Monday, April 14, 2008

Lesson from Long Island

The Community Preservation Fund is generated by a 2 percent tax added on real estate sales. It has raised more than $500 million for land preservation on the East End since it was created in 1999.

Panel presents ideas on Community Preservation Fund

Why don't we have this in NYC? Oh, wait, I almost forgot that it's because we are an ever-evolving, grand, global, vibrant, diverse city and therefore we must build on every available space, replace every historic structure and look like a hodge podge of animal scat.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

We already have this:

NYS Transfer Tax is 0.4% of purchase price.

NYC Transfer Tax is 1% of price up to $500,000; or, 1.425% of price if $500,000 and over.

Mortgage Tax is 1.75% of amount of mortgage for loans under $500,000. 1.875% of amount of mortgage for loans more than $500,000.

Mansion Tax is 1% of entire purchase price once the sale exceeds $1,000,000.

Please account for where this money is going, before suggesting new ways to tax the residents of this city. And that's what it would be - a tax on a the residents as every developer is going to pass the charge on to the buyers through higher costs.

You wonder why real estate is increasing a game that the little guy can't participate in. I present to you Exhibit A. they do not have these taxes in LI.

Anonymous said...

If you love the slow-paced, drive to everywhere, tedium of suburban life in LI, why don't you MOVE there? Stop trying to change NYC into a boring suburb to fit your tastes- go move out to a small town if that is what you like.

Queens Crapper said...

I was born and raised here, and have no intention of leaving.

Sounds like the typical "Go Back to Kansas" argument so perfectly described by Lost City.

Anonymous said...

"Please account for where this money is going, before suggesting new ways to tax the residents of this city."

Shouldn't you be saying this to the mayor?

Anonymous said...

I'd gladly pay a tax if it meant my neighborhood was preserved. It's not like the LPC is gonna do it for me.

Anonymous said...

Anon #4, The mayor isn't the one proposing new taxes. The crapper is. That is why the question is directed at him.

Queens Crapper said...

"Please account for where this money is going"

Uh, I have no idea. Why don't you ask the mayor!

Julie said...

The mayor has to account for where the NYC Transfer Tax and mortgage taxes are going, and if it's a "NYS" Transfer Tax, then they most certainly have this tax on LI.

Anonymous said...

The mayor isn't the one proposing new taxes.

Yeah, that whole congestion pricing thing was all just Mike's idea of an April Fool's joke!

Anonymous said...

You don't like how NYC evolves and grows, and you like how things are out in LI better, but because your parents lived here when you were born you are going to stay here and never move. That makes no sense. I was born and raised here too, and I never want this city or Queens to become what you wish for.

Anonymous said...

OK Crapper, since you want to be cute please explain why you feel that adding a 2% tax onto every real estate transaction on top of the 6% of taxes detailed above (which I should mention does not include inspection costs, title insurance, attorney costs, points, documents fees, etc.) makes good economic sense especially in these times.

In your response please address the potential benefits of the proposed tax to affordable housing (since I know you care so deeply about that). In addition since you care about the tweeding of government so much please explain how this additional tax does not contribute to corpution and back office deals that you rail against so frequently here. Where is this slush fund going to be used and what buracracy will need to be created to administer it?

Anonymous said...

Anon #2... it's bad enough the Manhattan elites look down their noses at the outer boroughs. Now Crappians look down on Long Islanders? Enough already.

But that Peconic Tax has resulted in a lot of open land being acquired - and keeping some of the reasons people moved there intact. It benefits homeowners. Not developers. Is that such a bad thing?

Anonymous said...

"You don't like how NYC evolves and grows, and you like how things are out in LI better, but because your parents lived here when you were born you are going to stay here and never move."

NYC evolved and grew just fine up until the end of the Giuliani years. Then it became a crap and illegal alien avalanche. It was quite liveable here, in fact, in the 1990s it felt like the city was reborn. Then it all went to shit. You stay because you care and want to keep your neighborhood good, despite the actions of the government. Stable communities are those that people stay in. Ones where you find generations of families. Not ones that invite temporary residents in. Sad that people don't understand this. It's always all about the Benjamins.

Anonymous said...

You know what? If this tax was collected during the "boom" years, maybe we wouldn't have been faced with such utter devastation of our neighborhoods and we'd have some open space, courtesy of generous foreign buyers.

Anonymous said...

Bloomberg's and Giuliani's policies are practically identical. Giuliani was pro-development and pro-immigration. You probably were complaining about everything and anything when Giuliani was mayor too. The neighborhoods of NYC never will be like small towns, so if that is the type of life you want, you shouldn't live here.

Queens Crapper said...

"The mayor isn't the one proposing new taxes."

MIKE PULLS SNEAK ATTAX ON THE CITY

He might as well just impose this tax, too. He can do just about anything yet somehow maintains his 75% approval rating.

Anonymous said...

As usual and as expected no substantive response from the Crapper. The Crapper prefers to lob grenades and not let the facts get in the way. What say you Crapper?

Justin said...

Hey Crappy you touched on a nerve with the real estate community. Who the hell else would know all these tax numbers and percentages on real estate transactions? How about this: All new buildings with 3 or more units that replaced 1 or 2 family homes have to pay the tax because they are taking away air and sunlight from the neighborhood. This money can then go towards preserving open space. We'll call it the Crap Tax. If they don't like it, then maybe they won't build crap.

Anonymous said...

Hey Justin, I'm not a RE professional. It's called being educated on a subject before forming an opinion on it. This is not any specialize knowledge. Do a goggle seach and you can find the same thing. The crapper came out and proposed a new tax. He did this without:

1) Realizing that similiar taxes already exist and that they are among the highest in the nation
2) have any idea of what the economic impact of the tax would be on city residents
3) having any concept of how the program would be adminstered

When asked to explain he goes silent or makes jokes. You draw your own conclusions.

Queens Crapper said...

"Realizing that similiar taxes already exist and that they are among the highest in the nation"

There is no tax that is put toward preservation of threatened landmarks or open space in this city. If you think you know of one, please tell me what it is called, who pays into it and what open space has been saved by it and I will gladly doff my hat to you.

Anonymous said...

Why don't we get a say what our taxes are put toward? Maybe if we didn't give developers tax breaks for overdeveloping our neighborhoods, we'd have a big fund available to save what's left. But God forbid the Bloomberg administration should do that.

Anonymous said...

"1) Realizing that similiar taxes already exist and that they are among the highest in the nation
2) have any idea of what the economic impact of the tax would be on city residents
3) having any concept of how the program would be adminstered"

Sounds very much like congestion pricing but without the B.S. Funny how Bloomie was all in favor of c.p., but preserving green space through a tax would be sooooo bad! Something that would actually protect the environment instead of phony baloney traffic reduction schemes.

Anonymous said...

It could be administered through councilmembers and community boards who identify open spaces in their districts. Part of their discretionary funding. The people would pressure them to bring home the green for their district. The districts with the least amount of open space get priority.

Anonymous said...

Similar in the sense that it is a tax added on all real estate sales - Not similar in use of the tax revenue.

Still haven't answered the questions Crapper, but you are a masterful dodger, I'll give you that. Do you want more time to find some other technicality that prevents you from responding?

Queens Crapper said...

Not dodging it at all. How about just charging $50 per transaction? That alone would raise gobs of money for preservation. I think most people could handle that. Let's be honest, the LPC can't do it and are purposely underfunded to allow destruction of landmarks and overdevelopment.

Anonymous said...

I love it when people's response is "If you don't like it here, move!" How about "If you don't like it here, work on changing things for the better."

Anonymous said...

Here's a better way - .50 out of every paycheck. Even if you don't own property, you benefit from open space. Everyone should pay into it.

Anonymous said...

You guys are sure generous with my tax dollars. Why stop there? Let's institute a 25% payroll tax to fund the purchase of all private property. Soon the government will own all the land like in China. I don't want open space. If I did I would move to the suburbs. If you are in love with this idea so much why don't you donate to charities that support this.

Anonymous said...

You don't want to change things for the better, you want to change things to suit your tastes. You want to change a highly urban city to a small town. In this case, you should move to an environment that you prefer rather than try to impose your tastes on everyone else.

Anonymous said...

Even the mayor wants open space - every person within 10 minutes walk of a park by 2030. Keep talking, Mr. Anonymous. As for generous with your tax dollars, take a look at the Atlantic Yards fiasco. That's what you should be enraged about. Not .50 out of your paycheck so kids will have a park to play in.

Anonymous said...

"You don't want to change things for the better, you want to change things to suit your tastes. You want to change a highly urban city to a small town. In this case, you should move to an environment that you prefer rather than try to impose your tastes on everyone else."

The majority of Queens wants more open space. You are in the minority, therefore you should move.

Anonymous said...

The projects are "highly urban". Maybe you should move there. But you'll find that even they have a lot of open green space!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, more than a lot of neighborhoods in Queens do. We're paying for their open areas and have few of our own. How sad.