12 thoughts on “One way to find rent-controlled apartments in Manhattan

  1. For rent controlled apartments in Manhattan inheritance is valuable just like in Ca where one can inherit the low value of a property in similar fashion. It seems to me that both are rather obvious distortions, they don’t help the intended people but their heirs. I agree that it may make sense to freeze the taxes for those over 65 but let them go up when the property is inherited just as if it were sold.

    • Lyle

      Don’t you believe a person should be able to do whatever they wish with their own property?

      If so, why wouldn’t that include giving it to some other person or organization when they die?

      If I own a business should my heirs be forced to sell it to pay the taxes they owe?

      • ron-

        doesn’t that cut both ways?

        if you are going to argue that “a person should be able to do whatever they wish with their own property” then shouldn’t a landlord be able to set rent as they choose making the entire edifice of rent control invalid?

        it seem to me that the argument you are making to support inherited rent control apartments invalidated the whole notion of rent control unless you think that rights apply only to renters and not to owners.

        further, since when is a rented apartment your property?

        it’s the landlord’s property. if they can do as the want, why must they keep tenants and pricing that the do not want?

        • morganovich

          Either I misread Lyle or I was really unclear. Of course a renter should have no future claim to someone else’s property.

          It’s the landlords property, and they should be able to do whatever they wish with it, including leaving it to their heirs without it being taxed again. They should be able to charge whatever rent they want to whomever they want to accept as tenants, for only as long as they wish to have them as tenants.

          My argument wasn’t to support inherited rent controlled apartments, but to support the right of a person to determine the disposition of their own property without interference from the state.

          In my view rent control IS invalid.

      • In both cases the item is not something a person owns neither the rent controlled apartment nor the assement for property taxes are something a person owns, rather they are controlled and set by government. In the case of property yes they can will it to whom they will, however the state should get the step up in values that occurs as the basis of the property steps up at the time for income tax purposes, you should not be able to have it both ways.

        • Lyle, If you believe a person has a right to their own property then you must believe they can do with it as they wish. That might include leaving it to wives, boyfriends, children, to universities, charities, or their cat. The property has already been taxed at least once when the income of the owner was taxed, and there is no legitimate reason to tax it again, or to allow a taxing authority to reappraise it at a higher value.

          To believe taxes should be raised on inherited property means you must also believe that government can make better use of the money than the rightful owner.

          • I was talking here the prop 13 exemption which freezes the assesed value of a house when it is purchased. My idea is that if it is inherited the assed value goes to the current value, just like the basis for income tax goes up.
            I was referring to property taxes here, which are taxes for the right to occupy property (since renters really pay them all be it indirectly) These of course date from England where the King owned all the land and you had to pay him to keep the use of it.

          • I was referring to property taxes here, which are taxes for the right to occupy property (since renters really pay them all be it indirectly) These of course date from England where the King owned all the land and you had to pay him to keep the use of it.

            So you don’t believe people actually own property but that it actually belongs to the state which can charge people for the use of it?

    • Except that in rent controlled areas, the renter doesn’t OWN the property. Your comment is one of the more obnoxiously ignorant that I’ve read recently.

      • yeah… the only thing ridiculous is that the government forces the landlord to rent at a capped amount. Total BS.I cant believe people can accept the idea that a landlord should continue a lease with tenants not named on a lease and whom they did not approve entering into an agreement with. These outlandish ideas are based way to much on “emotional fairness” driven by sympathy and other touchy feely words. Sad

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>