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

451–459 of 459 posts

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#451

Post by jimbob45 »

craftkiller wrote: post #197
jimbob45 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree and I’d prefer to see apartments excluded from this. Apartments are what I want second-homeowners to own rather than hoarding valuable land.

Wouldn't excluding apartments therefore exclude Ken Griffin's 238 million dollar penthouse? That seems like exactly the kind of 2nd home that this should be targeting.

Yeah I hear you but I want to incentivize dense housing like that. If you live in Texas or Florida, it’s easy to see how second homes can entirely overtake acres and acres of land.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#453

Post by tekne »

aerhardt wrote: post #450
WalterBright wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 com…

Wait... yes they do.

If I raise the price of my product, less people will buy it but I'll make more profit per-unit -- so the amount of money I make is an inverted U with price on the x axis and money on the y axis, and I should set the price at the inflection point.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#454

Post by tekne »

ycdeebs wrote: post #361
ryandrake wrote: post #205

Earlier 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…

Land value tax?

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#455

Post by arw0n »

SoftTalker wrote: post #135
arw0n wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fairest and easiest to realize wealth tax is on inheritance. It is great to want to give your kids a headstart in the world, it is terrible for them and the people around them to set them up for life.

I would disagree, I think income taxes and inheritance taxes are morally wrong. Earning money to support oneself and family instead of relying on public largesse should not be taxed. Passing the fruits of a lifetime of work to ones heirs so they can continue do productive work instead of relying on public largesse should not be taxed.

There's a difference in thought here so fundamental that it is hard to argue about details without addressing it first: You believe the individual comes first, what it produces is taxes hy the external construct of the state, which takes from what the individual truly earns.

But the individual would be a subsistence farmer at best without society supporting it, hardly worth taxing. In reality millionaires are only possible with a large state and societal network around them. Wealth is societies gift, and its right to take back.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#457

Post by Teever »

Terr_ wrote: post #423
WalterBright wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it basically never happens Why have a tax that never happens?

No, I'm saying the tax basically never takes 40% of the estate assets that are being gifted to recipients. That 40% is just one number in a larger equation, and it's wrong to use it out of context in a way that makes the policy seem harsher/scarier than it really is. However it also true that 99% of the time the estate tax is $0, but that just tells you 99% of Americans die without being that rich. It doesn't mean th…

Walter is just wasting your time because he's a Libertarian who doesn't believe in (m)any tax policies but he doesn't want to outright say that because he knows most people are wise enough to disengage from conversations like this with a Libertarian.

So instead he'll just act like he didn't read that "basically" that you wrote, despite quoting it and then pretend like he doesn't really understand what you just wrote above.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#458

Post by IAmBroom »

cyberax wrote: post #319
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.

> They are expensive largely because of housing so your statement is a bit of a tautology. Yes. And that's impossible to fix. > Historically NYC housing used to be a lot more affordable before they stopped building, reducing supply relative to demand and thereby raising prices. Demand will _always_ outstrip supply. And there's no such thing as "affordable housing", it's a contradiction like "hot liquid helium". If ho…

> Demand will _always_ outstrip supply.

Economics 101 would beg to disagree.

> And there's no such thing as "affordable housing", it's a contradiction like "hot liquid helium". If housing sells, then it's affordable for _somebody_.

Incorrect. Housing can be sold to a buyer that won't use it for housing. Like the dog protecting the manger full of food it can't eat, affordable housing can be removed from the market by investors, tax vehicles, and so forth.

Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax

#459

Post by efsavage »

ars wrote: post #438
kbelder wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If the housekeeper gets to live in a $5m penthouse downtown instead of a walkup with a 60+ minute commute, I'd file this as an unintended win for this policy.
Post reply on HN