Live data from Hacker News

New York passes pied-a-terre tax

cnbc.com

61–70 of 459 posts

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#62
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The elites always promise us trickle down economics, maybe this time it will happen. I wont hold my breath though.

> The elites always promise us trickle down economics, maybe this time it will happen.

Are you under the impression that the wealthy keep their money in a savings account?

They have more money than they can spend so they invest it, what do you think investment does?

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sure yeah, all those middle class families with second homes in New York City . Right. Nobody affected by this is middle class. Nobody that will be affected by this in the next 20 years would be considered middle class by any rational measure.

Just like the federal income tax was only targeted at the top 5% of the population when implemented.

Inflation is cumulative.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#64
Actual title from the article:

> New York passes Mamdani’s pied-a-terre tax. Here’s who pays and how much

(The submitted title at time of commenting is "New York Passes Tax on the Ultra-Wealthy)

It's a tax on second homes. If you thought it was a wealth tax from the editorialized title, like I did, that's not correct.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#65

[flagged]

This argument is used again and again and I wonder: Why do "people with money" stay where they are when there are countries, islands, even just states where there is less taxes to pay?

It's not the "people with money" leaving. There's equal evidence of people with money staying and people with money leaving.

It's people who use their money to generate more value and employ lots of people that are, consistently, leaving. That means that thousands of jobs for the lower middle class are leaving and going to somewhere with a more favorable business environment.

And that's not good (well, it's good for the other city).

It's easy for people in tech hub cities to think that's never going to change but history shows boom towns going bust repeatedly. Sometimes they come back (Seattle). Sometimes they don't (the whole Rust Belt + Upstate NY).

And once the talent pool from a few large companies moves to another metro, whole industries relocate their offices to chase it.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#66

I'm really curious about this. Wont, as a rule, any super-rich 2nd, 3rd, and 4th homes in New York be completely unaffordable for almost everyone? It feels a bit like you're potentially spreading around the super-luxury homes across a wider breadth of the super-rich, but not much else. Is there a better way to think about this?

> Wont, as a rule, any super-rich 2nd, 3rd, and 4th homes in New York be completely unaffordable for almost everyone?

??

The point is to raise revenue.

In some sense, City is calling the bluff of these deeply immoral rich fucks; the tax is incredibly affordable for them, and almost all of them will simply complain and pay it, and thus generate revenue for the City.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#67

Property tax is the workable wealth tax. There's no such thing as a perfect policy, but in the context of NYC this seems worth trying. I'll be interested to see if it helps create some liquidity in the housing market (the goal), or if it only functions as revenue source. One wrinkle I haven't heard much discussion of -- cities respond to incentives too. NYC is a global destination for the mega wealthy. If it turns ou…

Property taxes have the added benefit to lower property prices, and the money can go on improving the city. (Which make properties prices go higher)

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#68
post #12

> New York City’s new tax on second homes will more than double property taxes owed by many wealthy luxury apartment owners, according to tax experts. > State lawmakers on Wednesday passed the tax on nonprimary residences in order to help close the city’s budget gap. The so-called pied-a-terre tax will be imposed on second homes valued at $1 million or more. It’s expected to raise $500 million in revenue. > Details o…

Well, you need to read the rest too:

"While the tax seems large, experts say the city’s antiquated assessment and valuation system dramatically undervalues properties, reducing the burden. City valuations can often be 10% or less of the true market value, they said."

It also mentions they plan to adjust property valuations in coming years, and when the valuations go up the rates will go down:

"After the valuation adjustments ... properties over $25 million will be taxed at 1.3%"

I dunno, 1.3% of the actual value seems.. not at all unreasonable? I live in TX and that's about what my property taxes are, for a property valued at several orders of magnitude less than any of Ken Griffin's NYC properties.

EDIT: As mil22 pointed out, this 1.3% tax is on top of the existing ~1.8% NYC property tax rate, so it's more like ~3.1% total.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#69

I'm really curious about this. Wont, as a rule, any super-rich 2nd, 3rd, and 4th homes in New York be completely unaffordable for almost everyone? It feels a bit like you're potentially spreading around the super-luxury homes across a wider breadth of the super-rich, but not much else. Is there a better way to think about this?

If you can afford to pay $238 million for an apartment (the Ken Griffin example from the story) you can afford the annual $1.87 million in tax. That's about 0.785% tax rate.

By comparison, I have an investment property that's worth about $285k, and I pay 1.97% (about $5,800) on that in annual property tax, so esp. considering he's in Manhattan, that rate looks like a bargain.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#70
post #12

> New York City’s new tax on second homes will more than double property taxes owed by many wealthy luxury apartment owners, according to tax experts. > State lawmakers on Wednesday passed the tax on nonprimary residences in order to help close the city’s budget gap. The so-called pied-a-terre tax will be imposed on second homes valued at $1 million or more. It’s expected to raise $500 million in revenue. > Details o…

> The rates sound a bit steep.

Agreed, but you also have to keep in mind that those people don't pay NYC income tax.

Post reply on HN