Brooklyn property taxes are so high

Beats me why with such high taxes which are only going to increase people are still buying. Look at 655 6th avenue and 650 sixth avenue for high taxes on new development.

calldn, this seems way off. You may be calculating the unabated taxes incorrectly. There are other threads on this, but if you could give me the exact addresses (including unit numbers), I should be able to tell you what the taxes are/would be. I've never seen a new development unit in Brooklyn have higher taxes than a comparable new dev unit would in the vast majority (read: desirable parts) of Manhattan.

For reference, I have a 2/2 and unabated taxes are in the $450/mo range.

bjw2103, Is your apartment in Brooklyn? where in Brooklyn if you don't mind me asking? What year was it built?

The broker quoted me $800 a month for either apartment 2F or 2R (I can't recall which) in 63 Jackson st. in Williamsburg. I think the unit in Be@Schermerhorn was #3G, 99% sure.

Bjw, where do you look it up? Dept of Finance?

All, bjw2103 responding because W'Burg mentioned.

I went to look at a large studio with a home office listed at $675,000 at Ares Lofts in LIC and the broker told me the estimated property taxes were $1,400 a month (the building has a 12 year J-51 tax abatement). Those taxes seemed astronomically high.

calldn, my apartment is in Williamsburg, new building.

You can look up unabated taxes here: http://webapps.nyc.gov:8084/CICS/fin1/find001i
1. Type in the address (unit number needed for condos).
2. It'll take you to the property page. From there you can click on "Quarterly Statement of Account."
3. It should open up a pdf, in which you should scroll to page 2.
4. Look at the row that says "Tax Before Exemptions and Abatements." The very last number in the row is your yearly unabated tax amount at present. If you divide by 12, you'll get your monthly dues, obviously.

I should note that for many unsold units, the quarterly statement will default to the tax bill for the whole building. That seems to be the case for 63 Jackson, but based on my query, the total unabated property tax on the building is just under $17k per year, or $1400/mo. So there's no way just one unit will cost you $800/mo. The taxes there seems quite low actually. 189 Schermerhorn looks more in line with what I've seen in new devs in Brooklyn (~400/mo on average). Unfortunately, a LOT of people have a difficult time understanding unabated tax amounts, even those in the field, so it doesn't surprise me that you're getting some bad info from (hopefully) otherwise relatively reliable sources.

PS - mutombo, thanks for the highly useful PSA.

mieter, if I'm looking at the right unit (802), unabated taxes are $331/mo.

bjw2103,

No worries buddy! Because your taxes are xyz does not mean the entire prime neighborhood taxes will be the same. What about segmentation of the market, you talked about?

The best deal as far as taxes go in Bk are 1-3 fam. houses. People are paying the same in taxes for a 1-bed condo (unabated) as a single-fam townhouse in Park Slope.

mutombo, no, taxes won't necessarily be the same, but there is a general range I've noticed for new development in Williamsburg. The point about market segmentation has nothing to do with property taxes.

nyc10023, there's no doubt about that. There is a bit more variation in taxes on brownstones, but in general they are incredibly low for the most part. Not to mention, you're not paying common charges each month.

bjw2103, you are saying taxes the OP mentioned are high for new development and not comparing new development taxes to your taxes?

Incorrect, market segmentation has to do with property taxes.

mutombo, read what I wrote earlier: I'm saying the taxes the OP mentioned are almost certainly incorrect. There's little chance they're that high. I've looked at new dev in the neighborhoods mentioned and unabated taxes for similarly sized units are generally in the same range.

bjw2103,

I did read what you wrote and agree with you!

bjw2103,
I can not find where 3G in 189 Schermerhorn was individually accessed but rather it is showing the whole building. Actually I just noticed that the address that shows up is 179 Schermerhorn... and the owners show up as the same 2 people for all the G units that I checked...
Parcel (BBL): 3-164-30
Owner(s): YE, RAYMOND & YE, MICHAEL
Property Address: 179 SCHERMERHORN STREET 8G

The market value history for 63 Jackson st is VERY odd. I assume this is the entire building. It's all over the place. See below.

Market Value History
Tax Year Market Value
2011/12 N/A (TENTATIVE)
2010/11 365,000
2009/10 115,000
2008/09 874,000
2007/08 676,800

I really think that you can't believe this data at all and that estimated property taxes can never be taken as accurate to any descent degree. Now I wonder if I made a mistake not buying that unit at Be@Schmerhorn solely because of the estimated taxes...

10023 is quite right--impossible to justify purchase of a large apartment in Bklyn, given the incredibly low taxes for townhouses

i actually like the bigger places in the meier building, but the unabated taxes, when compared to prime townhouses in PS near PPW, or the big PPW coops, are the reason the bldg is a dog

> The best deal as far as taxes go in Bk are 1-3 fam. houses. People are paying the same in taxes for a 1-bed condo (unabated) as a single-fam townhouse in Park Slope.

interesting! what about 1-bed coops?

calldn, read what I wrote above - in some cases, if the unit hasn't sold, the statement shows the whole building's tax bill. The data is accurate, even if it may not be exactly what you're looking for. For 189 Schermerhorn, I would check where 179 is. It may well be the "official" address (this happens sometimes, for reasons unclear to me).

"10023 is quite right--impossible to justify purchase of a large apartment in Bklyn, given the incredibly low taxes for townhouses"

Bottoms, how silly. It's all relative, but townhouse taxes in Manhattan can also be quite low. Aside from that though, apartment vs townhouse is a totally different product. Not just a question of size - as lovely as townhouses can be, they require a lot more involvement with the maintenance, to say the least. Impossible to justify? Nah, sorry.

Bj: the disparity is greater in Bk v. "developed" areas of Manhattan like the UWS. Take a 2m Park Slope townhouse. 8 times out of 10, the ratio of taxes relative to the current market value of the PS townhouse is much lower than the same ratio on the UWS. There are various reasons for this, but that's how it is. Nothing to do with apt vs. townhouse living or size. Not sure what you mean by "justify" - does that mean THs at the same market price as a condo should have lower taxes because they require more maintenance by the owner? There's no inherent reason other than political as to why 1-3 fam. bldgs have lower taxes than 3+. Even if you take your argument at face value, why is that ratio more skewed in prime Bk v. prime Manhattan?

I haven't looked that much at taxes on condos in gentrified areas of Bk, but for the few I've seen the ratio of unabated taxes to market value is higher relative to the tax ratio for townhouses in prime Bk compared to the UWS. For the UWS, I look at taxes on condos in 200RSB (now completely? unabated), Bromley, Alexandria, Copley, Coronado. Ansonia is an anomaly.

Ah sorry, bj, misread your "justify". From a potential buyer's POV, some people are all about the net outflow/month and that trumps lifestyle considerations.

10023, no worries, I know different buyers will have different priorities. I just took issue with bottoms' pronouncement. I would guess most buyers care more about lifestyle considerations, but that's just a hunch. FWIW, from my experience, people looking at townhouses in Park Slope often look at townhouses in Harlem as well (as opposed to, say, apartments in the Slope), where the property tax situation is rather similar.

Maybe in Manhattan, the buyer pool is different. But my take (based heavily on brownstoner which is skewed towards TH crowd) is that buyers in Bk would be okay with either house or apt, and that it's mostly about space.
I didn't get the sense that people were looking in Harlem and Park Slope, given the disparities in services available. Maybe Harlem and Bed-Stuy.

Or harlem bed stuy and williamsburg...park slope much more mature established neighborhood than these others.
i find that the appeal fo many of established brooklyn is the townhouses, and the older coops near the promenade and prospect park.
The vastly better values based on cheap taxes (yes, much cheaper relative to newer apts than in manhattan) reinforces this.
Of course bj, youre in a small 2 bdrm 2 bath apt in williamsburg, so not really a market within your reach, opine as you may. Those in market for bigger spaces just arent buying big new, high tax properties in established brooklyn. These apts sit, townhouses and big established coops trade.

WButtocks, when you go to Prospect Park, make sure you stay away from children. On behalf of all parents in NYC, we beg you. Keep your perversions away.

Wow...sb reinforce this...bad me

Wtushy, getting sloppy.

Can I suggest trying Charmin on your Wbum?

10023, tough to gauge on B'stoner - even bringing up Manhattan makes some of the regulars queasy. But given the price points of townhouses in both Harlem and the Slope, it makes sense that some buyers would look at both. When I was looking at townhouses, that naturally came up, and I spoke to enough other buyers and brokers at open houses to determine that it was not an original thought.

"Or harlem bed stuy and williamsburg...park slope much more mature established neighborhood than these others."

What exactly do you mean by that? Sounds like another of your off-the-cuff, thoughtless remarks. The price points in Harlem, Williamsburg, and Park Slope are pretty much in the same ballpark.

"The vastly better values based on cheap taxes (yes, much cheaper relative to newer apts than in manhattan) reinforces this."

You really should look at the actual taxes. Manhattan townhouses are incredibly expensive, but relatively, taxes are cheaper than in new condos, especially once you get outside the village and other tip-top areas.

"Of course bj, youre in a small 2 bdrm 2 bath apt in williamsburg, so not really a market within your reach, opine as you may. Those in market for bigger spaces just arent buying big new, high tax properties in established brooklyn. These apts sit, townhouses and big established coops trade."

Bottoms, didn't know you were privy to my bank statements or the exact specs on my apartment. But hey, you're pretty good at this vapid commentary thing, so I won't stop you.

only an idiot would think park slope/brooklyn heights townhouse/ large coop buyers would likely be looking in harlem also. it's just a completely different market and part of the city. yeah, i'll go look in Harlem, so my kids can commute to St. Ann's. bj, youre such a windy dope; on quite the roll recently.

and bj, if you were in the market for a large space in an established neighborhood, why did you buy a 2/2 in williamsburg? Yours is not remotely the market or neighborhood i'm speaking of.

all the big, new, high tax, condo spaces are Park Slope and the Heights are sitting, stale. good quality townhouses and established coops trade quickly. space/value is just superior, largely based on taxes.

Wbuttocks!

"only an idiot would think park slope/brooklyn heights townhouse/ large coop buyers would likely be looking in harlem also. it's just a completely different market and part of the city. yeah, i'll go look in Harlem, so my kids can commute to St. Ann's"

Bottoms, are you really that offended at the notion? I mean, call it what you want, but it's true. Plenty of buyers look at what they can afford then weigh their options. Not all do it that way of course, but many do. I don't know why you lumped Brooklyn Heights in there all of a sudden (higher price points than any of these). Kind of disingenuous, as is the notion that all buyers of such properties have kids.

"and bj, if you were in the market for a large space in an established neighborhood, why did you buy a 2/2 in williamsburg? Yours is not remotely the market or neighborhood i'm speaking of."

I don't know what you mean by established. Williamsburg is as established as I need it to be. I was looking at townhouses for a while, as well as 2/2. Despite your championing of the lower property taxes on the former, the price points (which kind of matter, you big ninny) were and have been quite high relative to what I thought/think they're worth. Inventory is also an issue. Just never found something that made sense. I went with a 2/2 because it suits my needs just fine, even though I could afford more.

"all the big, new, high tax, condo spaces are Park Slope and the Heights are sitting, stale. good quality townhouses and established coops trade quickly. space/value is just superior, largely based on taxes."

This just proves you have no idea what you're talking about here. How many new condos are in the Heights or the Slope (especially the "established" part you keep whining about)? Very very few, especially in the Heights. Good effort, but just more vapid commentary really.

i've owned buildings and a condo in NYC, and yes brooklyn buildings - townhouses, whatever, do have low taxes, and no common charges, but the amount of money you continually have to pay for maintenance ends up being way more than common charges, plus you are in charge yourself of handling it all.

my personal experience of buying and selling over many years, is that we did indeed, as bj suggests, look at many different types of properties in and out of NYC that were in our price range, and represented a variety of locations, so i don't think that anyone can say that no one would look at both harlem and a brooklyn neighborhood. throw in jersey too.

most people seeking to buy a townhouse in PS or Brooklyn Heights have kids or plan to--and they have the means to pay upwards of 1.5 to 3 mm $$--a big part of their choice of where to live will be about the schools their kids attend or will attend--it's unlikely they will consider harlem, williamsburg, bed stuy etc--there are exceptions, but in general people looking to spend 1.5mm to 3mm on a house for their family in PS or Bklyn Hts would not expand their search to include Harlem, Bed stuy, Williamsburg--i know if i had 2mm to drop on my chpoice of sweet houses for my family in park slope, where there are good private and public schools, i sure wouldnt feel a need to check out williamsburg, bed stuy, harlem or other such neighborhoods

Bottoms, yikes, you really are misinformed here. Again, no idea why you started talking about Brooklyn Heights - look at the townhouse prices there. Different price point compared to yes, even Park Slope. Not surprisingly, it's generally older, and you'll only see the wealthiest of young families able to afford a brownstone there. Furthermore, if people are able to afford $3m on a townhouse, they also generally have the ability to pay for private school. Your logic just doesn't hold up, but I'm really not sure what point you're fighting to make here. Odd.

A couple good examples of high-priced townhouses in the county of Kings. No doubt taxes are low, but that's certainly offset by such high prices. I'm surprised prices have held up as much as they have. I've been keeping an eye on the market for years, but nothing really doing yet. One can dream...

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2011/04/last_weeks_bigg_160.php

bj, either you are a complete dope, or your reading comp is nil.

of course Brooklyn Heights houses cost more than those in Park Slope. Thus the wide range I cite above.

in my immediately prior post i specifically refer to schools, both public and private, as a primary concern for those looking at townhouses in PS and BH. Of course families in the market for multi-million dollar houses often use private schools, and they certainly can afford to pick neighborhoods that have good public and private schools. PS and BH are neighborhoods where, for those families wealthy enough to choose, there are very good schools. These are exactly my points yet you think they refute me. I'm getting that youre quite dumb.

What prompted this exchange was your idiotic comment that families of this ilk,looking for houses in PS and BH, would also look in wmsbrg, harlem, and bed stuy. This is not only dumb, it's laughable.

hahahahaha

Bottoms, not too bright, are ya? Let's dive in:

"of course Brooklyn Heights houses cost more than those in Park Slope. Thus the wide range I cite above."

If you think Heights townhouses can squeeze into that range of $1.5-$3m, well, you're just wrong. Look at the active listings for houses or multi-fams in the neighborhood. Yes, the $16m listing on Willow is an outlier, but most places fall WELL north of $3m. You need $3.5m to get into the conversation, and more for something nice. Note the $4m, $5m, and $6m listings, you ninny. Just not the same range as the places we're otherwise discussing.

"in my immediately prior post i specifically refer to schools, both public and private, as a primary concern for those looking at townhouses in PS and BH."

Again, for those with families, agreed, but then...

"PS and BH are neighborhoods where, for those families wealthy enough to choose, there are very good schools. These are exactly my points yet you think they refute me."

They don't have to live in those neighborhoods to send them to a private school, do they? Sorry, bottoms.

"What prompted this exchange was your idiotic comment that families of this ilk,looking for houses in PS and BH, would also look in wmsbrg, harlem, and bed stuy. This is not only dumb, it's laughable."

Hey smartass, read the comment again. YOU added BH, and someone else mentioned Bed-Stuy (which shouldn't really be mentioned here either). I only said Park Slope townhouse buyers often look at Harlem as well. It's true, yet you seem to be so offended by it. Tough cookies.

more punchlines:

My kids are really happy at school in Park Slope. Now that we can afford a house there, we'll look also in Harlem. Hell, the kids can commute. Why not?

Or, St. Ann's has been great for the kids. We can afford a house nearby, but we are really taken with harlem, and wmsbrg, and bed stuy. It's so confusing for us.

not offended at all...overwhelmed with laughter

Bottoms, right, because every buyer looking for a townhouse in Park Slope already lives there with kids in the public school system. I think this is the part where you disappear from the thread, as you did when I found you the rent/buy ratios you claimed didn't exist in Williamsburg. Good stuff.

morning punchline for bj:

we so love the family communities and great public/schools in Park Slope and Brooklyn Heights. and luckily our twins, dopey and dopie have been accepted at great private schools in the area; and the public schools are great too! I guess that's why the house in these neighborhoods continually attract families, nearly exclusively. luckily, we can afford to buy either in PS or, for a bit more.

i am confused tho--this self-appointed genius named bj on streeteasy says we should go look in harlem, bed stuy, and wmsburg before we pull the trigger on a place in PS or BH. help!!!!!

Oh, sorry, I was under the impression you were going to actually try to make a valid point. I'll play along then.

Morning punchline for bottoms:

Man, it's great that this Park Slope place allows only families to live here. Boy, we should never read too much into those demographics, especially when they blatantly lie that there are more single men AND women than the city average. That is just ridiculous and could never be true, based on what I read on internet message boards and such.

I am confused though - this ninny dope named bottoms on Streeteasy keeps blatantly distorting arguments and inexplicably conflating my beloved Slope with Bed Stuy, Williamsburg, and Brooklyn Heights. Help!!

yep bj--them old townhouses (with cheap taxes) in park slope and brooklyn heights are all full of single people--thanks for clearing that up!!

great punchline!! gotta hand it to you!!

Wbuttocks, very emotional issue for you here. By the way, how's your "girlfriend in Brooklyn"?

Bottoms, glad you're finally coming around. Looking forward to offending you with facts again in the near future, while you pretend not to be offended, type numerous "hahas" to reinforce the latter, yet post vociferously in defiance. Always a good time!

BJW, I think he prefers Tushy or Buttocks, to Bottom. Try it, he might be more friendly.

To think, all that foaming at the mouth from bottoms for suggesting that townhouse buyers might look at both Harlem and the Slope. How terribly offensive - perish the thought!

>To think, all that foaming at the mouth from bottoms

You sure you mean foaming at the 'mouth'?

'burg, touche.

Listen bjw, I know you are in Brooklyn. So is Wbuttock's "girlfriend".

morning punchline:

bj...bonding with h'burg...quality meets quality
i dont read hburg, but im sure you two are perfect together

slurp away at eachother!!

Classy stuff, bottoms! Let me know when you're ready to discuss the rent/buy ratio stuff again. Your "arguments" fizzled in that thread too...

the only thing that has fizzled, bj, apparently, is your will to resist h'burg

have at eachother!!!

Bottoms, so nothing then? You seem way more enchanted with burg than anyone else here. Bizarre.

Hi,

My question is related and I'm wondering if anyone knows the answer.
Why are the real estate taxes for new development condos (pre-abatement or exemption) higher than those for older condos, in the same neighborhood?

I'm trying to figure out whether I should buy a new condo, have the tax abatement for 10 yrs or whatever, and then pay a lot of taxes afterwards... Or whether I should just buy an older condo that doesn't have an abatement (so I pay full taxes now) but will at least have lower taxes than the new condo, in the future.

Any thoughts? I appreciate them!

Thanks!