The Third Certainty How and Why New York City's Property Taxes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Real Estate Forefront Emerging Developments in the NYC Marketplace, #22 The Third Certainty: How and Why New York City’s Property Taxes Increase Consistently Addressing The Many Misconceptions February 2013 Real estate investment services Real Estate Forefront: The Third Certainty: How and Why New York City’s Property Taxes 2 Increase Consistently Everyone knows the two certainties in life: death and taxes. In New York City, there is a third certainty which is that real property taxes increase every year regardless of market conditions. In fact, from 2009 to 2011 when the market value of all New York City properties declined, property tax collections increased by 17%. The data shows that since 1995 total billable assessed values have increased every year in every borough with the exception of the Bronx that showed a slight decline in 2010. While most would assume that wealthier neighborhoods would be assessed higher taxes, a close look at three neigh- borhoods shows that there is a wide disparity in property taxes paid within these neighborhoods, and there is no rule as to why some properties are taxed more than others. In short, this report aims to upend the reader’s preconceived notions on property taxes. The results of this study suggest that coop buildings do not necessarily have a favorable tax structure over rental buildings in some neighborhoods; townhouses are not always taxed lower than a coop; and the likelihood that property taxes will continue to increase every year is nearly a sure thing. Some of the specifi c fi ndings are as follows: — Real property tax collections have increased consistently from 2005 through 2012; however, the increase in tax collec- tions (56%) was in line with the net rate of increase in market values during this seven-year period (51%). — Of 111 buildings surveyed for this analysis on the Upper East Side, the Upper West Side and the West Village, coop buildings did not necessarily pay less in property taxes per square foot than rentals, despite the generally held percep- tion that they have been. — Real property taxes levied varied widely across and within the three neighborhoods reviewed. — Property taxes on single family homes were generally lower on a per-square-foot basis for buildings on the Upper West Side and West Village, but they were higher on the Upper East Side. — The overall market value of properties in the outer boroughs increased at a faster rate than in Manhattan from 2003 through 2009; however, the billable assessed values increased more in Manhattan during this period. These and other fi ndings discussed below demonstrate why property taxes generate so much controversy. As per Chairman and CEO Peter Hauspurg, “as a former tax lawyer, I am confounded by the City’s tax code. Researching these numbers was akin to a Law & Order episode: every new piece of information generated more and more questions.” Real property taxes increased over the last fi ve years on an aggregate level for a number of reasons, some more obvious than others. One could argue that, fi rst and foremost, property taxes increased because the City was adding new properties during those years, and as a result, was expanding the tax base. The chart below shows the new housing built in Manhattan alone from 2000 through this year and includes the housing expected through 2015. Browse listings at www.easternconsolidated.com Real estate investment services Real Estate Forefront: The Third Certainty: How and Why New York City’s Property Taxes 3 Increase Consistently New Housing Units in Manhattan 7,000 70,000 New Units in Manhattan 6,000 60,000 Cumulative Units 5,000 50,000 4,000 40,000 3,000 30,000 2,000 20,000 Units Cumulative New Units Per Year Per New Units 1,000 10,000 0 0 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Source: Eastern Consolidated and CoStar As shown in the table below, all of the boroughs saw a signifi cant increase in housing stock, and as a result, an increase in its property tax base. New Housing Units From 2000 To 2010 2000 2010 Added Units Percentage Change New York City 3,200,912 3,371,062 170,150 5% Manhattan 798,144 847,090 48,946 6% Bronx 490,659 511,896 21,237 4% Brooklyn 930,866 1,000,293 69,427 7% Queens 817,250 835,127 17,877 2% Staten Island 163,993 176,656 12,663 8% Source: Census Bureau Market Values These added properties and expanded base would suggest that the overall market value1 of New York City properties has increased. The charts below show that, indeed, while the growth in Manhattan looks to dwarf the other boroughs, the outer boroughs actually experienced a much higher rate of market value growth from 2005 through 2008. In other words, property values on the existing building stock increased across the City. From 2008 through 2012, however, all four of the outer boroughs saw market values decline while Manhattan’s market value increased 22% during that time (brown line). 1 The New York City Department of Finance (DOF) determines the “market value” of a property using one of three approaches: the sales prices of comparable proper- ties sold that year, the net income based on rent revenue less operating expenses or on the cost to replace that property which is based on construction costs. Browse listings at www.easternconsolidated.com Real estate investment services Real Estate Forefront: The Third Certainty: How and Why New York City’s Property Taxes 4 Increase Consistently New York City Property Market Values Growth in Property Market Values By Borough By Borough 250% $300,000 Manhattan Manhattan Bronx Bronx $250,000 200% Brooklyn Brooklyn Queens Queens $200,000 150% Staten Island Staten Island $150,000 100% (in millions) $100,000 50% $50,000 0% $0 Percentage ChangeSince 1994 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 -50% 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 Source: Eastern Consolidated and NYC Department of Finance With its signifi cant offi ce, hotel, retail and wealthy residential base, Manhattan’s total market value has generally accounted for 32% of 38% of the overall New York City market value. The chart below, however, shows how New York City’s overall market value (yellow line) stayed fl at from 2008 through 2012 largely because of the outer boroughs. New York City Historic Market, Actual And Billable Assessed Property Values $180,000 900,000 $150,000 750,000 $120,000 600,000 $90,000 450,000 Taxable Actual Assessed Value Taxable Billable Assessed Value $60,000 300,000 Market Value (right axis) $30,000 150,000 NYCTotal Property Value (in millions) $0 0 Source: Eastern Consolidated and NYC Department of Finance Browse listings at www.easternconsolidated.com Real estate investment services Real Estate Forefront: The Third Certainty: How and Why New York City’s Property Taxes 5 Increase Consistently Assessed Values The chart above clearly shows how assessed values2 (brown line) increased steadily during these years. More specifi cally, in 2010, the overall market value for New York City properties declined by 1.9% over 2009, but the total assessed3 value increased by 3.9% that year. In other words, the other reason why property taxes increased most years is because assessed values increased these years. By law4, the City’s Department of Finance (DOF), which is empowered to make property assessments, cannot raise as- sessed values or property taxes beyond a certain rate per year; therefore, they phase assessed increases over a period of fi ve years. For commercial buildings or residential buildings with 11 or more units, the DOF adjusts the assessment (down- ward) even further to calculate the “transitional” assessed value. This transitional value often becomes the billable taxable assessed value5 on which the tax rate is applied. For residential properties with fewer than 11 units, the tax rate is applied to the actual assessed value. Because transitional assessed values are often lower than actual assessed values, the taxable billable value line (orange) in the chart above is smoother and fl atter than the assessed value line. In short, because these phased-in increases are carried out over fi ve years, billable values increased from 2008 through 2012 even though market values declined. While this stabilization policy eases the tax burden in the frothy years, it adds to the tax burden when property values start to decline which is why the property taxes collected increased from 2008 to 2012. The lines below show how taxable values increased for most boroughs when overall market values did not6. 2 The DOF then determines the “assessed value” based on a set percentage of market value, called the “level of assessment or assessment ratio,” which is 6% for Class 1 buildings and 45% for tax classes 2, 3 and 4 as per the DOF website. However, the data below suggests that the assessment ratio can be much lower for Class 1 buildings. 3 The NYC DOF mails property owners a Notice of Property Value (NOPV) once a year that includes information about both the property’s market and assessed values which are used to calculate property taxes for that tax year. According to the DOF, “assessed values cannot go up by more than a certain rate per year and over a fi ve year period (depending on the building class) unless there was new construction or renovations took place. Therefore, it may take several years for the assessed value to adjust to a large increase in market value.” This explains why assessments go up even when market value goes down. 4 Assessed Value (AV) cannot increase more than 6 percent each year or more than 20 percent in fi ve years.