A table saying “1 to 3%” suggests that everything between KRW 600m and 900m sits somewhere in there. It does — on average. But measure what another KRW 10m of price costs in tax and a different number appears. On an 890m home it is 923,000 won.
In this band the rate is not tabled but computed. Rate = (price × 2 ÷ 300m − 3) × 1/100 (Local Tax Act art. 11(1)8(b)).
The formula means the price does not merely get multiplied by a rate — the price makes the rate. So the tax grows like a square, not a line.
The marginal rate runs 5.3% at 600m to 9.2% at 890m. Then, past 900m, it drops to 3.0%.
KRW 10m is worth different amounts at different points
| Negotiating range | Extra acquisition tax | Marginal rate |
|---|---|---|
| 600m → 610m | 527,000 won | 5.3% |
| 700m → 710m | 593,000 won | 5.9% |
| 800m → 810m | 800,000 won | 8.0% |
| 890m → 900m | 923,000 won | 9.2% |
| 900m → 910m | 300,000 won | 3.0% |
The marginal figures do not climb smoothly because the rate itself steps by 0.01 points every KRW 1.5m. With the steps removed, the underlying slope rises straight: 5.00% at 600m, 6.33% at 700m, 7.67% at 800m, 9.00% at 900m.
The last two rows are the point of this article. KRW 10m just below 900m and KRW 10m just above it differ by nearly three times. Negotiating the price down is worth considerably more at 890m.
Why — the price makes the rate
Most taxes are price times rate. Here the rate is itself a function of price, so the tax grows as a curve rather than a line.
| Price | Rate | Acquisition tax |
|---|---|---|
| KRW 600m | 1.00% | 6,000,000 |
| KRW 650m | 1.33% | 8,645,000 |
| KRW 700m | 1.67% | 11,690,000 |
| KRW 750m | 2.00% | 15,000,000 |
| KRW 800m | 2.33% | 18,640,000 |
| KRW 900m | 3.00% | 27,000,000 |
In this band the rate is the average rate — there is no progressive deduction, so dividing the tax by the price returns the rate in the table. There is nothing separate to show.
The average rate triples from 1% to 3%, while the marginal rate passes 5.3% to 9.2% — already above that range throughout. Where the average is 3%, the margin is 9.2%. “1 to 3%” is not wrong, but it is not the number to take to a negotiation.
The ends meet exactly. Feed in 600m and the formula returns 1.00%, matching the 1% below it; feed in 900m and it returns 3.00%, matching the 3% above. The band is designed to join, so nothing jumps at 601m.
The rounding, settled against the statute
The statute adds “rounded at the fifth decimal place to four decimal places,” and sources differed on where those four places sit. The formula settles it: it ends in × 1/100, so what it produces is a decimal (0.0166666…), and four places of that is 0.0167 — 1.67% as a percentage.
Material provided by the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, and the tax trade press, agree — 1.67% at 700m, 2% at 750m, 2.33% at 800m.
| Price | Read as 1.6667% | 1.67% — per the statute |
|---|---|---|
| KRW 650m | 8,666,450 | 8,645,000 |
| KRW 700m | 11,666,900 | 11,690,000 |
| KRW 800m | 18,666,400 | 18,640,000 |
| KRW 850m | 22,666,950 | 22,695,000 |
The gaps, top to bottom, are 21,450 · 23,100 · 26,400 · 28,050 won. Note that they do not run one way — at 650m and 800m the statutory figure is lower, at 700m and 850m it is higher. It depends on which way the rounding goes.
The widest gap is 44,962 won, at KRW 899.25m — 0.005% of the price. Small as a proportion, but it moves the ten-thousands digit.
This site wrote 1.6667% until 26 August 2026. After the articles were opened and read, the figures here and in the acquisition tax guide and the calculator were all corrected. Confirm the actual assessment on Wetax.
A by-product — the band holds 200 small notches
Cut at the fourth decimal and the rate does not run continuously: it steps by 0.01 points every KRW 1.5m. The first step is at 600.75m and the last at 899.25m, so 1.00% to 3.00% is exactly 200 steps.
Cross one of those steps by a single won and the tax jumps. At the step near 700m — KRW 699.75m — the rate goes from 1.66% to 1.67%, and that one won is worth 69,976 won. “A slope, so no notch” holds only at a distance.
This article used to put that figure at 69,975 — the number of the step’s location (KRW 699.75m) copied across as its value. Recomputed from the formula it is 69,976 (699,750,000 × 1.67% less 699,749,999 × 1.66%, discarding won fractions). The last digit is governed by Local Accounting Act art. 55: local government receipts and payments “may disregard amounts under 10 won” (with exceptions such as instalment collection), so on a bill the gap may show as 69,970 (checked 23 September 2026; the provision is permissive, so this is not asserted).
And from 899.25m the rate is already 3.00% — the top of the band arrives 750,000 won before 900m. These 200 steps are our own calculation from the statute's rounding rule; the statute does not say so in those words.
Buying a share works differently
The rate is set by the value of the whole home, not by what you paid. The statute carries its own conversion.
Whole-home value = value of the share acquired × (assessed value of the whole ÷ assessed value of the share)
So buying half of an 800m home for 400m does not land you in the sub-600m band at 1%. The conversion gives 800m, the rate is 2.33%, and that rate applies to the 400m you paid. Half a home, a whole home’s rate.
In figures (example): judged on the 400m paid, 1.00% × 400m is KRW 4m; converted as the statute requires, 2.33% × 400m is KRW 9.32m. A gap of 5.32m, more than double. The conversion needs two assessed values — one for the whole home, one for the share.
Questions that remain
Is it a loss to go just over 900m?
No — the opposite. There is no notch here: the tax does not jump at 900m, the slope merely flattens. It is 27m won at 900m and 27.3m at 910m. Nowhere in acquisition tax does crossing a price line suddenly cost you. The place that does bite is the heavy rates, and those are driven by the number of homes, not the price.
So is 890m to 900m the most expensive stretch?
By marginal rate, yes — 8.9% is the peak of the band. But it is not where the tax is largest. Past 900m the tax keeps rising at 3%. “Where the same KRW 10m costs most” and “where the tax is highest” are different questions.
Is the published “1.01–2.99%” wrong?
Worked from the statute, the ends are exactly 1.00% and 3.00%. “1.01–2.99%” looks like an attempt to avoid overlapping the neighbouring bands, but writing it that way hides the fact that the band is designed to join — it reads as though 600m is 1% and 600m-plus-one-won is 1.01%. It is continuous.
Does anything else change across this band?
The local education tax tracks it. At (rate × 50%) × 20% it is a tenth of the acquisition rate — 0.167% against 1.67%. The rural development surtax, by contrast, stays at 0.2% throughout this band; it splits only on floor area. That structure is set out in the rural surtax and the 85㎡ line.
What if the contract price is understated?
Recording a price other than the actual one is prohibited under the Act on Report of Real Estate Transactions, and it throws out not only acquisition tax but the later capital gains tax as well. A high marginal rate means “calculate precisely and negotiate” and nothing else. The penalties are in the statutes (checked 23 September 2026): a false price report draws a fine of up to “10/100 of the acquisition price” under Real Estate Transaction Reporting Act art. 28(3), and under-declared acquisition tax carries a 10% penalty, 40% where fraud is involved (Framework Act on Local Taxes art. 54). On a 700m home the fine alone can reach 70m won (our arithmetic) — nothing like the tax it saves.
Sources and where to check
Local Tax Act art. 11(1)8 — paragraph (a) 10/1,000 up to 600m, (b) the formula for 600m–900m, (c) 30/1,000 above 900m. The same paragraph carries the conversion for buying a share.
Local Tax Act art. 151 — local education tax.
Two things were corrected on a re-check on 11 September 2026. First, the one-won notch was given as 69,975 won and is now 69,976 — the step’s location had been copied across as its value. Second, a paragraph that appeared twice has been removed.
Article 11(1)8 was opened and read on the national statute portal on 26 August 2026. The formula sits on the page as an image, but the image carries the expression in its alt text, so it could be transcribed exactly: “(price at acquisition × 2/300m − 3) × 1/100”. That check found the rounding in this article wrong, and it has been corrected (1.6667% → 1.67%). Every figure here was then rebuilt from the formula.
Where to check further
The Wetax acquisition tax calculator. That is the reference for the actual bill.
For a share purchase, the assessed values. The conversion needs two — the whole and your share.
The number of homes first. The marginal rates here describe the one-home standard rate. Fall into a heavy rate and it flattens to 8% or 12% and this curve disappears.
To total all three taxes, put the price into the acquisition tax calculator.
