11–20 of 288 posts
I strongly doubt that this is going to have the effect that they want it to. It won't raise the taxes that they expect it to. It won't free up inventory. It will halt construction.
> an initiative to appease Mayor Zohran Mamdani and liberal voters Taxing the rich is not a Liberal thing, but the Rich is calling it that because they do not want to pay any taxes at all. He was elected because people are starting to feel real pain and seeing the ultra rich paying far less taxes then they are. If it was up to me, I would tax all the second homes above 5 million USD and add a Luxury Tax on all valuab…
Personal Income Tax accounts for around 31% of collected NYC tax revenue.
"The rich" also pay property tax. NYC's poorer residents generally don't have property to pay tax on. Everyone pays sales tax equally.
So how exactly are the ultra rich paying "less taxes"?
Good! Second homes in any region with low inventory should be taxed...
It seems like a place like Manhattan might benefit from first up-zoning the low slung sections that are currently 4-8 stories. My point here is that I'd start with trying to build enough housing before spending political capital on marginal things that neither unlock supply nor generate much revenue.
I strongly doubt that this is going to have the effect that they want it to. It won't raise the taxes that they expect it to. It won't free up inventory. It will halt construction.
I strongly doubt that this is going to have the effect that they want it to. It won't raise the taxes that they expect it to. It won't free up inventory. It will halt construction.
Taxing second homes would halt construction? Plenty of people out there wish to own a first home, myself included.
EDIT: Here is a list reported by Google search but I really do not understand or know how reasonable these challenges are.
Equal Protection: Owners may argue the tax unfairly treats similar properties differently based on second-home status, value threshold, or owner residence. This is likely a weaker challenge because tax classifications usually receive deferential rational-basis review.
Nonresident Discrimination: A challenge could claim the tax targets out-of-city, out-of-state, or foreign owners rather than property use. The law is safer if written as a tax on non-primary luxury residences, not on nonresidents as a class.
Assessment Inequality: Owners may challenge how the city values condos, co-ops, townhouses, and mixed-use properties. This could be significant if the $5 million threshold is applied inconsistently or without reliable valuation rules.
Due Process: Owners may argue the law lacks clear notice, proof, exemption, and appeal procedures. This would be especially relevant for disputes over whether a home is truly a second home.
Residency Conflicts: Taxpayers may challenge inconsistent treatment if the city treats them as NYC residents for income tax but non-primary homeowners for this tax. Clear coordination between residency rules would reduce this risk.
Home Rule Authority: Opponents may argue NYC lacks authority unless the state clearly authorizes the tax. This challenge is less likely to succeed if Albany passes valid enabling legislation and NYC follows required procedures.
Good! Second homes in any region with low inventory should be taxed...
It seems like a place like Manhattan might benefit from first up-zoning the low slung sections that are currently 4-8 stories. My point here is that I'd start with trying to build enough housing before spending political capital on marginal things that neither unlock supply nor generate much revenue.
I strongly doubt that this is going to have the effect that they want it to. It won't raise the taxes that they expect it to. It won't free up inventory. It will halt construction.
Taxing second homes would halt construction? Plenty of people out there wish to own a first home, myself included.
The per-apartment cost of construction in Manhattan is more than the retail price of my 3500sq ft house in near-rural South Carolina.
> an initiative to appease Mayor Zohran Mamdani and liberal voters Taxing the rich is not a Liberal thing, but the Rich is calling it that because they do not want to pay any taxes at all. He was elected because people are starting to feel real pain and seeing the ultra rich paying far less taxes then they are. If it was up to me, I would tax all the second homes above 5 million USD and add a Luxury Tax on all valuab…
The top 1% of NYC residents contribute 40-48% of all personal income tax collected in NYC. When you extend that to Top 2.5% you cross 51%. Personal Income Tax accounts for around 31% of collected NYC tax revenue. "The rich" also pay property tax. NYC's poorer residents generally don't have property to pay tax on. Everyone pays sales tax equally. So how exactly are the ultra rich paying "less taxes"?
> an initiative to appease Mayor Zohran Mamdani and liberal voters Taxing the rich is not a Liberal thing, but the Rich is calling it that because they do not want to pay any taxes at all. He was elected because people are starting to feel real pain and seeing the ultra rich paying far less taxes then they are. If it was up to me, I would tax all the second homes above 5 million USD and add a Luxury Tax on all valuab…
The top 1% of NYC residents contribute 40-48% of all personal income tax collected in NYC. When you extend that to Top 2.5% you cross 51%. Personal Income Tax accounts for around 31% of collected NYC tax revenue. "The rich" also pay property tax. NYC's poorer residents generally don't have property to pay tax on. Everyone pays sales tax equally. So how exactly are the ultra rich paying "less taxes"?