Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York passes pied-a-terre tax

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 459 posts

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#341

Post by eli »

apparent wrote: post #279
burlesona wrote: post #22

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…

> helps create some liquidity in the housing market (the goal) Is that the stated goal? I thought the goal was to generate revenue from the tax. It's true that triggering sales will create a one-time boost in sales-related taxes, but that's just temporary.

Seems like disincentivizing people from owning mostly vacant homes should free them up for someone who does intend to live there

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#342

Post by eli »

nonethewiser wrote: post #175
ceejayoz wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/the-pied-a-terre-tax-and... > It is unclear how DOF will treat properties owned by LLCs and trusts. In general, these owners are not considered residents. However, this does not mean that the properties are not used as primary residences. For instance, based on publicly available information, Mayor Bloomberg established his primary residence in two adjacent buildings on the Upper E…

Now remember they are changing how property values are assessed. So everyone's base rises and the rich with 2nd homes dont pay the extra tax because they move it into an LLC.

They are not changing how property values are assessed for everyone

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#343

Post by jcranmer »

cyberax wrote: post #251
jdappletini wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah Mamdani is firing on all fronts. There is plan to add to the housing stock as well: https://www.nyc.gov/mayors-office/news/2026/05/mayor-mamdani... He is also aggressively going after landlords withholding repairs, maintaining dilapidated units, etc. and thus tackling the quality of the housing stock problem.

That's because he's planning to fail upwards. None of his plans will result in positive outcomes but they'll look good on paper. So he'll move to a higher office and leave his messes for the next sucker.

First off, Mamdani does strike me as the kind of politician who is genuinely happy in his role and not someone who's treating it as a stepping stone to a higher office.

Secondly... the track record of NYC mayors' post-mayoral careers is abysmal. Not one mayor appears to have successfully held elected office after their mayorship. There's one failed bid for NY governor (unexpected primary loss to the senior Cuomo), and four failed bids for president, the most successful of which being Bloomberg's 4th place showing in the 2020 Democratic primary. So as a springboard to higher office, NYC mayor is absolute garbage.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#344

Post by selfhoster1312 »

kjshsh123 wrote: post #278
ceejayoz wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and rape helps the therapy industry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Bastiat was opposed to inheritance taxes. He wrote about this in Economic Harmonies. I think he'd call the connection you're trying to make a stretch

Yes, the famous bourgeois economist Bastiat is certainly a reference in how to provide economic justice on this planet. /s

To be clear, i'm not exactly defending inheritance tax if resources are shared another way. For instance, it would make sense to let people keep a − modest − home across generations. But i'm tired of rich capitalist tech bros saying income taxes are unfair because they've worked so hard, and inheritance taxes are unfair because they've already been taxed.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#345

Post by eli »

arjie wrote: post #147

Interesting. A $3m house is often valued at $300k so this is actually narrower than one would think. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/62-Beach-St-APT-2F-New-Yo... Wild that there are so many rich people in NYC. Truly an engine of wealth creation.

NYC surely does generate a lot of wealth, but a lot of vacant luxury NYC condos are just a place to park cash. No particular connection to the city.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#346

Post by aerhardt »

selfhoster1312 wrote: post #332
Aurornis wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it turns out the uber-rich don't mind paying and this becomes a cash cow for the city, that creates incentives for the city to cater to them and try and get more uber-rich people to have second homes in the city. The tax is reasonably small enough that I wouldn't expect a lot of wealthy people from divesting from their properties, but it's probably going to make them think twice about buying new properties. That…

> France discovered this the hard way when they implemented their first wealth tax Citation needed (for a solid study, not right-wing propaganda from CNews/Libération). From a quick cursory look, it appears the French government had no problem raising taxes when the taxes were higher, and that the previous governments who reduced taxes for the rich setting blame on public debt have in fact increased public debt over…

France's government expenditure is 57% of its GDP according to th OECD. It's probably an all-time record in the annals of global economic history in peacetime. It's more than the late Soviet Union spent around 1985-1990 according to the IMF / World Bank.

The 2025 deficit ran at around ~150 billion euros. The Zucman wealth tax would raise 25 billion in the most optimistic projected scenario (so, one sixth of the deficit at most). This is the very best case as projected by its proponents - there's a decent chance receipts would be significantly lower than that.

You're absolutely right that right wing parties did not, and almost certainly will not, solve any of these issues. Neither will a wealth tax. In my opinion, this is only solved in a bang.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#347

Post by plorkyeran »

VikingCoder wrote: post #106

> 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. I heard about a system for this that struck me as brilliant. Make someone declare the value of their property. Then the government has the choice of taxing them at the scheduled rate, or bu…

Forcing people to pay property tax on an inflated valuation of their house or face eviction sounds like a terrible system, actually. If you offered to buy my house for a number that I agreed was a perfectly fair market value that I didn't expect to be able to beat on the open market, I would say no immediately. You'd have to offer something like 50% over what I'd expect to get for me to seriously consider the offer.

It is very common to have goods where the price a buyer is willing to pay is smaller than the price a seller is willing to accept, and in a free market that simply results in no transaction happening. Forcing the transaction to happen is always going to make at least one side of the deal unhappy.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#348

Post by baggy_trough »

VikingCoder wrote: post #106

> 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. I heard about a system for this that struck me as brilliant. Make someone declare the value of their property. Then the government has the choice of taxing them at the scheduled rate, or bu…

This would be a exquisitely horrible way to live.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#349

Post by aerhardt »

WalterBright wrote: post #152
Aurornis wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it turns out the uber-rich don't mind paying and this becomes a cash cow for the city, that creates incentives for the city to cater to them and try and get more uber-rich people to have second homes in the city. The tax is reasonably small enough that I wouldn't expect a lot of wealthy people from divesting from their properties, but it's probably going to make them think twice about buying new properties. That…

> If you make the tax too high it starts discouraging the behavior you're taxing, which can paradoxically reduce overall tax revenue. The Law of Supply and Demand is not a paradox.

You could maybe somehow relate it to supply and demand dynamics, but the idea that that higher taxes can start reducing receipts after a certain point is widely credited to Laffer (although apparently there are signals of others saying similar things throughout the history of economics). The Laffer model displays an inverted U curve.
Post reply on HN