The Constitutional Court ruled that the comprehensive real estate holding tax is constitutional in a 6-3 decision on May 30. The subject of the Constitutional Court's judgment on this day was a provision of the old Comprehensive Real Estate Tax Act under the Moon Jae-in government, which greatly expanded the number of taxpayers. However, the Constitutional Court summarized the various controversies surrounding the tax in a lengthy written judgment and press release, and reaffirmed the legitimacy of the tax.

The claimants, who owned multiple apartments in Gangnam, Seoul, filed a lawsuit against the Constitutional Court, arguing that it was unconstitutional to specify that those with a combined property value of more than 600 million won were subject to the comprehensive real estate holding tax. They also argued that the calculation of the taxpayers, tax base, tax rate, and number of houses was delegated to the Presidential Decree in a comprehensive manner without stipulating specific details in the law. They said the tax rate was too high for those who owned two houses in the area subject to adjustment, violating the principles of tax legalism, equality, and proportionality.

However, the Constitutional Court did not recognize the claimants’ unconstitutional claim that the tax is unconstitutional. It said that the comprehensive real estate tax is a tax on real estate holdings above a certain value, so it basically does not violate the principle of proportionality. As for the claim that the tax violated tax legalism, it was necessary to delegate the fair market value ratio to a subordinate law because it is necessary to respond flexibly to market conditions in order to curb real estate speculation and stabilize prices. Regarding the argument that the comprehensive real estate tax discriminates against homeowners compared to landowners, the court said, “As housing is a living space that is a basic condition for human survival, there is a reasonable reason to impose the comprehensive real estate tax by treating housing and land differently from other property rights.” Unlike property tax, which is a local tax, the comprehensive real estate tax is a national tax, which contributes to balanced regional development.

The Constitutional Court basically judged that the comprehensive real estate tax is a just tax. By levying more taxes on high-value real estate holders, it has the effect of meeting the country's fiscal demand and discouraging speculation. It also made it clear that the ability to pay the tax lies in the ownership of real estate itself.

The ruling once again confirms the effectiveness and legitimacy of the comprehensive real estate tax. The Yoon Suk-yeol government and the ruling party should reflect on their efforts to reduce the amount of the tax and the targets of payment by lowering the listed price of real estate. Discussions on easing the comprehensive real estate tax raised by some opposition parties should also be put to an end. The 22nd National Assembly should take the ruling as an opportunity to work together to ensure that the tax remains stable even if the government changes.