Economically this is correct - you do have an imputed stream of rental income from a property. You are just choosing to consume it directly (by living in the house) rather than sell it to another party, receive money and turn the money into other consumer goods.<p>Imagine an alternate scenario. You own a home, but rent it out. Also, you rent an equivalent home from another person. In this alternate scenario, you&#x27;d have to pay income taxes on the rent you receive. Similarly, if your employer gave you free rent in a house they owned, you&#x27;d need to pay tax on the value of that rent.<p>Economically there is no good reason to distinguish between these two cases. It sounds like NL is doing things right, or at least righter than the US.