Ken Griffin is upset with Mamdani

It was a brand building exercise by Mamdani.

I bet he likes the reaction. That is exactly what he wanted. While Nada has convinced me on this pages that a little extra fine but vilification??
Also I agree that a little extra is fine as NYC is funded by a combo of property and income taxes. And top end property taxes are too low as a percentage. What Mamadani and Hochul should really have been doing is have a “true value surcharge” where top x percent by value are taxed on a real value basis at the same tax rate as 1-3 family. But that wouldn’t get votes and publicity.

In a city where land and housing is severely restricted, I think taxes discouraging encouraging occupancy and discouraging vacancy are reasonable policy. At all price levels.

Mamdani is playing to an audience who delude themselves, like Trump does, as evidenced by name-checking Ken. An larger-than-typical portion of the country is in a self-deluding binge from all sorts of angles, political, economic, financial, and health. Unfortunately, they only tend to set themselves back for the most part.

A couple of years ago, my housekeeper was telling my wife & I about her (immigrant) relatives who supported Trump. The reason was he was going to “fix the economy.” Her response: “What are you talking about? No politician is going to fix the economy for you. You gotta fix your own economy.”

If you look at GDP per capita in the US, it goes up steady no matter who’s in the White House. IMO, you are somewhat deluded if you think there’s a meaningful link between who’s in the White House and the US economy, to say nothing of your economy.

I own a small pied-à-terre—my beloved little matchbox—which I use for now but plan to make my primary residence when I retire in a few years. I bought it simply to have a place to land. Paid in the low 3 figures for it.

I can see the rationale for taxing it at a higher rate when it’s unoccupied, but it really depends on how high that rate is. I’m a middle-income wage earner in the NYC economic ecosystem.

Low 3-figures is usually interpreted as $999 or less. That’s a great price!

>> I can see the rationale for taxing it at a higher rate when it’s unoccupied, but it really depends on how high that rate is.

We’re talking about a policy question, and Mamdani is interested in political theater. As a matter of policy to discourage vacancy, one should probably introduce such a tax at all price levels. And as a matter of fairness and continuity, one should ramp up the tax rate gradually over a decade or more. A sudden tax jump may not fit into certain budgets (even $5M+ owners), and it’s not cool to give the shaft to sellers (an increased number due to the tax) and developments already under way under the presumption of demand with no such tax being in place. A gradual form of the tax would have the same effects directionally but be less disruptive.

But if you’re more interested in political theater than policy, you don’t think in such terms.

@inonada - I'll fess up: I didn't weigh the place at checkout.

Seriously: I meant low 6 figures...was thinking in K.

The market rent on my place would be much more accessible to the vast majority of renters than anything in Ken Griffin's portfolio. In fact, this law has it exactly backward. He should have started with the least expensive pieds a terre if the idea was housing affordability for workers. Phasing it in would be a nice concession, though. One of my biggest considerations when house hunting was maintenance. I'm still doing what I can to save for (semi) retirement.

You're right - I'm sure the intent is pandering to his left-populist base.

Cautionary tale: London lost a bunch of high rollers due to property tax hikes: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/25/nyregion/second-home-tax-london-ny.html?unlocked_article_code=1.d1A.EgPo.dV87mKKsKpY_&smid=url-share

And AI says: Property taxes in London vs NYC - higher or lower?
→ NYC is much higher
More progressive?
→ Neither is cleanly progressive
→ But:
London is more clearly regressive at the top
NYC is uneven but closer to value-based taxation

NYC has been losing non-resident “high rollers” since at least 2020. And RE has been taking into the chin since 2006, thought the non-resident high rollers only finally caught on a few years ago. The new taxes won’t help, but this has been a sinking ship for quite some time.

FWIW, I imagine this had a lot more to do with the “high rollers” non-residents leaving than property taxes:

>> That same month, the government abolished the special tax status of nonresidents, instituting new rules that tax them on their global income.

Why the scare quotes? Isn't 'high roller' just a euphemism for the rich?

I always associated “high roller” with high stakes gamblers, not rich. So I just put quotes around in acknowledgment of your funny usage (funny as in haha). What up, high rolla?

Hhh - gotcha. You're right that's where it comes from. Real capitalists are gamblers in the best sense. I admire their courage and optimism.

So political theatre by Mamdani and Hochul continues as they are coming to realization “Market Value” has a different meaning for single family and condo/coops in NYC real estate taxation. Then they are proposing an upfront tax for all cash buyers as if they can’t get a mortgage of 20 percent of the value so that their purchase is not all cash.

Article links please?

https://gothamist.com/news/lawmakers-plan-tax-on-nyc-cash-sales-as-hochul-details-pied-a-terre-plan

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/n-y-gov-hochul-says-fewer-second-homes-to-pay-pied-a-terre-tax-under-new-proposal-a0a5c3ce?eafs_enabled=false

Fact or fiction or something in between??

Mayor Mamdani delivers on affordability and results https://share.google/5gx6dx1ZALGZcGfhS

My understanding: the budget gap is technically closed on paper, but only through a mix of a state bailout, deferred pension costs, and one-time money — not structural reform. The problem hasn't been solved so much as relocated to the future.

Thanks. And who pays the most into NYS funds? NYC more than $200-300k earners. So it is really taxing NYC residents.

I will wait for an WSJ or some independent analysis looking under the Mamdani spin.

Wow…a balanced budget…I guess we don’t need that pied-a-terre tax anymore since apparently the city isn’t going broke and is doing just fine thank you very much

On my daily walk with my dog last night I counted five cars blocking fire hydrants…not within 5-10 feet, I mean the cars were totally blocking the hydrants. What is the fine for blocking a hydrant? I realize sending a meter maid (sorry, person!) would cost overtime in the evening but in 30 mins they could write hundreds of $$’s of parking ticket fees. This is low-lying fruit…it’s just there waiting to be picked. If politicians and city officials focused on enforcing existing laws rather than proposing new laws and taxes, we’d all be better off

The budget is balanced BECAUSE OF the pied-a-terre tax.

@911: " What is the fine for blocking a hydrant? "

Code 40: "Stopping, standing or parking closer than 15 feet of a fire hydrant": $115.

Want to close the budget? Increase the fines by an order of magnitude -- they're an insufficient deterrent as is. Want to clean up the police department? If the vehicle is registered to, or operated by, an NYPD or FDNY staffer, or their immediate family, a violation costs them 5% of their pension benefits. All other solutions are posturing and handwaving.

I’m surprised the ticket for blocking a hydrant is only $115, I would have thought it’s more (and should be more). Street cleaning violations are only $65 but blocking a hydrant seems much more serious

There is an Audi on my block that is always illegally parked. MD plates but they have a “placard” on the front windshield that I doubt is official Ave probably a 4 year old could generate with a decent color printer. It says “Trooper Surgeon!”. So I guess if true, this person operates on state troopers. Why that gets him free parking whenever he wants, not sure. But the placard is working! Never seen a parking ticket on that car

Ah. These fines don’t move the needle when it comes to increased spending without commensurate results.

Since COVID there seems to be significantly more extralegal parking.

The budget is balanced temporarily - really, they have just kicked the can down the road.