administrative principles.” At a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, President Lee said, “We must correct our [...] resource allocation, which is abnormally concentrated in real estate. We must not leave unfairness and abnormality untouched simply because we fear immediate consequences and resistance.” The underlying concern is understandable. Whether the approach is appropriate, however, is open to question.

One point must not be overlooked in the decision to end the suspensions. With the Oct. 15 real estate measures last year, designated regulation zones were expanded to cover all of Seoul, increasing the number of areas subject to heavier capital gains taxes. Ending the suspension under these conditions does not mean returning to the status quo; instead, it amounts to expanding the scope of heavier taxation.

The presidential office appears to be aware of this. At a press briefing on Wednesday, Kim Yong-beom, the presidential chief of policy, said, “Looking back, May 9 was a somewhat hastily decided date. With last year’s expansion of regulation zones, there is a possibility that those affected did not fully realize that they would suddenly fall under heavier taxation.” Kim explained that though the suspension would end, discussions were underway regarding allowing additional time.

Imposing heavier taxes on multihomeowners is possible. But how can a top tax rate of 82.5 percent for owners of three homes be described as normalization? It is an extreme response to overheating housing prices. In effect, it serves more as evidence that the real estate policy of the early Lee Jae Myung administration has not worked. Currently, all apartments in Seoul are designated as land transaction permit zones. Those without a genuine residential need cannot buy homes, and multihomeowners find it difficult to even sell one. Under what conditions will these restrictions be lifted?

President Lee’s remarks at his New Year press conference on Jan. 21 fit into the same context. Regarding real estate tax regulations, he said, “It is desirable to avoid them as much as possible. It is best to use them as a last resort.” Ultimately, this means that taxes will act as a tool to respond to housing prices. That makes this a moment for caution. What is needed now is not strong language but thoughtful plans. Korea’s real estate tax system has become a patchwork shaped more by market responses than by adherence to tax principles. The foundation of taxation lies in the expectation that taxpayers can accept levies appropriate to their ability to pay. A comprehensive design that can win public consent is needed.

Apartment complexes in Seoul are seen from Namsan on Oct. 27, 2025, as data showed that Seoul apartment sale prices recorded their highest increase so far that year when measured against levels before the government’s Oct. 15, 2025, real estate policy announcement. [YONHAP]

However, the messages from the presidential office are inconsistent. Kim said, “This is not something that can be announced in a month or two. [...] Comprehensive simulations are needed.” By contrast, the president’s message has involved moral language about correcting “abnormality” and “unfairness.” It is worth reconsidering whether it is appropriate to view the objections of those who suddenly became subject to heavier capital gains taxes due to last year’s expansion of regulation zones as mere attempts to “hold out” or “apply pressure to shake policy.”

When the government presents a real estate tax reform plan, it will need to distinguish between measures aimed at responding to market conditions and basic principles that should remain unchanged.

It will also need to present real estate policies honestly. The government should adhere to the basic principles of taxation, which should be understandable to those who pay taxes, similarly to how chefs give customers “honest” meals. Do not dress policy as moral or righteous. That only masks the ingredients’ true taste. As President Lee has said, a government can defeat the market. But successive administrations have failed to do so. The reason is that the process — from setting policy goals to implementing them — has not been honest.

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.