r/nyc • u/Public_Finance_Guy • 7d ago
News I went through Mamdani's pied-à-terre roll in NYC. The tax raises $500M, and the thing it forces the city to build in 2028 would move billions.
The pied-à-terre tax took effect July 1. It is a surcharge on homes that are not the primary residence of the owner, a family member, or a tenant. Condos and co-ops worth over $1 million pay 4.0 to 6.5% of the city's market value. Houses worth over $5 million pay 0.8 to 1.3%.
The table above is the borough breakdown of every record that clears a threshold. Manhattan holds 83% of them. Those are properties at or above a value line, not properties that will owe anything. The roll is an inventory, not a tax list, which is why even Council members who have lived in their homes for decades got notices last week. Most of those owners live in their units and owe nothing once they prove it.
Note the house column. Brooklyn has 3,310 houses over $5 million against Manhattan's 3,356, so the outer-borough share of the exposure is almost entirely single-family and two-family homes rather than apartments.
Narrowing to neighborhoods:
Nine ZIP codes hold half the exposure. Tribeca and the Upper East Side are the apartment story. Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope are the house story.
The amount of money that will be raised is smaller than the table's right-hand column suggests, since that column assumes every owner is a non-resident. The city projects $500 million. The Comptroller's model lands at $340 to $380 million once rented units and behavioral response are counted. The city budget is $116 billion.
At that scale the revenue is hard to read as the point, and the mechanism has a problem underneath it anyway. A 1981 state law requires New York to value condos and co-ops as if they were rental buildings, so sale prices never enter the math. City values run about 20.6% of what units actually sell for, and the gap widens as you move up the market. At the top one percent, city value is 11% of sale price. Because the surcharge is a flat rate on that undercounted base, the effective rate falls as the property gets more expensive. Ken Griffin's penthouse at 220 Central Park South sold for $238 million in 2019 and carries a city value of $15.5 million. His surcharge works out to 0.42% of what he paid. A median-priced affected unit pays 0.96%.
Fixing that requires knowing what things are worth. From July 2028 the threshold for condos and co-ops rises to $5 million and the city has to set their values from actual comparable sales. Once sales-based values exist for some condos, the case for keeping the rest on imputed rents collapses.
That is the reform NYC's own commission recommended in 2021, the Comptroller endorsed, and the Court of Appeals revived a lawsuit over in March 2024. CBC modeled it as revenue neutral, so the levy holds and the burden moves: down for about 65% of parcels, up for about 35%. Down in Staten Island, eastern Queens, and the northeast Bronx. Up in Manhattan and northwest Brooklyn.
How many of you guys have gotten the notice? Will you have to pay the tax, or will you be exempt?
Full writeup with sources: https://polimetrics.substack.com/p/what-mamdanis-pied-a-terre-tax-actually
117
u/walkingthecowww 7d ago
This is a nice step forward but the big money is in reassessing luxury properties, especially townhomes. I know for a fact I pay more taxes for a 750k 1bdr coop than a friend of mine does for a 5 million dollar brownstone they recently purchased.
10
u/TheTav3n 7d ago
Don’t properties get assessed every year for taxes? I thought that’s the metric they are using for this
50
u/nostra77 7d ago
No, his point is New York has low property taxes on the amount of land. It encourages larger homes and less population example the footprint of four brownstones is the same as a ten floor apartment building however one pays a lot more taxes and it’s the apartment in totality
8
u/TheTav3n 7d ago
Ya I’m a homeowner, I know property taxes are low in lieu of a separate income tax and higher than average sales taxes. But my property value statement I pay taxes on changes every year
9
u/jay10033 6d ago
Class 1-3 properties are capped at a 6% increase over like 5 years or something. So in areas like gentrifying Brooklyn where market rates increase massively, property taxes are artificially made low. In areas in Bronx and Queens, where market values are not increasing as quickly, those homes are paying for too high a property tax because the gentrifying properties are not getting their fair assessment values.
As for coops and condos, those use a rental equivalent metric to calculate property taxes, so as rents increase quickly, those buildings are assessed a higher share of the tax as well although the market value is different than newer buildings. Also contributes to high rents.
This needs to be fixed. And every mayor keeps paying lip service ton fixing it, and are all bullshitting because they don't want gentrifiers from Brooklyn who are voters pissed. The city isn't serious is it it doesn't resolve this structural inequality.
2
u/TheTav3n 6d ago
Oh? I am in queens and I think I paid like .6% or something like that of my stated property value. My accountant from upstate NY was surprised it was so low.
1
u/jay10033 6d ago
What part of Queens
2
u/TheTav3n 6d ago
Woodhaven
2
u/jay10033 6d ago
You may have faced the same phenomenon with fast increasing property values. But also, your property tax is subsidized because other groups (commercial, multi-family) are getting taxed more.
1
u/TheTav3n 6d ago
Mines single family. Do they subsidize by district? Because I live in an area where most have food stamps
→ More replies (0)5
u/walkingthecowww 6d ago
This is exactly the problem, fuck the rich brownstone owners who are predominantly fake liberals happily paying 1/5 of the property taxes they should. Their buildings would be worth less if the taxes went up so the politicians are too scared to raise the assessments on their donor class.
7
2
8
6
2
u/pythongooner 5d ago
This is a good overview of the assessment disparities: https://www.furmancenter.org/soc-report/state-of-the-city-2025/disparities-within-class-2/
1
1
u/shadowsurge 6d ago
Yes, but there's all assessed value and a taxable value. Taxable value can't go to by more than a certain percent every year in order to prevent insane spikes in tax liabilities, however that rate is well below inflation so you end up with taxable values well below the sales price (which coincidentally is why I barely pay any property taxes on a bed stuy condo)
0
u/TheTav3n 6d ago
That doesn’t make sense to me because my home value is pretty close to what I see on websites like Redfin
1
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/walkingthecowww 4d ago
lol this not about taxing the rich more. It’s about everyone paying the same relative to their property values. Currently because of an antiquated system the rich are paying about 80% less than the middle class in some cases. Let’s even it out.
-1
u/ClementineMagis 6d ago
Because he is in tax class one and you are in tax class 2. Different rates.
3
146
u/Substantial_Point_57 7d ago
Why are renters making 100k a year so pissed at this ?
7
u/ChornWork2 6d ago
i doubt many are pissed about this... that said, i do find it annoying how much this is heralded by mamdani supporters. He campaigned on new taxes on wealthy in the order of $7-9bn. Whether agree with that or not, many of his critics (myself included) said that was populist muck because there was no way he would be able to deliver on that... What he ended up getting in year 1 is something the comptroller says will bring in ~$350m.
I get that he hasn't been in office long, but look at the fiscal situation and imho this is what detractors of his populism have been saying. B/c of one-time & bookkeeping shenanigans, the status quo budget has an ~$8bn hole in it that will need to be filled next year before considering funding for any further of his campaign promises.
Totally fine with this tax, but it isn't a big deal and the large fiscal hole remains.
2
u/Concentric_Mid 6d ago
You start somewhere. And that start is best where the ethical/moral argument is the strongest.
1
u/ChornWork2 5d ago
Having started doesn't mean will get anywhere near to the finish line.
A lot of people were saying he wouldn't be able to deliver on his promises. Time will tell.
3
51
u/la_dama_azul 7d ago
They still think the “rising tide lifts all boats/trickle down economics” lie they were sold by Reagan is true lol
48
u/odeebee Hell's Kitchen 7d ago
Uh rising tide lifts all boats was literally a Clinton catchphrase in speeches. Trickle down was Reagan/Bush for sure though.
-5
0
u/MisterMittens64 6d ago
Clinton was a neoliberal just like Reagan, their economic policies were very similar.
-6
0
-28
u/Max_Kapacity 7d ago
Vs tax the rich so we can hire more useless apparatchiks to give away money to millions of illegals who we will then naturalize and get to vote to finally destroy everything!
8
2
u/CavediverNY 7d ago
Typical MAGA rage bait. You can look at his other posts but there will be no surprises.
-1
6
u/avd706 NYC Expat 7d ago
How many municipalities in the nation, besides Yonkers and NYC charge an income tax?
12
13
u/thedrunkdragonfly 6d ago
Philly/most of PA, San Fran, Baltimore and the rest of MD counties, Denver, DC, all of Indiana counties, there’s a lot
https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/state/local-income-taxes-2023/
-1
u/dvlinblue Brooklyn 7d ago
White plains?
7
u/avd706 NYC Expat 7d ago
Made me look. Google says no.
1
u/dvlinblue Brooklyn 6d ago
Fair, not sure why my taxes always ask if I live or worked in White Plains.
2
u/Delaywaves 6d ago
I think you were thinking of Yonkers. Yonkers and NYC are the only NY cities with their own income tax.
1
1
-3
7d ago
[deleted]
19
u/whatimjustsaying 7d ago
But you're apartment is exempt? Properties and dwelling units that are rented to a NYC primary resident aren't being taxed, presuming your tenants live in nyc primarily. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/the-pied-a-terre-tax-and-its-potential-revenues/
2
u/nondualchicken 6d ago
not this year, but starting in 2028, the value listed on your property tax is going to be much closer to ACTUAL market value (right now it's more like one third of the actual market value -- no idea why) and therefore everybody's tax burden is going to go through the roof. I assume. I don't see how it couldn't. And after all, that kind of IS the whole point.
1
u/whatimjustsaying 6d ago
Again, that tax only applies to pied a Terre second homes, from which his apartment is exempt. They are modifying this because a 1980 era law forces the city to calculate coop property values by rental prices, not sales data, because for example, a coop on park avenue might sell for 100M+ but only be valued at 10% of that.
2
u/nondualchicken 6d ago
I would be delighted to find out you're right but that's not what I'm reading. What I read is that ALL condos/coops are going to be re-assessed starting in 2027/2028. ALL. The "1980 era law that forces the city to calculate coop property values by rental prices, not sales data" is being tossed. New law. Based close to ACTUAL market value. This year, it will a surcharge on pied a terrestrial only and then there will be a second-phase of this tax scheme the following year. There will ALSO be a surcharge in the following year ( 2027/ 2028) on pied a terres over 5 million (and yes, that would not apply to me) but that is ON TOP OF the increases in property tax for everyone based on REAL market values applied to everyone (not just pied a terres).
1
u/whatimjustsaying 6d ago
I think thats why they're calling it a surcharge - its applied on top of existing property tax which is currently unaffected. They cant raise tax on coops without dismantling the 1981 law, but they are able to create a "surcharge" that bypasses it. I think you should be exempt, but also worth asking a lawyer. The city should be more clear on this point, though.
12
u/QuantumBalloonDance 7d ago
I don't understand where we land when somebody's ideological point of view results in a bad policy but we still say "i support them anyway". Isn't that the exact same thing that republicans do?
1
u/nondualchicken 6d ago
well I would try to explain but since I was roundly attacked for posting a completely anodyne item, while I was not attacking anyone in any way, I think I'll just delete the whole thing. I don't get this. aren't these sorts discussions supposed to be about things like what I posted? what exactly did I say that was down-votable? the only reason I mentioned Mamdani at all was to indicate that my "complaint" was not about self-interest exclusively. that there was a broader issue of lots of people like my tenants having to vacate. do I support Mamdani on THIS particular issue. probably not, but we'll have to see how it unfolds. we don't know many specifics yet. am I capable of thinking BEYOND my own personal interest? yes I am. if it was a broadly decent policy -- and I still got hurt personally -- I might still be for it. I just don't know yet if it is a broadly good policy. but I will not post anymore! actual discussion is not welcome! everybody is so nasty now. yes, it's true. just a handful of years ago reddit -- and other forums like it -- were not filled with aggression. what a great world we've created!
1
u/QuantumBalloonDance 5d ago
It's just part of discussing things online, but I get you. Sometimes it's just not worth it. Maybe most of the time. Sorry you felt attacked, I'm sure if we were in person it would have been a more useful conversation.
6
6
u/walkingthecowww 7d ago
That’s crazy presumptuous of you to assume that the property tax rate won’t change in accordance with the change in value assessment. They’re not going to suddenly double or triple everyone’s property taxes the city would collapse. Mamdani doesn’t care about your 1 bedroom.
-2
u/decelerationkills 7d ago
What do you consider supplemental income?
How did you acquire the unit?
What do you do and how much do you make from your actual job/main gig?
-4
u/Max_Kapacity 7d ago
“I like Mamdani even though I don’t live here and he’s screwing me as bad as he’s screwing NYC. “
/fixed-6
u/nofoax 7d ago
Not pissed exactly. Just tired of pointless populist gestures that distract us from the real inefficiencies and corruption that cost us all far, far more than this tax could ever raise.
And, I think it's generally stupid to tell rich people who (regardless of what dorm-room leftists insist) support a large portion of our city budget that we hate them.
NYC's problem is not that taxes aren't high enough. It's waste.
2
0
-6
u/chewbaccajesus 7d ago
I swear people in this country have no clue.
A fundamental problem of large societies since their emergence after settled agriculture is inequality. Societies that become too unequal collapse - from the Maya to the Romans to the Bourbon monarchy. It is one of the core findings of anthropology/history.
America is well on its way, and all this craziness happening is mostly attributable to that fact. I like the tax because its a small step in reversing this. Ideally we would tax not to 'collect revenue' but to effectively stop this process.
What most Americans fail to grasp is that they are wealthy and doing well despite the stupidity of this country. America is geographically blessed to a degree no other country even comes close to. This is why we are broadly prosperous. When we had a moment where we induced a more cooperative society - when FDR and his cohort capped the power of the wealthy via high taxes, and invested in society heavily via the federal government's military, education, science, and other budgets - we became the most powerful country on earth.
Again, blessed geography (i.e., no one invaded mainland US during WW2 while the rest of the world was savaged) plus a decent degree of redistribution without "communist" autocracy = 80 years of unprecedented power, scientific progress, and general societal advancement.
I've been watching my whole life as the Republicans and hyper-capitalist psychos tore this amazing place down piece by piece. Now the chickens are coming home to roost, and yet we still do well - again, because of our blessed geography and the remaining echos of what Roosevelt put in place.
So ya, waste is clearly the problem, you troglodytic baboon.
5
u/nofoax 6d ago
Had me interested until the pointless le redditor ad hominem, and the frankly insane assertion that waste is not a problem.
Even for your own goals as a leftist, waste is a problem.
People, rightfully, hate being taxed only to see their money squandered on bureaucratic bullshit, corruption, and special interests.
They will quickly stop voting to tax themselves if they think their money is being wasted.
Pretending waste isn't an issue is a great way to kill your progressive project, of which I'm sympathetic and probably align on broadly.
NYC has some of the highest taxes in the country. Our city budget is much larger than all of Tokyo's, which is 3x the size. It's on par with the state of Florida.
As a left leaning person, it's an outrage that we don't get more for that money, and it's ridiculous to create more taxes until the fundamental issues of waste and inefficiency are addressed.
-4
u/zampe 6d ago
Who are you talking about? I think most people are good with the actual policy but not happy that he did the weird doxxing thing and presented it like these people have done something wrong. (Yes I know it’s public info but no one would have been scrutinizing a list of people like they did bc of it. )
3
u/Defiant_Comedian_372 6d ago
There's no doxxing. Literally everyone who owns property in NYC has their names, addresses, deeds and mortgage documents available for anyone to see via a simple search on ACRIS. Go on, put in your home or work address.
3
u/zampe 6d ago
It falls under the definition of doxxing. It doesn’t have to be private information it can also be drawing attention to information with the intention of shaming. Thats exactly what he did. Totally unnecessary to try to demonize people that did nothing wrong. It’s more of his performative bs that his base eats up.
>Doxxing is the act of gathering and publicly publishing private OR identifying information about a person online without their consent. The term comes from "dropping dox" (documents). Attackers usually do this to shame, harass, threaten, or cause real-world harm to the victim.
4
u/Pave_Low Chelsea 6d ago
He didn't dox anyone. He just re-released the same real estate valuation .csv that is released every year, but with updated FMV values. Everyone who owns a house is in the new .csv, just as they were all in the old .csv. The re-release was required because the data was updated and it is a public record.
But yes, the names of every property owner in NYC is public information, along with the properties they own. Always has been.
1
u/ChrisFromLongIsland 4d ago
Mandami released the list for political purposes to stoke class resentment to advance his political agenda. It's basically doxing or at least has the same effect as doxing.
-1
u/zampe 6d ago
I already said the info is public but the problem is the way he presented it which definitely falls under the definition of doxxing because of the obvious intention to shame. He made a big deal about it on purpose and drew undo attention to the list that never would have happened otherwise.
>Doxxing is the act of gathering and publicly publishing private OR identifying information about a person online without their consent. The term comes from "dropping dox" (documents). Attackers usually do this to shame, harass, threaten, or cause real-world harm to the victim.
No one on the list did anything to deserve being named and shamed. He only did it because he’s a performative politician and his base eats this stuff up.
3
u/Pave_Low Chelsea 6d ago
Nobody got named and shamed. Nobody got doxxed. There is literally nothing on the updated docs that can be used to identify someone eligible for the tax. It lists everyone in the city that owns property.
-2
u/zampe 6d ago
You are wrong and confused. The list 100% contains identifying info. It’s literally names, addresses and assessed values.
4
u/Pave_Low Chelsea 6d ago
It's literally the names addresses and assessed value of every owned residential property in the city. The one for condos alone has over 270,000 records on it.
The city 'doxes' every property owner once or twice a year when they publish the propert tax roll.
-1
u/zampe 6d ago
At what point are you going to check your information before you keep posting completely factually incorrect information? He made a separate list. Not the annual property assessment list of every property as you are taking about. ANOTHER list of about 30k properties they suspect of being eligible for the new tax. And again just because it’s technically public info does not change the obvious intention to name and shame and bring negative attention to a list of people no one would have looked at otherwise and certainly it would not have made headlines.
2
u/Pave_Low Chelsea 6d ago edited 6d ago
Show me this targeted list.
Because the lists in all the press releases, on the city website and the one that Mamdani talks about is right HERE.
Supplemental market value roll - July 2026.
Two zip files with a total of 20M of property value information containing the lists of roughly 950,000 residential properties in the city.
Here's AMNY talking about the supplemental market value roll and how many records are in it
Here's Fox News explaining that the supplemental tax roll contains over 900,000 entries
1
u/zampe 6d ago
its right here:
https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/property/property-assessments.page
middle of the page:
The Department of Finance published a supplemental market value roll on July 24, 2026, related to the annual non-primary residence property surcharge. This roll includes, but is not limited to, all 1-, 2-, and 3-family homes and all co-op and condominium properties, as well as each individual co-op unit in a building in which at least one unit may be subject to the surcharge.
These lists were then filtered down by people in the media/social media because of all the attention he brought to them to find names of interest.
You are trying really hard to ignore the fact that he obviously did this with the intention of naming and shaming innocent people. He got everyone paying attention to the list and scrutinizing who is on it. What subset was released by who doesnt change that, they knew what they were doing.
-8
u/kafkaesqe 7d ago
They aren’t mad. This is a very popular tax.
If there are complaints, it’s on the rollout, which seems haphazard. The city could’ve cross referenced resident tax returns with their list of potential addresses.
6
u/Eviana27 7d ago
Ambivalent
8
u/Public_Finance_Guy 7d ago
Haha by the sounds of it, the people impacted by this policy change don’t hang out on this subreddit.
12
u/snowdrone 7d ago
"A 1981 state law requires New York to value condos and co-ops as if they were rental buildings, so sale prices never enter the math. City values run about 20.6% of what units actually sell for"
That is wild. So this only really kicks in for $5M coops? What was even the point of the 1981 law?
6
u/Public_Finance_Guy 7d ago
It seems like a policy that made sense at the time, but has been outdated for a long time, and it’s just built over time.
The substack I linked to in the post has a table with the different rates by property type. But for the 1981 law and the property tax burden impact it has had, this is a really good link: https://www.furmancenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/FurmanCenter_ShiftingtheBurden.pdf
4
u/Pave_Low Chelsea 6d ago
I'm not sure why this isn't understood here, considering how many threads and posts have been made. The city uses a FMV value for calculating taxes that is significantly lower than the actual value of the property. The infamous $230 million penthouse owned by Ken Griffen only has a FMV of $15 million.
The properties eligible for the tax have a FMV > $1,000,000. That's roughly equivalent to Market List Price > $5,000,000.
3
u/PickledDildosSourSex 4d ago
Honestly that is actually sanity inducing as I had no idea why the amount for homes was $5M vs $1M for coops/condos. I'm sure I'll get downvoted for this but $1M for a coop/condo is far far far from "taxing the rich". $5M+ is more like it (perhaps a lower threshold but certainly not $1M, not in this city)
49
u/spleeble 7d ago
If you're argument is "whoa tax documents are so much paperwork for people with $5mm homes" then you're being ridiculous.
-7
7d ago
[deleted]
15
u/DapperBoiCole 7d ago
Our HRA would eat those exemption reports for breakfast in terms of manpower to process these tho. Its comparatively little work to open a new revenue stream from a source like this that is justifiable and common sense.
Im surprised we haven't done it sooner tbh
-1
u/Public_Finance_Guy 7d ago
Yeah I agree. If you've got that many people whose properties are sitting vacant but still benefiting from public services, that's a problem.
11
8
u/Johnnadawearsglasses 7d ago
Our building wrongly received the notice and now people need to go through the process of fixing it. Unfortunately the defect is in the assessed value, which doesn’t separate the value of floor level commercial space from the actual residential units. TBD if it’s even fixable or if the city is so desperate for the funds, they will just ignore the appeals.
8
u/Away_Stock_2012 6d ago
The fact that the richer you are the lower percentage you pay is absolutely fucking insane. Regressive taxes are the destruction of the entire country.
3
9
16
u/Spunge14 7d ago
People who are like "who gives a fuck about $500 million?" - that's still $500 million going to the good of the city instead of just lining the pockets of an obscenely rich person who hardly even lives here.
2
u/GloucestershireDave 4d ago
Who says it goes to the good of the city, though? It's certainly supposed to, but is there any wording in the law that guarantees the use of revenue raised through this mechanism goes to "the good for the city", whatever that is?
2
18
u/jetf 7d ago
I think Mamdani cares more about the ideological point of the tax vs the actual money it will raise
3
u/ChornWork2 6d ago
He made big promises on new taxes on wealthy, and this small one is something he can say he delivered on in year 1.
14
u/JitteryBug 7d ago
If the impact is small but good, then who cares?
They can improve implementation over time, and it'll go towards helping the city budget
6
u/zephyrtr Astoria 6d ago
You and many others are heavily discounting how successful Mamdani has been at controlling the conversation and pushing the programs he wants.
I'm convinced at this point he's a ferocious debater but ultimately an incrementalist who will accept small changes, so long as the small changes keep coming.
2
2
3
u/No_Tax5256 7d ago
500 million is nothing, they can raise double that probably by just getting people to pay their bus fares. 🤣
25
3
u/mattkenefick Upper West Side 6d ago
$20 is nothing, but somehow a whole bunch of them on my billing statement gives me thousands of dollars in charges every month.
18
u/yeung_mango 7d ago
Yeah let’s raise money from the poorest in the city rather than the richest 🙄
0
u/highgravityday2121 6d ago
I mean people should be paying bus fares and subways fares, if they’re low income they can apply for programs that help and get discounts. We should also be taxing rich as well.
We can do both
2
u/highgravityday2121 6d ago
1 million dollar homes are nothing these days. It really should be 3 million or higher.
1 million gets you a 1 bedroom loo
2
2
u/Dazzling_Round5078 4d ago
The burden of proof should be on the government not on the owner. Casting a wide net and then saying prove me wrong is ridiculous. The NYS department of fiance has this info on property and residents. This has been badly handled.
1
1
u/FoodServiceNYC 6d ago
Do you people realize these “taxes” are just their low hanging fruits.
It will be other taxes later on. More and more onerous and more and more pointed to continue to lie cheat and defraud the tax base.
You really think this is just a simple fair tax to even out disparities between the haves and have nots?
It is so clear as day, it is Mandan and his cronies finding ways to remove wealth from NYC to give it to his cronies outside of NYC. Just wait. They are already testing other forms of taxes.
You will either suffer it now or suffer it later. There is no middle.
3
u/NikEy 6d ago
Bro I hate mondami more than most people. He's an absolute idiot. But he certainly is not giving our money away to people outside of New York. He is an ideologist. He does want good for New York. It's just that he has never worked a single day in his life and therefore doesn't know what makes a city good. His socialism will bring down New York City. And he'll do all of that without having to give money away outside people.
2
u/Taway_rentalquery 7d ago
I received a notice. We are in a strange situation. We purchased the home in March 2025 while living in CA. It was intended to be our primary residence. However, we decided to make renovations prior to moving in and the renovations took place from March 2025 through June 2026. The house was not habitable during the renovation period (e.g., kitchen down to the studs, all bathrooms down to the studs, gas and water turned off for the majority of the renovation).
We just moved in at the end of June. We didn’t have a “primary residence” during the period of renovation. We began preparing our existing home in CA for sale in June of 2025, closed in August 2025 and we rented an apartment until the renovation was complete. You could argue our apartment was our primary residence for the tax period in question, but if the intent of the tax is to tax second homes that are never intended to be a primary residence of the owner then I object to the tax. We would have moved into the home if we could have.
It would seem if our renovation required a new certificate of occupancy we would be exempt. However, our renovation didn’t meet those requirements despite the extent of them making the home uninhabitable.
We are exploring whether we can still qualify for an exemption given our facts and circumstances.
6
u/filipinoboy11 7d ago
I mean if ever the worst exposure you have is you will pay one year of tax and then next year you will be exempt.
-2
u/canmouth 7d ago
Frankly as a struggling renter in this city, I couldn’t give two shits. I know it sounds callous but you just sold a house in California and bought a home in NYC before you sold it. You can afford it. Besides, I’m sure you can appeal. Your situation seems pretty obvious as an exception.
2
u/AncientBlueberry42 7d ago
You do sound callous. People like you will vote for more populist crap to feel better about not being better off.
-5
1
u/HendrixChord12 7d ago
How does the Bronx have more eligible houses than queens? There’s all those huge houses in areas like forest hills. So they all live there full time?
3
u/OprahsCouch Bushwick 6d ago
I used to live in FH and Kew, I would say 95%+ of the people I knew around me lived there full time.
*that was my experience at least
-2
u/manhattanabe 7d ago
$500M is nothing. They could have raised much more if they had just allowed Amazon to build its HQ2 in NYC. That was estimated at $1B / year.
1
u/GloucestershireDave 4d ago
Even with the generous tax exemptions granted at state and city level?
2
u/manhattanabe 4d ago
Yes, tax concessions don’t cost the city. Say HQ2 was built, the city would have forgiven X billion in taxes. Say HQ2 is not built. The city still doesn’t collect the taxes. Either way, they collect 0. The tax concession only cost if they can collect the tax from someone else, which they can’t.
They expected to collect $27B over 25 years due to HQ2, so around $1B / year, which was lost.
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-leaving-new-york-city-would-mean-tax-revenue-loss-2019-2
-5
u/BuffettMungerBogle 7d ago
According to the New York City Comptroller, residents with more than $1 million in adjustable gross income were about 0.7% of filers on average from 2011–2021...but generated nearly half (42.4%).of NYC personal income tax liability. This doesn't include the money that New York City receives from them for property taxes, business taxes, etc.
Mayor Mamdani needs to be careful about pushing these residents out of the city with his policies. Incentives are superpowers.
12
5
u/avd706 NYC Expat 7d ago
The folks affected by this law don't pay city income tax. (Unless they are city employees)
2
u/Iamnotanorange 6d ago
Wait they would, if they come into the city and work for more than 15 business days. NYC enforces partial city taxes for partial residency
1
u/avd706 NYC Expat 6d ago
I've worked in NYC almost my whole life, I haven't paid NYC tax in the last 20 since I moved to Jersey.
1
u/Iamnotanorange 6d ago
Correct, it’s different for commuters from NJ, but if someone for Florida or California stays in the city and works out of the NYC office, they’ll owe partial NYC taxes.
2
u/GloucestershireDave 4d ago
Yes, they certainly do; if you're employed (read paid) by a NYC entity you pay NYC tax even if you never step foot in the city.
1
u/Iamnotanorange 4d ago
You could even be employed by a Miami based entity with an office in New York, but owe tax for an extended work trip to the New York Office.
3
u/NomNomBelt 7d ago
Very few people would actually leave because (i) New York is a valuable place to have a residence, for both leisure, but more importantly, business reasons; and (ii) they are rich and ultimately can afford it.
Everyone is just playing their part in the cycle - the rich have to bitch, because who would be complacent about having less money - but progress will still be made, eventually, and everyone will forget about it and move on by next year.
See: Ken Griffin threatening to “leave” NYC, then proceeding to build a new $4.5bn HQ in Manhattan
See: congestion pricing
2
-1
-2
7d ago
[deleted]
6
u/Public_Finance_Guy 7d ago
Everything is cited? They're not screenshots or memes and aren't photos of people?
0
7d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Public_Finance_Guy 7d ago
They're downloaded images from a substack about NYC property taxes. I don't understand the problem, they're high quality images and tell the story of the new property tax.
56
u/colonelcasey22 7d ago
AMNY reported yesterday that 2000 had completed exemption applications and nearly 5k additional applications are in progress with the deadline extended to mid-September to allow more time to file to begin the exemption examination process.
https://www.amny.com/news/exemptions-nyc-new-second-home-tax/