New York bill would tax luxury second homes outside of NYC

[1srelluc]

MSN

ALBANY - In parts of the Adirondacks, nearly one in five homes sit empty, a vacancy trend that local officials say is hollowing out once year-round communities into seasonal ghost towns.

Now, state Sen. Patricia Fahy, a Democrat who represents a large portion of the Capital Region, wants to take a page from New York City's playbook by introducing legislation that would let municipalities across the state impose an opt-in tax on luxury second homes and investor-owned properties worth more than $5 million.

on ultra-wealthy second homeowners in New York City, reviving a long-stalled "pied-à-terre" tax aimed at helping close the city's multi-billion-dollar budget gap. The tax is being discussed as part of New York's $260 billion budget, which was due April 1 - a deadline that was extended for the eighth time this week.

Hochul said the proposed New York City tax would impose an annual surcharge on residential properties that are within the five boroughs and not used as primary residences. According to the governor's office, the tax would be imposed based on a property's value as determined by the city tax assessor. Hochul said the tax would allow the city to levy a tax surcharge that would generate at least $500 million in recurring annual revenue.

Fahy's bill would aim to help cash-strapped upstate municipalities facing severe budget deficits driven by rising costs, stagnating revenue and delayed state aid. Rochester is staring down a $131 million deficit, while Albany's 2026 shortfall stands at $15 million.

Looks like NY is just as unfriendly to second homeowners as NYC is.

I guess they never thought of cutting back services that were not essential to running the state to fill their shortfalls.

LOL....It's sort of like keeping a second home in WV.....Nice scenery, but it's full of WVians.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

NY voted this. They deserve it. I have no sympathy.

 

[Nostra]

Has there ever been a member of the Islamocrat Cult who hasn't tried to solve a budget issue by taking more money?

Why is spending never in their equation? I take that back, INCREASED spending is in their equation because they promise all kinds of new FREE SHIT and need to take more money to pay for all the FREE SHIT.

Idoits.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Has there ever been a member of the Islamocrat Cult who hasn't tried to solve a budget issue by taking more money?

Why is spending never in their equation? I take that back, INCREASED spending is in their equation because they promise all kinds of new FREE SHIT and need to take more money to pay for all the FREE SHIT.

Idoits.

The only thing the dems know how to do is tax. That's their solution for everything.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Has there ever been a member of the Islamocrat Cult who hasn't tried to solve a budget issue by taking more money?

Why is spending never in their equation? I take that back, INCREASED spending is in their equation because they promise all kinds of new FREE SHIT and need to take more money to pay for all the FREE SHIT.

Idoits.

If the NYC or Seattle tax revenue was $100 trillion, the commies in charge would insist they need $110 trillion.

IT IS ALL BULLCRAP.

 

[excalibur]

Gotta keep those services to immigrants flowing. Diversity!

 

[Winston]

Can a voice of reason show up here. This is a tax on homes that are not the primary residence. Do you think maybe the cost of protecting those homes is more than one that is occupied? Should local residents subsidize that cost? Why?

 

[1srelluc]

Can a voice of reason show up here. This is a tax on homes that are not the primary residence. Do you think maybe the cost of protecting those homes is more than one that is occupied? Should local residents subsidize that cost? Why?

Of course it is numbnuts. Damn you are retarded.

Property tax on those homes is the deal of the day for the town/county when compared to a year round occupied dwelling.

Less need for emergency services (Fire/EMS), less waste disposal, less water/sewer usage, and usually the more expensive properties hire privite security to check up on them during the off-season.

All it amounts to is a new tax stream was discovered and dems want it.

 

[Winston]

Of course it is numbnuts. Damn you are retarded.

Property tax on those homes is the deal of the day for the town/county when compared to a year round occupied dwelling.

Less need for emergency services (Fire/EMS), less waste disposal, less water/sewer usage, and usually the more expensive properties hire privite security to check up on them during the off-season.

All it amounts to is a new tax stream was discovered and dems want it.

How do you get it is less need for fire? I am home, a fire starts, I call. Unoccupied home gets hit by lightening, catches fire, the damn thing is an inferno before Fire shows up. Police protection? What about squatters? Come on, visit snowbird land in North Carolina, these second homes are a damn problem. As to sewage and water, that is pretty much a fixed cost with little variable cost.

This is what gets me. The wealthy, and I am sure you, have no clue has to what a tax expenditure is. Look it up. But it is really hypocritical to lament about some poor person getting a few hundred dollars a month in EBT while taking thousands in tax expenditures for mortgage interest.

 

[toobfreak]

NY voted this. They deserve it. I have no sympathy.

Not only should NYC tax you for any luxury secondary homes in or out of the state, but they should tax you just for thinking about buying a second home! Then they should add an additional tax if it is nice or you make a lot of money, and finally, the state should tell people that if they don't like it, they should lump it and leave--- then the state should tax all former residents for moving away.

 

[1srelluc]

How do you get it is less need for fire? I am home, a fire starts, I call. Unoccupied home gets hit by lightening, catches fire, the damn thing is an inferno before Fire shows up. Police protection? What about squatters? Come on, visit snowbird land in North Carolina, these second homes are a damn problem. As to sewage and water, that is pretty much a fixed cost with little variable cost.

This is what gets me. The wealthy, and I am sure you, have no clue has to what a tax expenditure is. Look it up. But it is really hypocritical to lament about some poor person getting a few hundred dollars a month in EBT while taking thousands in tax expenditures for mortgage interest.

Like I said....You're retarded.

 

[Winston]

Like I said....You're retarded.

Says the dude consumed with guns. LOL

 

[1srelluc]

Says the dude consumed with guns. LOL

 

[Winston]

View attachment 1250870

I prefer the FAL.

 

[the watcher]

Wouldn't the properties already be taxed as personal property, no matter who the owner is? Seems like double taxation.

 

[Winston]

View attachment 1250870

I know all you gun nuts think someone like me, a strong advocate for gun control, does not know my way around a firearm. I get it.

Years ago I got a call from work. I was working the evening shift. Boss called and said some cops showed up looking for me. They left a number and he told me, they weren't wearing uniforms, they were wearing suits. Damn, talk about scary. So I called the number and set up a meet before work.

It was the SBI. They were investigating a murder. A woman was shot, from the rear of a vehicle traveling down the interstate from an overpass. They demanded an alibi and thankfully, I had one I could document. I had no ties to this lady. I was puzzled and asked them why they suspected me. Their response, few people could make that shot, they knew I could.

 

[ThisIsMe]

MSN

ALBANY - In parts of the Adirondacks, nearly one in five homes sit empty, a vacancy trend that local officials say is hollowing out once year-round communities into seasonal ghost towns.

Now, state Sen. Patricia Fahy, a Democrat who represents a large portion of the Capital Region, wants to take a page from New York City's playbook by introducing legislation that would let municipalities across the state impose an opt-in tax on luxury second homes and investor-owned properties worth more than $5 million.

on ultra-wealthy second homeowners in New York City, reviving a long-stalled "pied-à-terre" tax aimed at helping close the city's multi-billion-dollar budget gap. The tax is being discussed as part of New York's $260 billion budget, which was due April 1 - a deadline that was extended for the eighth time this week.

Hochul said the proposed New York City tax would impose an annual surcharge on residential properties that are within the five boroughs and not used as primary residences. According to the governor's office, the tax would be imposed based on a property's value as determined by the city tax assessor. Hochul said the tax would allow the city to levy a tax surcharge that would generate at least $500 million in recurring annual revenue.

Fahy's bill would aim to help cash-strapped upstate municipalities facing severe budget deficits driven by rising costs, stagnating revenue and delayed state aid. Rochester is staring down a $131 million deficit, while Albany's 2026 shortfall stands at $15 million.

Looks like NY is just as unfriendly to second homeowners as NYC is.

I guess they never thought of cutting back services that were not essential to running the state to fill their shortfalls.

LOL....It's sort of like keeping a second home in WV.....Nice scenery, but it's full of WVians.

Florida’s population about to get even bigger!

Also, I thought all the blue states were where all of the money is, how do they have deficits and shortfalls ?

 

[1srelluc]

I prefer the FAL.

Inch or metric?

 

[Winston]

Inch or metric?

Metric, of course.

 

[ColonelAngus]

At least none of these second homes are on the coast…because, you know, the seas are rising because of my aerosol spray deodorant.

No one buys oceanfront property anymore. It is worthless…BECAUSE IT IS TRUE THAT IT WILL ALL BE UNDERWATER BY, WHEN WAS IT? 2012?