The 3.8% Tax Is Not a Real Estate Transfer Tax

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “The 3.8% Tax Is Not a Real Estate Transfer Tax”.

Comments
  1. Good information on video….might want to use mic’s in the future though. It will definitely improve sound quality.

  2. Robert Freedman

    Eric, I appreciate your observation about the audio. We used a boom mic that’s about three feet from the speakers, just out of camera range, and on my computer the audio is great. I can hear it clearly from my external computer speaker on just the first volume notch. On the third volume notch (out of 16 maximum) it’s really loud. So, at least on my computer, I’m not hearing the audio issues. But I’ll see if it’s an issue for other people. Thanks.

  3. Chris Buss

    Am I correct in saying that this is a non-real estate tax on some real estate transactions or would it be better to say that there are some real estate transactions that may be subject to a non-real estate tax?

  4. Robert Freedman

    It would probably be most accurate to say it’s a tax on investment income that could include a small percentage of home sales among some high-income households. Thanks for your question.

  5. Christina

    Bottom Line: If you purchased your home wisely in the New York area and it has appreciated more than $500,000, you WILL pay a tax on the appreciation. This will impact MANY homes in communities near New York City (NY, NJ and CT) and other home markets where even starter homes are priced in the $600-700 thousand range. Of course the real estate associations want to minimize that impact to reduce potentially chilling the markets that they serve. Good luck!

  6. This is the perfect webpage for anybody who wants to understand this topic.
    You realize a whole lot its almost hard to argue with you (not
    that I personally will need to…HaHa). You definitely put a new spin
    on a topic which has been discussed for many years.
    Great stuff, just wonderful!

  7. Great stuff here..
    Thanks for the share

  8. Daniel

    This is a tax. Why don’t we penalize the government when they spend too much money instead of penalizing people when they make too much money. It seems to me that we are penalizing the right behavior and rewarding wrong behavior. Or if a person makes more money than other, why not require them to teach the rest of society starting with the 18 trillion dollars in debt government how to handle money and then a mentorship with the poor to help them become better off by doing things that well off people do. Those with 18 trillion in debt have no business telling successful Americans how to handle money! Why would you ever penalize achievement, Why?

  9. Here is the deal, taxing, no matter how you might try and spin it, is still taxing. The middle class is shrinking, the lower class is expanding, and the rich keep getting richer. Something is really wrong here.

  10. Hi Robert,

    I wanted to touch upon something:

    With the recent election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, we might be seeing a huge change in the way real estate is taxed, both for home owners, and for investors of rental property.

    Regarding your statement about:
    “a 3.8 percent tax on investment income of upper-income households to help shore up Medicare. The tax takes effect in 2013.”

    There is a high probability that this 3.8% tax might disappear, as part of Trump’s tax reduction program.

    As an effort to stimulate the economy without excess money printing, I think elimination of this tax is vital to the success of real estate investors such as myself as well as the economy as a whole, as that 3.8% tax can be considerable.

    Thanks for the NAR Brochure link you provided.

  11. The brochure is immensely helpful! Thank you. Especially with a new president incoming, it’s important to be watching all the new laws related to the profession: tax and otherwise. Forwarding this article to clients as well.

ADD YOUR COMMENT