Evelio Rivera’s Post

Since April 1, 2023, Los Angeles has implemented the so-called "mansion tax," imposing levies on real estate sales of $5 million or more. While intended to fund housing initiatives, the tax has generated approximately $439 million as of October 31, 2024—significantly below the projected $600 million to $1.1 billion per year. This shortfall highlights the tax's unintended impact on the local real estate market, including reduced profit margins and decreased investment in high-value properties. LABA advocates for a balanced approach that supports housing initiatives without stifling economic growth. By collaborating with city officials and stakeholders, we can develop solutions that address housing needs while fostering a vibrant real estate market. Join us in advocating for thoughtful reform: https://lnkd.in/gWD2X-RA #LABuildersAssociation #LABA #BuildingLA #MansionTaxImpact #RealEstateLA #HousingInitiatives #EconomicGrowth #PolicyReform #SmartGrowthLA #CommunityDevelopment #SustainableHousing #CollaborativeSolutions #StrongerLosAngeles

As a commercial real estate professional committed to Staten Island’s development, and a head of a family office that constantly looks for growth opportunities. it’s disheartening to see our borough excluded from the 485X Tax abatement. Despite the city’s $400 million investment to revitalize the North Shore—creating 20 acres of open space, over 7,500 jobs, and 2,400 housing units—this tax abatement could have further driven growth and investment across Staten Island. The 485X Tax abatement offers substantial tax relief for developers, promoting new projects and revitalization efforts. Without it, Staten Island faces several challenges: Competitive Disadvantage: Developers will gravitate towards areas with tax abatements, reducing interest in Staten Island properties. Slower Economic Growth: The lack of incentives will decelerate the pace of new developments, impacting job creation and economic diversification. Underutilization of Funding: Despite the city’s substantial investment in the North Shore, the absence of complementary tax incentives will limit the full potential of these funds. Staten Island deserves the same opportunities as other boroughs to flourish and attract new investments. It’s crucial for policymakers to recognize this gap and consider extending the 485X Tax abatement to include our community. #CommercialRealEstate #StatenIsland #NYCDevelopment #485XTaxAbatement #EconomicGrowth #RealEstateInvestment

As the 89th Texas Legislature kicks off, several key real estate issues are on the agenda, with the potential to significantly impact housing and property ownership across the state. Here’s what to watch: Property Tax Reforms Building on the $18 billion reduction achieved last session, lawmakers are exploring further ways to ease property tax burdens. Proposed measures include capping annual appraisal increases for primary residences at as low as 2.5% (down from 10%) and using state surplus funds to support schools, thereby reducing the reliance on local property taxes. Foreign Ownership Restrictions Legislation is being introduced to restrict or ban property ownership by citizens of certain foreign nations deemed “hostile.” These proposals aim to address national security concerns but have drawn criticism for their potential discriminatory impacts. Corporate Landlord Regulations The role of corporate landlords in the housing market is under scrutiny, with lawmakers considering regulations to address their influence on housing availability and affordability. Zoning and Housing Affordability In response to the ongoing housing affordability crisis, there is bipartisan interest in reforming land use and zoning policies. Potential changes include reducing minimum lot sizes to promote diverse housing options, such as multiplexes and townhomes, in areas currently limited to single-family homes. These discussions highlight the Legislature’s focus on balancing property rights with the need to address housing challenges and ensure affordability for all Texans.

There are perpetual concerns about affordable housing constructed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits flipping to market rate after the affordability period expires. But states' affordability periods vary dramatically. Vermont requires perpetual affordability and, according to a representative at its housing finance authority, is still seeing a "steady pipeline of demand." While further analysis would be interesting, what's the downside in states where 9% tax credits are already oversubscribed? Thanks to National Housing Trust and Shelterforce for highlighting this issue. https://lnkd.in/e8GSdq-R https://lnkd.in/eZDm5FUb

This is really interesting. There has been a lot of concern over the course of the LIHTC program about units aging out after their designated affordability timeline (typically 30, occasionally 15, years. States and localities have addressed this by extending the affordability requirements since the establishment of the program in ‘86. And it seems like the extended affordability requirements don’t affect use much, and I think that comes down to if you’re using 30 years of affordability in your initial financing calculations, there’s honestly not a ton of difference financially between 30 years and perpetually. In my experience, they just end up being refinanced and maintain their affordability, either through their ownership by mission-oriented organizations (PHAs, nonprofits, etc), or similarly refinanced by private developers. Even then, to make subsidized housing work, non-mission organizations are typically stacking with other public funding sources (local PILOTs, local IZ programs, local/state grants, federal loan guarantees, etc) that have their own long-term or perpetual income restriction or subsidy requirements, so the LIHTC length is kind of a moot point.

The Montana Department of Commerce announces that more than $37 million in federal housing tax credits will be allocated to six developments to build new affordable homes in five Montana communities. Projects in Bozeman, Dillon, Missoula, and Polson received tax credits. A complete list of projects can be found here https://lnkd.in/g_7sgxJK

Four Fort Worth projects receive $8M in tax credits for lower-income housing Contact me to discuss the latest scoop in real estate! #KnowYourHomesValue #HomeValueInsights #PropertyWorth #KnowYourHomesValue #InformedDecisions #ExpertPropertyReport #ValuationWisdom #EmpowerYourChoice

The issue of whether taxes should be increased on very wealthy people is a complex political one. My CEO predecessor believed that CT should have a personal income tax in 1990 and it implemented one. My view on taxes is that I am not opposed to paying more if governments spend our money wisely. But they don't. Aside from the corruption and graft, especially in cities like Chicago and New York, the more systemic issue is that legislators and regulators attempt to accomplish too much with big projects and end up spending our money poorly. For example, if CT wants to support affordable housing, that is a worthy goal, since private real estate developers probably cannot make the economics work. But when state money has strings attached to it, such as "prevailing wage" laws that give too much money to construction trades, the housing becomes too expensive to achieve its intended purpose. Governments load too many regulatory burdens on money they provide to get things done and end up producing less beneficial results. They also do a poor job of targeting when they provide relief funding. Wealthy people end up with too much of the relief money.

According to Redfin, property taxes for homeowners have risen about 30% since 2019, and the median monthly payment has reached $250. The increase is driven by higher home values, inflation, and, in certain areas, rising property tax rates to fund municipal expenses. Texas and Florida, pandemic migration hotspots, have seen significant home value increases, with property taxes now representing up to 20% of monthly housing costs in cities like Austin. Rising taxes in Florida also fund climate resiliency efforts, and in some regions, this may curb housing demand by increasing the overall cost of ownership. Meanwhile, areas with the highest dollar tax payments are New York and New Jersey, with Nassau County topping the list at $905 per month. #PropertyTaxes #PandemicMigration #RisingTaxes #HousingDemand https://lnkd.in/ey2KGyFv

As we navigate the stresses of modern day living, it's essential that our systems evolve to meet current needs. One such system in need of urgent reform is the council tax valuation method. Currently, council tax in many areas is based on property values from as far back as the early 1990s. This outdated approach not only fails to reflect the significant changes in property values but also leads to unfair discrepancies. Homeowners with properties of similar value today can end up paying vastly different amounts simply due to historical valuations. This is neither fair nor efficient. It's time we consider a more up-to-date approach: Implementing regular property revaluations would ensure that council tax reflects current market conditions. This would create a fairer system where contributions are based on the true value of properties. A reformed council tax system could be designed to be more progressive, ensuring that those with higher-valued properties contribute a fairer share, while providing relief for lower-valued properties. To put this current system into perspective, Burnley had the highest council tax relative to house price with the band D tax being £2,244 to an average house price of £116,172. On the flip side, the affluent London Borough of Westminster had the lowest, with band D residents paying £914 on an average house price of £927,774. #council #tax #reform #bandings #valuation #enforcement #debt #collection #LetsFindAWay