Hochul angling towards $5M+ pied a terre tax

A lot of people think governments spend wastefully. I can’t say I disagree. At the same time, I find multiple homes and pied a terres wasteful. So to me, this seems like a match made in heaven.

Nada, Transfer and mansion taxes are very high on expensive properties. So the more expensive properties are sold, the more goes to city and state coffers upfront. This revenue will reduce if there is increases tax on non doms.

I guess your point is that NYC collects taxes in form of income tax and property tax.

Why should people who live here less than 183 days be able to avoid the income tax portion?

I would agree with that if they were to talking about not increasing spending and use that additional rev to reduce remaining property taxes. But they want to spend like crazy without results and then look for revenues.

And why not tax on rentals which are pied-a-terre? That is the same concept. Why only penalize ownership?

I wasn’t making a particular comment on the policy aspect. More commentary on the poetic justice: “Wasteful government taxes wasteful people.”

>> So the more expensive properties are sold, the more goes to city and state coffers upfront. This revenue will reduce if there is increases tax on non doms.

Are you sure? Pied a terre owner keeps apt => more property taxes than status quo. Pied a terre owner sells apt to NYC resident as a result => more transfer taxes. Heads, Aunt Hochul wins; tails, rich homeowner loses.

Ahh. That is funny.

But wasteful people like Ken have a second headquarters here which may become a higher hurdle when they feel unwelcome to have a pied-a-terre. He left Chicago already due to too much BS.

I always thought it is good to have Billionaires come to the city for extended periods of times as many of them are good for economic growth due to their ideas and investment capability.

For people who already bought it is true. Stiff them. But not for future buyers.
———
Are you sure? Pied a terre owner keeps apt => more property taxes than status quo. Pied a terre owner sells apt to NYC resident as a result => more transfer taxes. Heads, Aunt Hochul wins; tails, rich homeowner loses.

It is basically partial confiscation of their property vs what was indicated when they bought - same treatment as others for property taxes.

Remember Uganda. They confiscated. And then ran out of things to confiscate.

>> So the more expensive properties are sold, the more goes to city and state coffers upfront.

And in case you are referring to new development going to pied a terres, let me remind you that this is the same city+federal govt officials talking about spending $2000 ppsf to build *affordable housing* units in Sunnyside Yards—train tracks in Queens.

It takes $1B+/yr of recurring taxes to offset costs of a $21B boondoggle. Maybe we forgoe both the incremental taxes and the need for such boondoggles if less pied a terres get built?

Ah. The issue is boondoggles will continue and look to “confiscate” resident’s property with further above inflation increase in re taxes as well after they have spent money from non-residents.

>> But wasteful people like Ken have a second headquarters here which may become a higher hurdle when they feel unwelcome to have a pied-a-terre.

Ken’s a reasonable guy. I’m pretty sure another $1M/yr won’t make him “feel unwelcome”. He’s got $1B of RE holdings on its way to $1.5B. That’s $200M/yr of forgone returns in his funds in the capital he’s sunk. And another $50M/yr in taxes & upkeep? Once you’re are $251M/yr, you’re not gonna do something silly to avoid $251M/yr.

Wait for exit tax. And one time billionaire tax like CA.

Yeah, tell me about it. Back in 1912 there was no Federal income tax—took an amendment to make it happen! Ditto on NYS and NYC. They’ve been “confiscating” increasing amounts of income ever since. Why keep it solely aimed at income?

Ha.

On Ken, you are right. He wouldn’t care about $2mm extra. But who is to say they wouldn’t make it $10mm extra. But $5mm people will care about $50k extra.

They should fix under taxation as a percentage of MV of many ultra luxury properties first.

>> above inflation increase in re taxes

Isn’t this somewhat the necessary state of play? Expenses grow with GDP, not inflation. Sure, govt workers may be sitting around doing nothing. But wages grow with GDP, so they need to be paid *more* next year to sit around doing nothing. It’s boring on the job, and you need the latest iPhone with all the new features to keep you entertained.

Meanwhile, grandma is complaining about how she can’t get a larger-screen iPhone without COLA adjustments to her Social Security… so she can schedule her appointment with the doctor… who needs to overbill Medicare by larger amounts by overtreating a too-sick-to-cure patient… so he can keep up on payments on his new 3-year lease with the latest BMW model.

No. Real estate taxes, in general, are supposed to be fixed as a percentage of property value. When property values go up they go up. Total revenue can grow as there is more housing available. Workers wage budget collectively is supposed to grow as per inflation as total production of these
workers remains the same absent more programs and housing units. Individual workers can get inflation plus productivity increase (GDP) but retiring workers get replaced by lower paid workers.