Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-05-2017, 08:51 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
18,458 posts, read 15,236,363 times
Reputation: 14326

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bookspage View Post
You seem to have an idea that rich people (or big houses? supposedly fancy towns? not sure) just live in their own housing realm, unaffected by the rest of the market
Yes. To rich people. Not necessarily “big houses” or “fancy towns” because you dont necessarily have to be rich to live in those.

I’m a rich person, so I can only go by my own feelings and what I see from other rich people that I am around. And I am unnafected by the rest of the market. I have certain criteria when I buy a home for my family. If it costs more, I will pay more. My monthly mortgage payment isn’t going to put me at my spending limit for the month, so I dont have the trappings of someone in the market for, say, a split level home.

Two different markets. Two different types of buyers. Is the price of a Maybach affected at all by the price of a ford eclipse?

If you do something to directly affect my market, that is another story, but if you are directly affecting a different market, whether or not it translates to my market, is questionable at best.

Last edited by AnesthesiaMD; 12-05-2017 at 09:22 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-05-2017, 09:30 AM
 
Location: NYC
20,550 posts, read 17,683,966 times
Reputation: 25616
Typical fear mongering, if the tax bill was really awful the markets would react. The tax bill will make certain households have even more financial mobility instead of this rigid punishing system we have today.

Last edited by vision33r; 12-05-2017 at 09:52 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 10:23 AM
 
Location: NJ
516 posts, read 1,005,135 times
Reputation: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by vision33r View Post
Typical fear mongering, if the tax bill was really awful the markets would react. The tax bill will make certain households have even more financial mobility instead of this rigid punishing system we have today.
If the capital gains tax is changing from 2/5 to 5/8 years primary residence requirement, isn't that bad for mobility?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 11:56 AM
 
9,434 posts, read 4,248,521 times
Reputation: 7018
Quote:
Originally Posted by vision33r View Post
Typical fear mongering, if the tax bill was really awful the markets would react. The tax bill will make certain households have even more financial mobility instead of this rigid punishing system we have today.
The tax bill is great for the financial markets because of the corp tax cut. Real estate prices sinking in some markets will not have nearly the same effect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 12:02 PM
 
9,434 posts, read 4,248,521 times
Reputation: 7018
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsPiggleWiggle View Post
If the capital gains tax is changing from 2/5 to 5/8 years primary residence requirement, isn't that bad for mobility?
I think it will be bad for flippers and people who invest in real estate, most people do not buy and sell their primary residence every 2-5 years. A flipper or an investor should pay taxes as if it's ordinary income in mho.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 12:03 PM
 
2,509 posts, read 2,494,440 times
Reputation: 4692
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD View Post
Yes. To rich people. Not necessarily “big houses” or “fancy towns” because you dont necessarily have to be rich to live in those.

I’m a rich person, so I can only go by my own feelings and what I see from other rich people that I am around. And I am unnafected by the rest of the market. I have certain criteria when I buy a home for my family. If it costs more, I will pay more. My monthly mortgage payment isn’t going to put me at my spending limit for the month, so I dont have the trappings of someone in the market for, say, a split level home.

Two different markets. Two different types of buyers. Is the price of a Maybach affected at all by the price of a ford eclipse?

If you do something to directly affect my market, that is another story, but if you are directly affecting a different market, whether or not it translates to my market, is questionable at best.
Ok, "rich people" have their own housing market. Got it LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 12:32 PM
 
7 posts, read 7,364 times
Reputation: 16
Default TAXING high tax payers will cost NJ

Quote:
Originally Posted by bookspage View Post
Ok, "rich people" have their own housing market. Got it LOL
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/b...shuddered.html

One Top Taxpayer Moved, and New Jersey Shuddered
By ROBERT FRANKAPRIL 30, 2016
Continue reading the main storyShare This Page
Share
Tweet
Email
More
Save
Photo

Credit Taylor Callery
Our top-heavy economy has come to this: One man can move out of New Jersey and put the entire state budget at risk. Other states are facing similar situations as a greater share of income — and tax revenue — becomes concentrated in the hands of a few.

Last month, during a routine review of New Jersey’s finances, one could sense the alarm. The state’s wealthiest resident had reportedly “shifted his personal and business domicile to another state,” Frank W. Haines III, New Jersey’s legislative budget and finance officer, told a State Senate committee. If the news were true, New Jersey would lose so much in tax revenue that “we may be facing an unusual degree of income tax forecast risk,” Mr. Haines said.

The New Jersey resident (unnamed by Mr. Haines) is the hedge-fund billionaire David Tepper. In December, Mr. Tepper declared himself a resident of Florida after living for over 20 years in New Jersey. He later moved the official headquarters of his hedge fund, Appaloosa Management, to Miami.

New Jersey won’t say exactly how much Mr. Tepper paid in taxes. But according to Institutional Investor’s Alpha, he earned more than $6 billion from 2012 to 2015. Tax experts say his move to Florida could cost New Jersey — which has a top tax rate of 8.97 percent — hundreds of millions of dollars in lost payments.

Mr. Tepper, 58, declined to comment on his move. He does have family — his mother and sister — who live in Florida. But several New Jersey lawmakers cited his relocation as proof that the state’s tax rates, up from 6.37 percent in 1996, are chasing away the rich. Florida has no personal income tax.

Continue reading the main story
ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

“If you’re making hundreds of millions of dollars and you’re paying close to 10 percent to the state of New Jersey, you do the math,” said Jon Bramnick, the Republican leader in the New Jersey Assembly. “You can save millions a year by moving to Florida. How can you blame him?”

Beyond the debate on taxing the rich, Mr. Tepper’s move is a case study in how tax collections are affected when income becomes very highly concentrated. With the top tenth of 1 percent of the population reaping the largest income gains, states with the highest tax rates on the rich are growing increasingly dependent on a smaller group of superearners for tax revenue.

In New York, California, Connecticut, Maryland and New Jersey, the top 1 percent pay a third or more of total income taxes. Now a handful of billionaires or even a single individual like Mr. Tepper can have a noticeable impact on state revenues and budgets.

California had to account for a “Facebook effect” in 2012 and 2013 after that company’s 2012 initial public offering of stock. The offering generated more than $1 billion in revenue — much of that from the chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, and a small group of company shareholders. Washington, D.C., had an unexpected $50 million gain in its 2012 fiscal year — which helped create a budget surplus — after the death of a local billionaire increased its estate tax receipts.

Some academic research shows that high taxes are chasing the rich to lower-tax states, and anecdotes of tax-fleeing billionaires abound. But other studies say there is little evidence showing that the rich move solely for tax purposes. Millionaires and billionaires who move from the high-tax states in the Northeast to Florida, for instance, may be drawn by the sunshine, lifestyle and retirement culture, in addition to lower taxes.

While some high earners may be moving for tax reasons, New Jersey, New York, California and other states are replacing rich people faster than they are losing them. New Jersey had 237,000 millionaires in 2015, compared with 207,200 in 2006, according to Phoenix Marketing International, a research firm. New York added 69,500 millionaires from 2006 to 2015, to 437,900, while California added over 100,000 millionaires, to 772,600.

The best solution to the mega-taxpayer dilemma, some tax experts say, is for states to do a better job of tracking and forecasting the incomes of their top earners. Since the rich are the most mobile and are able to manage their investments just as easily in Miami as in Manhattan, states are devising new ways to monitor their top taxpayers and keep them from leaving.

“In a time of rising inequality, I’m not sure the right answer is lowering taxes or making them less progressive,” said Kim S. Rueben, senior fellow of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute. “It’s more about keeping an eye on people, seeing where they are and enforcing the tax rules.”

Photo

Tax experts say David Tepper’s move to Florida could cost New Jersey — which has a top tax rate of 8.97 percent — hundreds of millions of dollars in lost payments. Credit Brad Barket/Getty Images
Connecticut, home to several hedge fund billionaires, now tracks the quarterly estimated payments of 100 of its top earners. Kevin B. Sullivan, commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services, said about five or six of the highest earners could have a “measurable impact on the revenue stream.”

Mr. Sullivan said that when one of the state’s rich hedge fund executives planned to move his family and company to a lower-tax state, state officials met with him and persuaded him to leave some of his work force in Connecticut.

“We knew we were going to lose him,” Mr. Sullivan said. “But we wanted to keep some of the higher-paying jobs.” He said the state worked out a deal to keep the jobs in exchange for an agreement about the owner’s regular visits to family and friends in Connecticut. (Homeowners who spend more than 183 days in the state are considered residents for tax purposes.) He said the state was holding discussions with other top earners in hopes of keeping them.

Newsletter Sign UpContinue reading the main story
Sign up for the all-new DealBook newsletter
Our columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin and his Times colleagues help you make sense of major business and policy headlines — and the power-brokers who shape them.


Enter your email address
Sign Up

You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

SEE SAMPLE PRIVACY POLICY OPT OUT OR CONTACT US ANYTIME
“I’m not saying we’re sending fruit baskets and get-well cards,” said Mr. Sullivan, a former Democratic legislator. “But we’re trying to send a more welcoming message to the high earners as a group.”

New York is now more closely monitoring wealthy taxpayers who have homes in New York but claim Florida as their tax residence. And New Jersey is collecting data on all of the taxpayers who make more than $1 million to forecast their tax payments more accurately.

In California, 5,745 taxpayers earning $5 million or more generated more than $10 billion of income taxes in 2013, or about 19 percent of the state’s total, according to state officials.

“Any state that depends on income taxes is going to get sick whenever one of these guys gets a cold,” Mr. Sullivan said.

Hence New Jersey’s concern over Mr. Tepper’s departure. Whatever the reasons for his move, he is leaving for Florida at an especially opportune time for tax savings. Many hedge fund managers have for years used a tax loophole that allowed them to defer taxes on fees they earned through the use of offshore funds. A 2008 federal tax rule, however, requires them to declare those fees by the end of 2017 and pay any necessary federal, state and local taxes.

For some hedge fund managers, the amounts declared will probably be in the billions of dollars, accountants say. A spokesman for Mr. Tepper declined to comment on his overseas income. By moving to Florida, Mr. Tepper could avoid paying state income taxes on any such funds.

“If he’s bringing money back, you’re talking about a big possible gain,” Mr. Bramnick said. “So it’s a good time to move to Florida.”

Mr. Tepper regularly topped state wealth rankings as New Jersey’s richest resident. He also has homes in Miami Beach and the Hamptons. In 2012 and 2013, he also topped Alpha’s list of the highest-earning hedge fund managers, with estimated earnings of $2.2 billion in 2012 and $3.5 billion in 2013. His earnings fell to $400 million in 2014.

Mr. Tepper never publicly announced his move to Florida. But it became public on April 5, when Mr. Haines, citing a Bloomberg report, mentioned Mr. Tepper’s move in his remarks to the State Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee. In discussing the move, Mr. Haines said, “Even a 1 percent forecasting error in the income tax estimate is worth $140 million.”

Mr. Tepper’s payments may have even been higher. If Mr. Tepper earned $3.5 billion in 2013, his state tax bill could have been over $300 million, according to New Jersey accountants. Granted, his actual payments were probably far lower because of deferred income, charitable deductions and other accounting treatments. Yet Mr. Haines’s comments are believed to be the first time a state official has warned of a budget risk because of one resident’s relocation.

“We’ve had states mention risks from high-income groups, but never from a single taxpayer,” Ms. Rueben of the Tax Policy Center said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2017, 02:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
516 posts, read 1,005,135 times
Reputation: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodyum View Post
I think it will be bad for flippers and people who invest in real estate, most people do not buy and sell their primary residence every 2-5 years. A flipper or an investor should pay taxes as if it's ordinary income in mho.
But if you want career mobility, 5 years is a really long time.

Several of my coworkers, myself included, purchased a condo or townhouse in Jersey City because it made sense commute wise in the beginning of our careers. As we have kids and need space or schools or whatever, we need to move out to the suburbs, but now Senate/House is saying that you can't. If I need the equity in my condo to buy a house, I need to put up with what I got or face a whopping tax bill, that could wipe out a lot of the equity I need to finance the next house.

Furthermore, if I get a great job offer in a different state, I'm stuck. If I want to take that next step in my career, I either face the taxman if I haven't lived in my home at least 5 years and if I did, I need to sell within the next three years. There is no flexibility of being an absentee landlord while I try to figure out if this relocation will work out.

This change is absolutely not isolated to flippers and investors, but impacts regular folks just starting out their careers or families hugely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:12 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top