The wealthy are very easy to tax. They possess a lot of assets. Really, all of them should be taxed progressively, like shooting fish in a barrel.
New York passes pied-a-terre tax
81–90 of 459 posts
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#82Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
The elites always promise us trickle down economics, maybe this time it will happen. I wont hold my breath though.
> The elites always promise us trickle down economics, maybe this time it will happen. Are you under the impression that the wealthy keep their money in a savings account? They have more money than they can spend so they invest it, what do you think investment does?
Currently it seems to be funding frenzied investment in data centers.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#84This 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.
The rich don't really care about insurance rates down here because they can a) pay them, b) tend to gravitate towards newer buildings that have better protection and c) have the money to retrofit older buildings with the necessary protection to lower insurance rates. Miami has the strictest hurricane codes in the country, so while there's a possibility that they may get gutted, it's probably going to be less than people expect.
I live in FL so if you have questions about insurance feel free to ask.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Sure yeah, all those middle class families with second homes in New York City . Right. Nobody affected by this is middle class. Nobody that will be affected by this in the next 20 years would be considered middle class by any rational measure.
That really depends on how you define middle class. I can easily see how someone with a net worth of 100m being considered middle class compared to billionaires.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#86> New York City’s new tax on second homes will more than double property taxes owed by many wealthy luxury apartment owners, according to tax experts. > State lawmakers on Wednesday passed the tax on nonprimary residences in order to help close the city’s budget gap. The so-called pied-a-terre tax will be imposed on second homes valued at $1 million or more. It’s expected to raise $500 million in revenue. > Details o…
Well, you need to read the rest too: "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." It also mentions they plan to adjust property valuations in coming years, and when the valuations go up the rates will go down: "After the valuation adj…
> I dunno, 1.3% seems.. not at all unreasonable? I live in TX and that's about what my property taxes are, for a property valued at several orders of magnitude less than any of Ken Griffin's NYC properties.
Bear in mind, it's 1.3% on top of the existing ~1.8% average NYC property tax rate, so it may still be comparatively expensive relative to TX property taxes.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure yeah, all those middle class families with second homes in New York City . Right. Nobody affected by this is middle class. Nobody that will be affected by this in the next 20 years would be considered middle class by any rational measure.
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.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#88[flagged]
I think there is a real argument here that everyone will love to yell at you. Same thing happened with California. Its always a balance -- if the tax is too much people will leave, if they get the number just right in that its a nuisance and not material they will stay.
Though when you start engaging with the bots they can't handle the nuance.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
1 million remains the hallmark of 'wealthy' (as in: not us), to the point where pop culture has started mocking the concept decades ago (See: That Austin Powers movie...) Hardly everyone understands 'owning a house' as millionaire-level wealth. Which is why people cheer the policy on until they realize it is them who is being shaken down.
In what world is 1 million US not wealthy? Have tech salaries distorted people's opinions that much? Owning a house where your equity in it is over a million is absolutely wealthy.
> In what world is 1 million US not wealthy?
In the US itself (?) lol
I disagree with the comment and entire existence of the person to whom you are replying, but they aren't wrong about $1m actually not being as big or watershed a number as it used to be.
A basic middle-class house in just about any part of the country that's worth living in is going to be $1m, plus or minus 200k.
Re: New York passes pied-a-terre tax
#90[flagged]
This argument is used again and again and I wonder: Why do "people with money" stay where they are when there are countries, islands, even just states where there is less taxes to pay?
Person with money and former NYC'er here. I didn't stay. I moved to a state with less taxes to pay. I haven't looked back.