28 ms·

So this was (IMHO) a shit show from go to whoa. The dog and pony show was a transparent shakedown where Amazon would still probably go where they were always go

by cletus 8y ago

So this was (IMHO) a shit show from go to whoa. The dog and pony show was a transparent shakedown where Amazon would still probably go where they were always going to go. The whole splitting HQ2 I think showed this. Like it's not even an "HQ" in any sense of the word. It's just an expansion. Also with talk of "25k jobs"... what jobs? Are we talking software engineers or warehouse workers? There's a difference. I don't know the inner workings of this but it seems like Cuomo was the driver here with de Blasio on board. This was a missed opportunity. NYC needs several things from NYS that are politically unpalatable upstate. Top of that list is: - Property tax reform; and - Congestion pricing. NYS grossly favours SFHs for property taxes. For example, a $3m brownstone in Park Slope I saw had ~$700/month in property taxes. A similarly priced apartment would have more like $1500-2000/month taxes. A $100m apartment would be taxed at ~$15k/month. NYC has on several occasions tried to introduce congestion pricing on people driving in or into Manhattan (something I 100% support) but the efforts have failed as this is the jurisdiction of NYS and NYS has no interest in this (so far). Why not frame this issue as NYC supporting these efforts to fix issues with NYC like these? The deal may have gotten much more traction were this the case. So I understand the need for government intervention in large projects, say if Amazon were to build 8m sq ft of office space. Regulatory approval can be nigh on impossible. That much office space is hard to find in NYC. I think Amazon missed the boat with Hudson Yards (probably the last place this would've been possible in Manhattan). I agree with other commenters that the net effect of this is about zero. Amazon is trying to have a PR moment. They'll still expand in NYC as it suits their needs. They'll still get tax breaks like any large corporation in NYS/NYC would. This really is just a corporate tantrum.

quxbar 8y ago
> what jobs? Are we talking software engineers or warehouse workers? Workers with an average salary of $150,000, I think it's disingenuous to act like you don't know that but you're also an expert in property tax reform.
- cletus 8y ago
  Pay one person a salary of $1m and you can pay 9 people $55k to average $150k. The average means nothing. Will there some site lead earning $20m/year bringing up the average?
  - all_blue_chucks 8y ago
    25,000 x $150,000 = $3.75 Billion dollars of new taxable income, regardless of how it is distributed.
    - QML 8y ago
      Those billions aren’t uniformly taxed: that’s what they were pointing out.
      - hannasanarion 8y ago
        Actually, those billions wouldn't have been taxed at all. That was part of the deal: Amazon gets all of the income taxes that are paid by their employees in the first ten years.
        kevindong 8y ago
        To be more specific, this part of the deal is called the Excelsior Jobs program. It rebates to Amazon 6.85% [0] of the wages earned by the company's employees, which effectively does mean that income taxes get paid out to Amazon (in reality, the income taxes paid plus a little more due to the NYS tax brackets [1]). That being said, there's no city-level income tax rebate. Assuming the tax brackets currently in effect hold steady until the full 25k jobs promise was fulfilled, the city of New York would get ~3.8% of $150k * 25k jobs = ~$142.5 million/year once the 25k job mark is reached [2]. [0]: https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program [1]: Note how the 6.85% bracket only applies to income above $215.4k; income above $1.08 million gets taxed at 8.82%; consequently Amazon will get more rebated than employees paid in income tax the vast majority of the time. See the second table of page 57: https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=57 https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=... [2]: The ~3.8% is approximated based off of page 69 of https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=69 https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=...
robterrin 8y ago
Best comment on the thread so far. Property tax reform could work for single family homes if we decoupled property tax from land tax. NYS should only raise taxes on the value of land given the surrounding population density, natural properties and accessibility to public infrastructure. Check out some Henry George, if you're interested in learning more.
- mancerayder 8y ago
  I didn't read Henry George, whoever that is, I'm reading you right now. Are you suggesting to tax a single family home the same as a six, if they take up the same amount of space? What happens if someone has owned the home for 60 years, they're older and retired, and suddenly it so happens their neighborhood got popular a decade ago and their property values doubled, and some rezoning happened at a nearby avenue. That's one example. How about we try the academic flirtations with tax experiments at a smaller scale elsewhere, first?
lsllc 8y ago
"For example, a $3m brownstone in Park Slope I saw had ~$700/month in property taxes" Surely that's a typo. At a tax rate of $10 per $1000, that would to be $2500/month.
- cletus 8y ago
  Examples: - Park Slope brownstone, $548/month: https://streeteasy.com/sale/1375411 https://streeteasy.com/sale/1375411 - Park Slope condo, $1740/month: https://streeteasy.com/building/105-8-avenue-brooklyn/3 https://streeteasy.com/building/105-8-avenue-brooklyn/3 Note: if you look into this a lot of condos have deceptively low monthly taxes due to a tax scheme (now defunct) called J-51 (IIRC) where property taxes started at 0 and would go to normal levels over 20-30 years.
  - lsllc 8y ago
    That's absolutely insane. So we get oligarchs and tyrants buying up property in NYC to launder their ill gotten gains and paying little to no property tax on it!
    - mancerayder 8y ago
      Oligarchs and tyrants buy condos in the sky more than brownstones someplace. And 3M isn't a huge amount for a three family home near public transportation, especially a home from the late 1800's that's attached to other homes and with thousands of dollars a year in upkeep. There's an even more important reason for taxes targeting condos more than the older buildings: rental buildings (like a 3 or 4 family brownstone) have renters, and higher taxes would mean higher rents. All that said, if you build a brand new single or multi-family home someplace, anyplace, the taxes will be pretty high. It's all about the grandfathering of older asessments and a state cap on tax rate increases (20% a year I believe), which is allowed an adjustment if renovation is done (or a fresh assessment if it's new).
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mancerayder 8y ago
NYS grossly favours SFHs for property taxes. For example, a $3m brownstone in Park Slope I saw had ~$700/month in property taxes. A similarly priced apartment would have more like $1500-2000/month taxes. A $100m apartment would be taxed at ~$15k/month. The Park Slope home you had was probably newly renovated. That matters - the sale price doesn't. 700 is even a lot, relatively speaking. In any case, houses from the 19th century cost money to maintain, and sometimes, shockingly, they're populated by people who can't afford 1k a month in property tax. The property values went up high and fast - are we going to punish homeowners for that? This isn't a suburb where taxes must come primarily from property tax - there's a NYC-specific income tax, as you're probably well aware. Then, here's something else, tax those 2,3,4-families more, rents will go up as a result; they're free-market rate apartments, not rent stabilized. I don't know what any of this has to do with Amazon, though. NYC has on several occasions tried to introduce congestion pricing on people driving in or into Manhattan (something I 100% support) but the efforts have failed as this is the jurisdiction of NYS and NYS has no interest in this (so far). They introduced it - it just impacts taxis and for-hire vehicles.

by cletus 8y ago

quxbar 8y ago

> what jobs? Are we talking software engineers or warehouse workers? Workers with an average salary of $150,000, I think it's disingenuous to act like you don't know that but you're also an expert in property tax reform.

cletus 8y ago
Pay one person a salary of $1m and you can pay 9 people $55k to average $150k. The average means nothing. Will there some site lead earning $20m/year bringing up the average?
- all_blue_chucks 8y ago
  25,000 x $150,000 = $3.75 Billion dollars of new taxable income, regardless of how it is distributed.
  - QML 8y ago
    Those billions aren’t uniformly taxed: that’s what they were pointing out.
    - hannasanarion 8y ago
      Actually, those billions wouldn't have been taxed at all. That was part of the deal: Amazon gets all of the income taxes that are paid by their employees in the first ten years.
      - kevindong 8y ago
        To be more specific, this part of the deal is called the Excelsior Jobs program. It rebates to Amazon 6.85% [0] of the wages earned by the company's employees, which effectively does mean that income taxes get paid out to Amazon (in reality, the income taxes paid plus a little more due to the NYS tax brackets [1]). That being said, there's no city-level income tax rebate. Assuming the tax brackets currently in effect hold steady until the full 25k jobs promise was fulfilled, the city of New York would get ~3.8% of $150k * 25k jobs = ~$142.5 million/year once the 25k job mark is reached [2]. [0]: https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program https://esd.ny.gov/excelsior-jobs-program [1]: Note how the 6.85% bracket only applies to income above $215.4k; income above $1.08 million gets taxed at 8.82%; consequently Amazon will get more rebated than employees paid in income tax the vast majority of the time. See the second table of page 57: https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=57 https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=... [2]: The ~3.8% is approximated based off of page 69 of https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=69 https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/current_forms/it/it201i.pdf#page=...

robterrin 8y ago

Best comment on the thread so far. Property tax reform could work for single family homes if we decoupled property tax from land tax. NYS should only raise taxes on the value of land given the surrounding population density, natural properties and accessibility to public infrastructure. Check out some Henry George, if you're interested in learning more.

mancerayder 8y ago
I didn't read Henry George, whoever that is, I'm reading you right now. Are you suggesting to tax a single family home the same as a six, if they take up the same amount of space? What happens if someone has owned the home for 60 years, they're older and retired, and suddenly it so happens their neighborhood got popular a decade ago and their property values doubled, and some rezoning happened at a nearby avenue. That's one example. How about we try the academic flirtations with tax experiments at a smaller scale elsewhere, first?

lsllc 8y ago

"For example, a $3m brownstone in Park Slope I saw had ~$700/month in property taxes" Surely that's a typo. At a tax rate of $10 per $1000, that would to be $2500/month.

cletus 8y ago
Examples: - Park Slope brownstone, $548/month: https://streeteasy.com/sale/1375411 https://streeteasy.com/sale/1375411 - Park Slope condo, $1740/month: https://streeteasy.com/building/105-8-avenue-brooklyn/3 https://streeteasy.com/building/105-8-avenue-brooklyn/3 Note: if you look into this a lot of condos have deceptively low monthly taxes due to a tax scheme (now defunct) called J-51 (IIRC) where property taxes started at 0 and would go to normal levels over 20-30 years.
- lsllc 8y ago
  That's absolutely insane. So we get oligarchs and tyrants buying up property in NYC to launder their ill gotten gains and paying little to no property tax on it!
  - mancerayder 8y ago
    Oligarchs and tyrants buy condos in the sky more than brownstones someplace. And 3M isn't a huge amount for a three family home near public transportation, especially a home from the late 1800's that's attached to other homes and with thousands of dollars a year in upkeep. There's an even more important reason for taxes targeting condos more than the older buildings: rental buildings (like a 3 or 4 family brownstone) have renters, and higher taxes would mean higher rents. All that said, if you build a brand new single or multi-family home someplace, anyplace, the taxes will be pretty high. It's all about the grandfathering of older asessments and a state cap on tax rate increases (20% a year I believe), which is allowed an adjustment if renovation is done (or a fresh assessment if it's new).

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

mancerayder 8y ago

NYS grossly favours SFHs for property taxes. For example, a $3m brownstone in Park Slope I saw had ~$700/month in property taxes. A similarly priced apartment would have more like $1500-2000/month taxes. A $100m apartment would be taxed at ~$15k/month. The Park Slope home you had was probably newly renovated. That matters - the sale price doesn't. 700 is even a lot, relatively speaking. In any case, houses from the 19th century cost money to maintain, and sometimes, shockingly, they're populated by people who can't afford 1k a month in property tax. The property values went up high and fast - are we going to punish homeowners for that? This isn't a suburb where taxes must come primarily from property tax - there's a NYC-specific income tax, as you're probably well aware. Then, here's something else, tax those 2,3,4-families more, rents will go up as a result; they're free-market rate apartments, not rent stabilized. I don't know what any of this has to do with Amazon, though. NYC has on several occasions tried to introduce congestion pricing on people driving in or into Manhattan (something I 100% support) but the efforts have failed as this is the jurisdiction of NYS and NYS has no interest in this (so far). They introduced it - it just impacts taxis and for-hire vehicles.