question about condo taxes

gcondo: I don't know about your building. I'm paying more common charges and property tax than the lower floors, units in the same line (unless the guy on the 6th floor has been a liar.)

The allocations do no have to be done the same across all buildings. Many Condos allocate common charges equally based on square footage and do not consider floor number.

Good to know, Riversider.

"Many Condos allocate common charges equally based on square footage and do not consider floor number."

This, is true, and is BS.

Yet people continue to buy condos without looking at how the common interest is allocated. You'd think those who'd be bothered by PCI allocated purely by square feet, wouldn't buy those condos.

Why should owners care?, at the end of the day, it's about the resultant common charges and the growth of this billing along with assessments.

It makes sense that condos would have uniform CCs per sf, because the operating costs are the same per sf. RE taxes are part of a coop's maintenance, but not so for condos.

The only thing that should be different for different units in a condo is share of RE taxes -- a magnificent river view from the 20th floor will always be worth more than a back view from the 2nd floor; the 2nd floor of a walk-up will always be worth more than the 6th floor of that walk-up. Taxes are supposed to [laugh track] reflect value of property, while CCs should reflect operating costs.

Apologies to that guy on the ground floor who doesn't use the elevator, but pays for it, in both coops and condos.

Some of the newer condos have experimented with allocations that make lower floors cheaper to own from a common charge perspective. The A.G. has apparently signed off in it and it does make some sense from a pricing perspective since the lower floors have worse views and less desirable. The lower common charges compensates the buyers somewhat.
200 West End Avenue does this as well as some other condos..

in my opinion, inconsistency of taxation between buildings is an issue.

Also, I agree that common area percentages should be equivalent between lower floors and higher floors. It is the taxes, since any idiot knows that views hold a premium, that should not be allocated this way. The higher you go in a building, the higher your taxes should be.

Incidentally, common percentages are supposed to be allocated on things such as uniqueness of the unit.. I think view or lack of view qualifies, ie floor.

"compensates the buyers somewhat"

For what?

* The purchase of the price, initially and subsequently, reflects the relative desirability of the unit (views, layout, etc.)

* The taxes correspond roughly to the $$$ that the relative desirability confer.

* What part of the expenditure, once collected, of common charges has anything to do with anything beyond square footage?

http://www.cooperator.com/articles/1238/1/Doing-it-By-the-Book/Page1.html

There are sections of the Condo Act, for example, which delineate how common interest is determined. There are four or five subdivisions which say you can determine common interest by allocating it evenly, based on square footage alone or it can be based on a combination of factors including square footage, special features of the unit and other ***subjective factors***. (For example: *****high floors******, low floors and views that might be available.)

Exactly. The sponsor can divvy up the PCI however she wants, as long as the methodology is stated and an impartial third party certifies that the allocation makes some kind of sense. If you buy a condo whose allocation makes no sense to you, then don't complain. If PCI is equal then taxes are equal, just like in a co-op where same number of shares equals same share of taxes. If your prospective condo allocates same PCI for your less-desirable unit as a more-desirable one upstairs, then don't buy it. Just as you wouldn't buy a co-op where every apartment in a line had the same shares.

meh - my question is more ... is there an issue with inconsistent taxation between buildings? Let me guess the answer - the law says there is no issue, so then there is no issue and if you dont like it dont buy it. thanks thats helpful.

Of course taxes may not be consistent between buildings, and the remedy for that is the building challenge the valuation used for taxes...

indeed, my building, when it was built some time back, stated that the methodology used to divide common charges was akin to this: "it can be based on a combination of factors including square footage, special features of the unit and other ***subjective factors***.." however, I see no evidence that this actually happened. oh well.