Pittsburgh tried to levy a tax* in 2014 which was going to cost landlords $65/unit/year in order to register the owner of every unit. That means if you own a building with three units, you will have to register with the city your contact information three separate times for $195 a year. Every year. Forever. They failed, but they're trying to do it again this year.
There was a bit of a backlash last year when the Pittsburgh City Council held a video-recorded hearing believing they could smooth-talk mom-and-pop landlords, many of whom were my clients (and a few were opposing parties, but on that date, we were truly all brothers in arms), into forking over $65/unit/year, forever. The city's claim was the stated good intention of neighborhood revitalization, so that they can somehow better enforce safety violations, etc. etc. They also tried to guilt trip (?) attendees by saying that it's the cool thing to do -- who wouldn't want to join Philadelphia, Allentown, Erie and Monroeville in enacting a rental property registration program?
This claim really insults one's intelligence, if said person's IQ is above room temperature, to know that a $65 registration program will do nothing of the sort.
Governments already have police and eminent domain powers and code inspectors and police officers and attorney solicitors and other assorted bureaucrats at their disposal; whether they choose to enforce code is really a matter of bureaucratic inertia. And so the Pittsburgh City Council and Mayor, recognizing this issue of governmental incompetence, decided that the thing to do was to make landlords pay a $65/unit/year tax, and voilà! Problem solved.**
When I mentioned earlier there was a bit of a backlash at the Pittsburgh City Council hearing last year on this matter, I meant overwhelming opposition, considering that the city council hearing was standing-room-only in the city council chamber with a heavy police presence. Dozens of people, yours truly included, were granted exactly 3 minutes each to voice their opinion. The whole hearing took more than 3 hours. You do the math.
Alas, this year, the City of Pittsburgh's dastardly tax on apartment units has been resurrected in the Mayor's 2016 proposed budget (the shameful mention of which was buried on page 59 in a wall of text).
If you are a landlord who does not like giving the City of Pittsburgh $65/unit/year forever for no obvious benefit except to see the grins on Pittsburgh's elected officials' faces, then do keep an eye on this, and be prepared to show up in person this year to let our elected officials know what your feelings are on this issue.
*The more vulpine politicians, bless their hearts, have found a better way to coat money-grabbing by calling such acts a "fee" or some other euphemism, e.g. the Mt. Lebanon "Stormwater Fee", although they retain the option of calling something a "tax" when it suits their fancy, a la Affordable Care Act/Obamacare "fine"; see also this editorial for a more nuanced explanation on the wordplay.
**Never mind that there are many more non-rental property owners whose properties are quite dilapidated, including -- but then if you try to make everyone pay a "registration fee", then everyone will not be happy about this new and improved property tax.
This claim really insults one's intelligence, if said person's IQ is above room temperature, to know that a $65 registration program will do nothing of the sort.
Governments already have police and eminent domain powers and code inspectors and police officers and attorney solicitors and other assorted bureaucrats at their disposal; whether they choose to enforce code is really a matter of bureaucratic inertia. And so the Pittsburgh City Council and Mayor, recognizing this issue of governmental incompetence, decided that the thing to do was to make landlords pay a $65/unit/year tax, and voilà! Problem solved.**
When I mentioned earlier there was a bit of a backlash at the Pittsburgh City Council hearing last year on this matter, I meant overwhelming opposition, considering that the city council hearing was standing-room-only in the city council chamber with a heavy police presence. Dozens of people, yours truly included, were granted exactly 3 minutes each to voice their opinion. The whole hearing took more than 3 hours. You do the math.
Alas, this year, the City of Pittsburgh's dastardly tax on apartment units has been resurrected in the Mayor's 2016 proposed budget (the shameful mention of which was buried on page 59 in a wall of text).
If you are a landlord who does not like giving the City of Pittsburgh $65/unit/year forever for no obvious benefit except to see the grins on Pittsburgh's elected officials' faces, then do keep an eye on this, and be prepared to show up in person this year to let our elected officials know what your feelings are on this issue.
*The more vulpine politicians, bless their hearts, have found a better way to coat money-grabbing by calling such acts a "fee" or some other euphemism, e.g. the Mt. Lebanon "Stormwater Fee", although they retain the option of calling something a "tax" when it suits their fancy, a la Affordable Care Act/Obamacare "fine"; see also this editorial for a more nuanced explanation on the wordplay.
**Never mind that there are many more non-rental property owners whose properties are quite dilapidated, including -- but then if you try to make everyone pay a "registration fee", then everyone will not be happy about this new and improved property tax.
RSS Feed
