I don't know why, but now I have to pay a large house maintenance fund to buy a new house or an old house. This is really a lot of money for many ordinary people who are not rich! "Fund" is neither an administrative fee nor a national tax, but it can be on an equal footing with national taxes such as "deed tax". If you don't pay the so-called housing maintenance fund, the housing management department will not handle the real estate license for you! Now the industrial and commercial administration fee of the industrial and commercial bureau and the national "people-oriented" have also been abolished, but the hidden "housing maintenance fund" is still firmly pressed on ordinary buyers! So what is the housing maintenance fund? Is it necessary to exist? Is it reasonable and legal? After the so-called "Regulations on the Management of Housing Maintenance Funds" was promulgated, the housing maintenance funds were collected from buyers by the real estate management department according to a certain proportion of the house price or the purchase area. The fund is earmarked and managed by the real estate department or the approved property department. Here, I would like to ask several questions: First, why should we charge the house maintenance fund to the buyers? As a house, like home appliances, food, cars and so on. , belongs to consumer goods, but the so-called special. It is because housing construction requires higher quality and standards, and it is a commodity for the national economy and people's livelihood. However, the house is still a commodity, but why should we charge the house maintenance fund to the buyers? Do all consumers who buy cars have to pay the so-called car maintenance fund? What about the color TV maintenance fund? The responsibility that should be borne by the construction party is inexplicably passed on to a large part of the buyers (consumers). Is this reasonable? Houses, like other commodities, should have a shelf life and a maintenance period. As a commodity, the life of a house should be set at more than 50 years. If the maintenance period does pass, the owners should also choose their own maintenance methods and collect such a large sum of so-called "housing maintenance fund" in advance. Does it mean that the quality of developers (construction units) is sloppy? Anyway, after receiving the housing maintenance fund, will those consumers carry it themselves? Second, the management of the so-called "housing maintenance fund". Many property buyers report that a considerable number of housing maintenance funds paid by property buyers have been misappropriated by the housing management department and even the government! Some housing management departments collude with property companies to misappropriate or defraud property buyers' housing maintenance funds at will. The housing maintenance fund has actually lost its function. Third, the "housing maintenance fund" actually has no consumer supervision and management at all, and has become an "administrative fee" for the real estate management department. The real estate management department lacks publicity, and many consumers don't know what the housing maintenance fund is and where it is used. Fourth, there is an unreasonable phenomenon that the property repeatedly collects housing maintenance funds. When buying a house, the owner has paid the house maintenance fund in proportion or area. After the property is transferable, the transferee is required to pay the house maintenance fund again in the same way. If the same property is transferred many times, the housing maintenance fund will be collected many times. What logic is this? Fifth, the span of the housing maintenance fund is too large, and the management simply can't keep up, or even is not standardized. In addition to bringing economic burden to property buyers, it is not of great benefit to property buyers. The common part of the house can't be repaired as soon as it is bought, can it? The pool part is also the part that developers should ensure the quality and quantity, and it is an integral part of consumer real estate, which is spread into the personal housing area of buyers. As a real estate developer or producer, it is an unshirkable responsibility and obligation to ensure the quality of real estate. Therefore, it is meaningless for consumers to bear the so-called housing maintenance fund. Even in the face of natural and man-made disasters, some owners will negotiate with each other to deal with the maintenance costs of shared houses. What is the role of inexplicably collecting the "housing maintenance fund"? It is debatable.

Hope to adopt, thank you.