[비즈한국] On June 3, the Republic of Korea faces an election to choose its 21st president. At a time when the suffering of the people's livelihoods and future uncertainties overlap, voters are being asked to make more level-headed and realistic judgments than ever before. In particular, the real estate issue has become a "question of the era" that goes beyond the realm of "housing" to encompass inequality, tax justice, and the future of the younger generation.
Amidst this, Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party of Korea candidate, has recently been putting forward a series of pledges focused on easing real estate taxes and expanding supply, showing a stance quite different from the policy direction he demonstrated during the last presidential election. The public is quite surprised by remarks such as "Let's not try to suppress it with taxes," "I will withdraw the national land ownership tax," and "The more you tinker with real estate taxes, the more problems arise."
This shift is too significant to be seen as a simple policy adjustment. This is because messages with diametrically opposed philosophies are being repeated within the same party, not due to a change in government or external shock, and within just a few years. In this column, I intend to reflect on the change in candidate Lee Jae-myung's real estate policy stance, examine its implications and risks, and consider the duties we must not forget as voters.
Democratic Party Candidate, A Rapid Shift in Policy Stance Before and After the Presidential Election
During the last presidential election, candidate Lee Jae-myung argued that "punitive sanctions, more than just a 'tax bomb,' are necessary for multi-homeowners." In particular, he made the strengthening of tax functions to curb speculation a major policy pillar, and most notably, he put forward the "national land ownership tax" as a key tool for resolving wealth inequality.
However, ahead of this presidential election, his position has completely changed. A series of remarks such as "It is impossible to stop people from viewing real estate as an investment tool," "Let's not try to curb housing prices with taxes," and "The national land ownership tax has low public acceptance" stand on a completely different trajectory from his past claims. The voices of the past that called for tax justice and public intervention for the stabilization of the real estate market have disappeared, and only the language of market-friendly "right-turns" remains.
The Moon Jae-in Administration and the Democratic Party's Repeated 'Double Messages'
Candidate Lee Jae-myung's shift is in line with the dual behavior shown by the Moon Jae-in administration and the Democratic Party over the past five years. Even then, while they claimed to expand supply for real estate price stabilization during their candidate days, regulation-oriented policies dominated the market after they actually took power.
Voters remember. Regulation-heavy policies such as heavy taxation on capital gains for multi-homeowners, strengthening of the comprehensive real estate tax, and loan restrictions did not lead to housing stability but rather brought about market distortions and resentment from the middle class. Nevertheless, the Blue House and the Democratic Party at the time constantly repeated the message that "we are trying to increase supply." The inconsistency between words and actions eroded public trust, and did that not lead to the defeat in the last presidential election?
And yet, a similar message is being repeated in this presidential election. While they talk about expanding supply and easing regulations, it is questionable how much they can be trusted regarding specific legislation or effective policy direction.
The Danger Hidden Behind the Saying "Let's Not Suppress"
The remark "Let's not suppress with taxes" may sound like a statement respecting market autonomy at first glance. However, one should not miss the political implications of this statement.
First, this is language that effectively acknowledges the policy failures of the past Moon Jae-in administration while avoiding the fact that he was part of it. Candidate Lee was a candidate of the same party in the last election as well. Saying now that "we tried to stop it by force and failed" can be read as a self-reflection that the policies of the time were wrong, while simultaneously acting as an evasion of responsibility for himself, having participated in the policy decisions.
Second, the direction of emphasizing "supply" rather than regulation while highlighting market autonomy could be welcomed. However, the problem is that this statement can act as a political alibi to "not regulate" in any future situation. In other words, when a time comes where regulation is needed again in any form, policy flexibility may decline and policy credibility may plummet due to conflicts with past statements.
Pledges Should Not Be Forgotten… The Need for 'Political Taxidermy'
Such rapidly changing pledges must be recorded and remembered. A pledge should not be a mere campaign sentence, but a standard by which we can hold politicians accountable in the future. Therefore, voters must set up "political boundaries" in the following ways.
First, let's document the evolution of pledges. Not only the media but also civil society needs to organize and archive the past and present statements of major candidates in an easy-to-understand manner.
Next, let's track whether the pledges are realized. A structure is needed where citizens can directly verify whether pledges are actually legislated and budgeted after the election. To this end, private monitoring networks must be strengthened.
The People Must Become the 'Alarm'
Politicians use new language every election, but given that those words have a real impact on our future lives, the people have a responsibility to remember and record each and every word.
At this very moment, candidates are speaking. Those words eventually become policy, and policies, in turn, permeate the daily lives of the people as laws and budgets. Therefore, the people should not be mere consumers, but record-keepers and watchdogs of political language.
Watching the true meaning of the phrase "Let's not suppress with taxes" until the end, and being vigilant and keeping records so that it can be realized through action—that is likely the minimum political civic consciousness that the people can exercise now.
Kim Hak-ryul, head of the Smart Tube Real Estate Research Institute, known by his pen name Pasyong, served as a team leader at the Real Estate Research Division of Gallup Korea. He operates and hosts the Naver blog "Pasyong’s World Exploration" and the YouTube channel "StuTV." His books include "The Power of Gyeonggi Real Estate (2024)," "The Absolute Principles of Seoul Real Estate (2023)," "The Future of Incheon Real Estate (2022)," "Kim Hak-ryul’s Absolute Principles of Real Estate Investment (2022)," "Future Map of Korean Real Estate (2021)," "From Now On, Only Places That Will Rise, Rise (2020)," and "User Guide to Korean Real Estate (2020)."