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

New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 288 posts

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#161

Post by bsimpson »

8note wrote: post #120
bsimpson wrote: post #40

Reactionary taxes like this have a tendency to be ill-considered and have unintended side effects. NY also has a 1% penalty on paying more than $1 million for housing, which was probably enacted to proletariat applause when $1 million was still considered a lot of money. Now it distorts the value of entry level housing in NYC, where you'll have a hard time finding anything more than a studio apartment for $1 million.…

> people tend to lose money on housing in NYC unless it's held for many years. I'd generally consider that a success metric? People making money flipping houses on short terms is a bad thing

What's a reasonable time horizon?

What should happen when you find a mate and need more space than you did when you moved into your current unit?

A friend moved out of his space after 7 years to start a family, and the appreciation didn't cover the closing costs.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#162

Post by smallmancontrov »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #153
dwa3592 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good attempt at manipulation. Why don't you link some studies here which say it will be better to leave the tax system as is than taxing the unrealized gains somehow.

The numbers are self evident. If you've ever owned a business you know that you have: 1. Corporate income tax 2. Employee Federal income tax 3. FICA Payroll Tax 4. Sales Tax on transactions 5. Property Taxes Now multiply that by each node on the graph. Each employee, vendor, business that comes in contact with your company spends the money you paid them and is taxed on it as well. It grows exponentially after just a…

"I shouldn't be taxed because my employees and customers will be!"

Folks, we've found it! Pure, distilled, refined, 100.0%, 200-proof trickle down economics!

Just one teeny tiny itty bitty problem: r>g

Oops.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#163

Post by trolleski »

Mallory_Ringess wrote: post #134
trolleski wrote: post #101

Tax them to oblivion, the goal should be for them to sell! Let them go to Dubai if they don't like it.

Before long Mamdani will provide yet another proof of Thatcher's well-known dictum on socialism: The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money

Taxes are not socialism.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#164

Post by bryanlarsen »

WarmWash wrote: post #83
bryanlarsen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless he does the step-up basis hack when he dies I'm sure we can count that as a given. > The government views Amazon as a money printer, states get their sales taxes, and the federal government gets their income taxes. Except when states fall all over themselves to give Amazon a massive tax break to build their second HQ.

>I'm sure we can count that as a given. It's very unlikely, he has pledged to give away most of his wealth in his lifetime, but there are a variety of factors that will always add space for detractors to make fair points. Bill Gates is still worth billions despite being an endless waterfall of charity money for decades. Either way, the step-up thing is way way way more common in the upper class, where people with ~$2…

He can't give away the securities he has used as collateral for his loans.

The businesses that are laying off employees because of competition from Amazon were less efficient and this employed far more people than Amazon does, thus paying more in taxes.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#165

Post by al_borland »

ch4s3 wrote: post #4
mikeweiss wrote: post #2

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.

If I was a developer and building owner who only cared about money, it seems like it would be much better to build a luxury building where the units are sold, but sit empty most of the time. This seems to be the environment in NYC. The proper systems need to be in place so it makes sense to build housing for actual people, rather than building stored real estate value for the ultra rich, especially foreign investors who may never even set foot in the US and are just looking to diversify their portfolio.

I’m not an “eat the rich” person, but these mostly vacant buildings in a city with a housing affordability problem are a crime. I don’t necessarily fault the billionaires for this, I fault the politicians who sat back and watched it happen, approving all the projects along the way.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#166

Post by WarmWash »

javanissen wrote: post #136
WarmWash wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York City rent exists at an equilibrium. The draw for people to move there is so intense, that any draw downs in rent are met with upticks in immigration. Adding housing stock in NYC is not like adding housing stock in Lawnsdale Ohio. Almost by definition you cannot out build the demand for housing.

> Almost by definition you cannot out build the demand for housing. Would love to see some justification for this claim, which tacitly suggests that adding, say, 2M extra apartments over baseline would have zero effect on our housing market.

2 million new apartments is doubling the number of apartments in NYC.

I call water safe, but you may say it's a tacit admission that you could drink 5 gallons in an hour an experience zero effects. I wouldn't call that an honest rebuttal

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#167

Post by [deleted] »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #162
phyzix5761 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The numbers are self evident. If you've ever owned a business you know that you have: 1. Corporate income tax 2. Employee Federal income tax 3. FICA Payroll Tax 4. Sales Tax on transactions 5. Property Taxes Now multiply that by each node on the graph. Each employee, vendor, business that comes in contact with your company spends the money you paid them and is taxed on it as well. It grows exponentially after just a…

"I shouldn't be taxed because my employees and customers will be!" Folks, we've found it! Pure, distilled, refined, 100.0%, 200-proof trickle down economics! Just one teeny tiny itty bitty problem: r>g Oops.

[deleted]

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#168

Post by tlogan »

tekla wrote: post #26

I dunno why anyone thinks this matters. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/the-pied-a-terre-tax-and... "We find that, before adjusting for these factors, our choice of tax rates and brackets could raise almost exactly $500 million from a little over 11,200 properties. However, revenues could be reduced to between roughly $340 million and $380 million based on assumptions on exclusions for rented units and behavioral…

From what I know this is going to be challenged in the court and it probably it is not going to pass the legal challenge (renting part is one interesting loophole - I think that one caused similar tax law in SF to be struck down).

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#169

Post by dwa3592 »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #153
dwa3592 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good attempt at manipulation. Why don't you link some studies here which say it will be better to leave the tax system as is than taxing the unrealized gains somehow.

The numbers are self evident. If you've ever owned a business you know that you have: 1. Corporate income tax 2. Employee Federal income tax 3. FICA Payroll Tax 4. Sales Tax on transactions 5. Property Taxes Now multiply that by each node on the graph. Each employee, vendor, business that comes in contact with your company spends the money you paid them and is taxed on it as well. It grows exponentially after just a…

Do you wanna get an endoscope test? I think there is koolaid in your gut.

Re: New York to tax luxury second homes in NYC

#170

Post by Rekindle8090 »

jmclnx wrote: post #7

> 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…

[dead]
Post reply on HN