Video Briefing

Nomad Capitalist: Why I Keep Empty Homes

Sep 4, 2019Video Briefing10:18Watch on YouTube

Living in multiple homes around the world can feel like a luxury, but many nomadic entrepreneurs choose to keep those properties empty rather than rent them out. The decision hinges on a blend of tax efficiency, cost structure, and, most importantly, productivity.

The “Success Tax” Concept

When income rises, living costs and taxes tend to increase proportionally. A high‑cost base—such as a New York City apartment—can erode a million‑dollar salary, leaving only a modest remainder after taxes, rent, and lifestyle expenses. By relocating to lower‑cost jurisdictions (e.g., Kuala Lumpur) and owning property outright, the same income can retain a much larger share because:

  • No mortgage or rent payments.
  • Minimal utility and maintenance bills.
  • Light personal tax burden in many offshore or low‑tax locations.

Even if a property in a cheap city could generate rental income, the net gain is often a small fraction of the overall savings achieved by living there full‑time.

Concrete Example: Kuala Lumpur Property

  • Potential short‑term rent: ≈ $2,000 per month.
  • Assuming 8 rentable months: ≈ $16,000 annual revenue.
  • Owner’s net after‑tax income in Kuala Lumpur is ~3× that of a New York resident with the same gross earnings.

Thus, the $16 k rental income represents a modest percentage of the total financial advantage.

Productivity Over Revenue

For a multi‑million‑dollar service business, time is the most valuable asset. Introducing tenants creates several hidden costs:

  • Management overhead – coordinating with property managers, handling maintenance requests, and dealing with tenant turnover.
  • Risk of disruption – unexpected damage, security concerns, or the need to intervene while traveling.
  • Opportunity cost – the mental load of property oversight can reduce focus on core business activities.

The speaker estimates that a $16 k loss in rental revenue could translate into $160 k (or more) in lost productivity, far outweighing the direct income from renting.

Logistical Convenience

Owning fully equipped homes eliminates the friction of hotel stays:

  • Charged devices are ready on arrival (e.g., iPhone chargers placed on entry tables).
  • Personal belongings remain organized and accessible, reducing the need to unpack and repack for each trip.

This “plug‑and‑play” setup supports a seamless transition from travel to work, reinforcing the productivity argument.

Managing Multiple Properties

Scaling the model to several homes multiplies the administrative burden:

  • Each additional property requires a reliable local manager or a trusted network contact.
  • Vetting tenants, handling contracts, and ensuring compliance with local short‑term rental regulations become increasingly complex.

Even with a network of vetted managers, the cumulative effort can erode the net benefit of renting.

Decision Framework

When evaluating whether to rent out a secondary residence, consider:

Factor Impact if Rented Impact if Kept Empty
Direct cash flow +$16 k (example) $0
Tax efficiency May increase taxable income Lower overall tax liability
Living expenses No change (owner still pays utilities, maintenance) No rent/mortgage, minimal bills
Productivity Potential loss from management tasks, tenant issues Stable, predictable environment
Risk Property damage, security concerns, regulatory compliance Minimal exposure
Time investment Ongoing coordination, possible travel for oversight One‑time setup, then negligible

If the productivity loss and risk outweigh the rental income, keeping the property vacant is financially rational.

Bottom Line

For high‑earning, mobility‑focused entrepreneurs, the primary goal is to preserve the ability to work efficiently across borders. Owning homes that are always ready for immediate use provides that stability, while the modest rental income from those homes often cannot compensate for the added complexity, tax implications, and potential productivity hits. Consequently, many choose to forgo rental revenue entirely, accepting the “success tax” as part of a broader strategy to maximize net wealth and personal freedom.