Submitted by NotYourCity t3_10jcyp5 in nyc
mowotlarx t1_j5jm3z9 wrote
How does this help small businesses when landlords and real estate companies refuse to lower commercial rent allowing businesses to have storefronts? Or even rent office space at reasonable prices? Part of the reason they struggle in this city is the batshit insane rents they're being charged.
Law-of-Poe t1_j5jo4ej wrote
To me, the only logical way for them to lower rent is by letting their properties sit empty and generate no revenue when no one can or will pay their exorbitant rents.
But the fact that they can write off empty properties as losses on their taxes is what really gets me. That provision should be eliminated.
Pool_Shark t1_j5jupnd wrote
Yeah it needs to be the opposite. A vacancy tax would help incentivize keeping small business rather than keeping stores empty in hopes a bank or a chain will pay ridiculous rent prices.
Just set up some provisions so it can be waived during a recession or if a certain area is struggling, etc.
Law-of-Poe t1_j5jxrcn wrote
Or that. I can sympathize with property owners that are falling on legitimately hard times and can’t rent out.
But it is so blatantly obvious that many are gaming the system by writing off imaginary losses on the hopes of hooking a big money tenant. This kind of manipulation should not be tolerated
djdjddhdhdh t1_j5jpyoo wrote
Well the write really depends on what is being written off. AFAIK you still have to pay property taxes on empty properties. But you don’t pay income taxes, since there is no income, and you can transfer loss for certain amount of yers. We can’t particularly charge taxes on income that doesn’t exist, but loss write down could probably be discussed, but will be a difficult implementation
NetQuarterLatte t1_j5jsmnt wrote
A lot of those commercial properties have mortgages that require them to be rented at prices that are out of line with the current market.
So it’s really the landlord sucking it up and paying a mortgage on something that is not generating revenue and hoping the economy gets better.
If they are right, the economy will get better and someone will rent them. But if they are wrong, they will go bankrupt and the property will be taken over by the banks, who won’t be forced to ask the unrealistic rents anymore.
The problem is that both scenarios can take a long time to resolve.
Until then, the city could at least require those business properties to not be an eye sore showing disrepair, with trash accumulating on the side walk, etc.
Pool_Shark t1_j5juyu0 wrote
This is the other problem, but shouldn’t that only be an issue for newer buildings?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments