drive.google.com
IMPORTANT FACTS
Thanks for the link. Here are the facts of the situation. It has been well documented:
New York City's property tax system disproportionately burdens homeowners in less affluent, often outer borough, and minority neighborhoods, while favoring more expensive homes in wealthier areas, is widely supported by various reports and analyses.
The way wealthier homes in New York City can end up paying less in property taxes, relative to their market value, compared to less wealthy homes is due to several complexities and historical quirks in the city's property tax system. The key factors include:
* Assessment Caps (especially for Class 1 properties):
* New York City's property tax system classifies properties into different categories (e.g., Class 1 for 1-3 family homes, Class 2 for larger residential buildings like co-ops and condos, Class 3 for utilities, and Class 4 for commercial properties).
* For Class 1 properties, there are state-mandated assessment caps. This means the assessed value (the value on which taxes are calculated) cannot increase by more than 6% in any one year or 20% over any five-year period.
* In rapidly appreciating markets, like many wealthier neighborhoods in Manhattan or parts of Brooklyn, the market value of homes can skyrocket much faster than these caps allow the assessed value to increase. This creates a widening gap between the market value and the assessed value. As a result, these properties effectively pay taxes on a much lower percentage of their true market value.
* In contrast, in neighborhoods where property values have not increased as dramatically, or perhaps have even stagnated, the assessed value is often much closer to the market value. This means homeowners in these areas end up paying a higher effective tax rate (tax paid as a percentage of market value).
* Fractional Assessments and Different Assessment Ratios:
* NYC uses a "fractional assessment" system, meaning properties are assessed at a fraction of their estimated market value.
* Class 1 properties are assessed at 6% of their market value.
* Class 2, 3, and 4 properties are assessed at 45% of their market value.
* While on the surface it seems that properties assessed at 45% (like co-ops and condos) should pay more, the combination of assessment methodologies and caps can lead to luxury co-ops and condos being significantly undervalued for tax purposes compared to their actual sales prices. The Department of Finance often bases the valuation of these units on hypothetical rental income or comparable rentals, which can significantly understate their true market value, especially for high-end properties.
* "Taxes Based on Location" and Gentrification Effects:
* The way property taxes are calculated has historical roots aimed at avoiding huge tax bills for homeowners. However, this system didn't fully account for rapid gentrification and soaring property values in certain areas.
* This has led to situations where properties in areas that have experienced rapid value appreciation (often wealthier areas) end up paying relatively less in property taxes compared to areas with more stable or slower growth in property values, where assessments more closely reflect market value.
* How "Low Rates are Made Up by Climbing Taxes in Other Parts of the City":
* Because the city needs to collect a certain amount of property tax revenue to fund services, the lower effective rates paid by some wealthier properties (due to assessment caps and undervaluation) effectively shift a greater portion of the overall tax burden onto other properties that are assessed closer to their market value or have less protective assessment caps. This often includes homeowners in outer boroughs and certain types of rental properties.
In essence, the NYC property tax system's structure, particularly the assessment caps and valuation methods for different property classes, leads to a situation where properties that have seen the largest increases in market value (often in wealthier areas) benefit from artificially suppressed assessed values, resulting in a lower effective tax rate for their owners, while other properties bear a proportionally higher share of the tax burden.