Transfer Tax and the City
On April 12, 2019, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed New York's 2019-2020 budget into law. One section of the new law will increase the transfer tax rates that apply to real estate transactions in New York City. The new transfer tax rates are effective for property transfers on or after July 1, 2019.
June 21, 2019 at 01:20 PM
10 minute read
On April 12, 2019, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed New York's 2019-2020 budget into law. One section of the new law will increase the transfer tax rates that apply to real estate transactions in New York City. The combined New York State and New York City transfer tax rates may approach 6% of the sales price for some residential transactions.
The new transfer tax rates are effective for property transfers on or after July 1, 2019. There is a limited grandfathering rule that exempts transfers made pursuant to a binding written contract entered into before or on April 1, 2019, provided that the contract's execution date is confirmed by a recording of the contract, payment of a deposit, or other independent evidence.
Introduction
New York State (NYS) and New York City (NYC) both impose transfer taxes on real estate transactions. Before the new law, there were three different transfer taxes on transactions of “residential real property,” which generally includes a one-, two-, or three-family house, an individual condominium unit, or a cooperative apartment unit. Multifamily properties with four or more units are considered non-residential real properties and are subject to different tax rates discussed below.
The three transfer taxes for residential real property under prior law were:
(1) The NYS transfer tax of 0.4% of the total consideration for NYS property,
(2) The NYS additional transfer tax (sometimes called the “mansion tax”) of 1.0%, if the consideration is $1 million or more for NYS property, and
(3) The NYC transfer tax of 1.0% for consideration of $500,000 or less, or 1.425% if the consideration is more than $500,000, for NYC property.
As a result, for NYC residential real properties, the tax rates under prior law for different levels of consideration were as indicated in Chart 1:
CHART 1 | ||||
Consideration | NYC Transfer Tax (paid by seller) | NYS Transfer Tax (paid by seller) | NYS Mansion Tax (paid by buyer) | Total Transfer Taxes |
Up to $500,000 | 1.0% | 0.40% | 0% | 1.40% |
$500,000.01 to $999,999.99 | 1.425% | 0.40% | 0% | 1.825% |
$1,000,000 or more | 1.425% | 0.40% | 1.0% | 2.825% |
The consideration is generally the gross sales price of the residential real property, though sometimes reduced by any continuing mortgages on the property. The NYS and NYC transfer taxes are legally imposed on the seller, while the NYS mansion tax is legally imposed on the buyer; there is sometimes joint and several liability on the other party if the tax is not paid. The tax incidence is factored into the price as a practical matter, and some residential condominium transactions require the buyer to pay all taxes.
Example 1: Miranda has a growing family and decides to move to Brooklyn, so she purchases a brownstone for $5 million. The total NYS and NYC transfer taxes are $141,250 (2.825%), of which $91,250 (1.825%) is paid by the seller and $50,000 (1.0%) is paid by Miranda.
New York State's new law made two changes that effectively apply only to properties in New York City. First, the NYS transfer tax is increased from 0.4% to 0.65% for any transfer of NYC residential real property with $3 million or more of consideration, or any transfer of other NYC real property with $2 million or more of consideration.
Second, a new NYS supplemental transfer tax is imposed on any transfer of NYC residential real property with consideration of $2 million or more, at increasingly higher rates. The NYS supplemental transfer tax is imposed on the buyer, like the NYS mansion tax. As a result, for NYC residential real properties, the tax rates for different levels of consideration under the new law are as indicated in Chart 2:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUnit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Judgment of Partition and Sale Vacated for Failure To Comply With Heirs Act: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Trending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250