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

441–450 of 459 posts

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#441

Post by thrance »

sfmike wrote: post #379

Against all new tax. It's spent too inefficiently. Why does there need to be more New York Learing Centers. Would you keep adding buckets of water into a leaky boat or try to patch where it's leaking first?

> It's spent too inefficiently.

Source? With all the ruckus DOGE made, they just couldn't find that many inefficiencies. They ended up cutting marginal things just to look good (to their fans, who think 5M a year to keep Ebola at bay is too much).

As their taxes have been steadily decreasing over the past decades, the rich kept getting richer, now owning most of the wealth in this country, and with that everything is turning to shit. There's less and less money for stuff that matters (education, health, infrastructure...) and more and more for the pedophile oligarchs to buy media companies and politicians. Redistribution is the only way out of this crisis.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#442

Post by EliRivers »

cakealert wrote: post #191
EliRivers wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what degree do they really invest it? A lot of rich people just buy shares (other than at an IPO) and just move money around each other's pockets rather than investing in something wealth creating, or just swap already-existing overpriced properties around each other.

> move money around each other's pockets rather than investing in something wealth creating So your claim is that wealthy people aren't interested in generating more wealth for themselves? What exactly is it you are claiming? Sounds like something a populist youtuber would say.

So your claim is that wealthy people aren't interested in generating more wealth for themselves?

They're interested in getting more wealth for themselves. The easiest way to do that is not to generate new wealth.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#443

Post by EliRivers »

cakealert wrote: post #401
swiftcoder wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So your claim is that wealthy people aren't interested in generating more wealth for themselves? The claim is that wealthy folks aren't typically interested in generating more wealth for other, non-rich folks

That requires explanation of a mechanism that would generate wealth for yourself (and your selected friends) and no one else. Capturing 100% of the value is all but impossible. Also you didn't address what he said, possibly because it's complete nonsense? > A lot of rich people just buy shares (other than at an IPO) and just move money around each other's pockets rather than investing in something wealth creating, or…

That requires explanation of a mechanism that would generate wealth for yourself

Acquire it from other people. That's how I do it; my day job pays me less money than me just swapping stocks around. The companies whose stock I buy and sell have never seen a penny from me; never received from me a single penny of investment in their business. I harvest wealth without having ever invested in any company and my actions create no new wealth; I harvest wealth I did not create.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#444

Post by throwaway2037 »

queenkjuul wrote: post #411
throwaway2037 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we'd still be on the hook for taxes for (iirc) 15 years This is defintely not true. I did some light Google searches and I cannot anything. There is an exit tax, but only applies if your net worth exceeds 2million USD.

I thought US citizens are taxed on income (but not capital gains) even when outside the US? I had friends who had to file US income tax returns while living overseas

US citizens regardless of their residency are responsible to pay taxes on all global income and assets. Thus, if you live in the US, but have a brokerage account in Bermuda or Hongkong (where there are no local capital gains taxes) you are still required to pay US federal taxes on capital gains from your overseas brokerage account. The same would be true if you lived in Bermuda or Hongkong.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#445

Post by cucumber3732842 »

pydry wrote: post #409
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Land value taxes don't discourage desirable behavior Are you serious? LVTs expressly incentivizes landlords to kick out "grandfathered in" developments and uses in favor of redevelopment and sale for that purpose. But those grandfathered in developments and uses are exactly what made the place valuable in the first place and you need some amount of them to remain.

I mean, I guess if you're a NIMBY who wants to inhibit the construction of more affordable housing that's a bad thing.

Nothing inhibits construction like creating a system where all the existing land owners stand to get taxed more if they allow development.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#446

Post by steveBK123 »

aerhardt wrote: post #346
selfhoster1312 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 defic…

I agree a lot of these things end in a bang at some point.

Western rich world boomers have gotten a great deal - unusually stable & high growth economies, relative housing abundance, and peace during their peak working life during which all sorts of retirement related benefits were introduced.

Unfortunately many of those benefits only work in a higher population growth, higher economic growth, lower retired lifespans world that no longer exists.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#447

Post by postflopclarity »

Jblx2 wrote: post #381
janalsncm wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are expensive largely because of housing so your statement is a bit of a tautology. Historically NYC housing used to be a lot more affordable before they stopped building, reducing supply relative to demand and thereby raising prices.

Has anyone tried to study how much NYC housing demand is due to having a large foreign-born population (something like 37%)? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/new-york-city-immigrants_n_44...

.. yes? this is studied.

studies typically conclude that immigrant populations do contribute to housing demand (duh), but the labor supply they bring to services market (e.g. childcare, retail) lowers the cost of those services by a more-than-commensurate amount. so the total cost of living goes down for "natives."

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#448

Post by slackfan »

cactacea wrote: post #87
slackfan wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

So the numbers will need adjusted for inflation. Eventually. Like any other tax. If you're making an argument it is entirely unclear what your position is.

No tax base rate is ever adjusted for inflation. What planet are you from?

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#449

Post by pydry »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #445
pydry wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I guess if you're a NIMBY who wants to inhibit the construction of more affordable housing that's a bad thing.

Nothing inhibits construction like creating a system where all the existing land owners stand to get taxed more if they allow development.

And the land value tax does the exact opposite of that.

If you sit on an underdeveloped plot of land in a high value location your tax bill will exceed your rental income.

The land is worthless to you. So you'll sell up to somebody who will make something of it.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#450

Post by aerhardt »

WalterBright wrote: post #356
aerhardt wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Laffer curve is a result of the Law of Supply and Demand. It's no different than increasing the price of X causes the sales of X to go down.

Classical supply and demand models do not show that increasing the price of x causes quantities to first go up then down after a certain inflection point…

You could probably make the relationship through utility rather or a proxy model (you can model anything with enough imagination in economics) but to call it “the result of” as if it is immediately related is not accurate. It is apparent at first sight when you compare the curves…

Post reply on HN