[flagged]
Real Estate can't move out of New York. Someone else would have to buy it.
A company in the Bahamas maybe.
I really hope this backfires on a grand scale and the NY state actually loses money because of their greed.
New York passes pied-a-terre tax
431–440 of 459 posts
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is great to want to give your kids a head start in the world, it is terrible for them and the people around them to set them up for life. How is it terrible for my kids to not have to break their back like I did to build the wealth I'm looking to pass on to them after I die? Why should they go through the same struggles that I did? It is up to them to squander it or transform it into even more wealth to pass it…
My grandparents didn't pass away until my folks were in their 60s, my remaining parent most likely won't die until I'm in my 60s. I also went to give my children the world, but giving them a few million when they're about to retire doesn't really do much. parents wanting to support their kids should do things like pay for college or a trade school, cover their grandkids daycare costs, help them buy their first home.…
Well, you can just give them the money before you actually pass away…
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#433This is fantastic news for the Miami real estate market. Does anybody has stats as to how many homes this would actually affect?
Miami? Have you checked home insurance rates lately? The thought of these NYC second home owners getting gutted by the next hurricane is rather amusing though.
Homes built after 2002 in Florida are not gutted by hurricanes, they are hurricane resistant under updated building codes. The codes were even strengthened in subsequent years. Example, FEMA found no structural failure from wind in modern-code homes for Hurricane Ian.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#434Against 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?
One can find an unending supply of complaints when you simply choke the hose. Consider focusing your feedback on how best to use this new revenue stream such that you’re not left filled with anger and disappointment.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that doesn't change the fact that Jeff Bezos, fundamentally, is extremely wealthy, even if he'd have to sell or borrow against a few shares to use it.
Perhaps refer to the root of this convo branch: > Accrue more money pretty much indefinitely? You changed the subject. Wealth wasn't it.
It kind of was the subject. The person I replied to up thread was clearly implying that rich people making investments is a net benefit to everyone, and if they were all acting like VCs, maybe, but since they are mostly locking up their investments in mutual funds or real estate, its less clearly beneficial.
Yes, a lot of economic activity is predicated on the availability of investment capital, but only investing in already-successful firms doesn't generate new economic activity. And static, unused real estate generates basically none at all.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#436Earlier 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 (and your selected friends) and no one else
I mean, there are a bunch of direct mechanisms for that, from the legal (preferred stock classes), through the grey (letting your buddies invest pre-IPO), to the less-legal (insider trading)
Sitting on a bunch of real estate in a desirable location like NYC isn't a bad mechanism either.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
And I think that inheritance, while a natural desire, is morally wrong. It's an example that desires aren't always congruent with morality. People will go to great lengths to justify their conclusion.
Are gifts morally wrong? If I'm near death is it wrong for to give my assets to my children beforehand, or does it only become immoral if done via a will?
> Are gifts morally wrong?
If we're going to talk about morality, I think we need to talk about the government as one of the moral actors.
Imagine this scenario, exaggerated to make a point:
1. Alice receives $X. It's from her boss, for laboring in the mines every day. Government man says: "Give me 20% to pay for the shared roads, or you go to jail."
2. Bob receives $X. It's from his parents, for doing nothing other than being born related to them. Government man says: "Gee, I just can't do anything here, I guess I'll have to shake down Alice even harder next time."
Isn't there something off about the morality of Government Man's choices?
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tax is based on residency, not ownership. If nobody lives there as their primary residence, it's subject to the tax.
Simple fix, they need to put mistresses in all their second homes.
You joke, but they can partition off a small space, rent it out, and claim they are renting the entire thing to someone. It can be a housekeeper who actually has access to the entire thing.
They can also split the property into multiple independently owned properties that just so happen to be right near each other, each just under the limit.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those schemes are also human-created though, and can be human-fixed. I've never really understood the arguments that go like: "This regulation won't work because the people it targets will avoid it through loopholes and other schemes." Well, get rid of the loopholes and schemes, then! Granted, this requires lawmakers to explore more of the "exploit space" around their proposed regulations, but I don't think that's re…
The only way to get rid of tax avoidance is to simply tax transactions, every time, for every person, on every transaction. “Oh, that’s regressive” they will say. Make it small per transaction. A rich person spending 100x what a normal person spends will pay 100x as much tax. A billionaire spending 10000x what a normal person spends will pay 10000x as much. And they will also be taxed if they borrow money (that’s a t…
If your wealth/income increases x1000, their spending will not increase a thousand-fold. It's not like you can eat a thousand burgers in a day. All this leads to is poorer people paying a larger proportion of their income as taxes than the richer.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#440>“All my clients already feel like they pay too much,” Pollack said. “These numbers are significant. I don’t care how wealthy you are.” If that argument holds up in court, we are all screwed.
Oh, won't somebody think of the multi-millionaires???