• About
    • What Should I Read to Understand Zoning?
  • Market Urbanism Podcast
  • Adam Hengels
  • Stephen Smith
  • Emily Hamilton
  • Jeff Fong
  • Nolan Gray
  • Contact

Market Urbanism

Liberalizing cities | From the bottom up

“Market Urbanism” refers to the synthesis of classical liberal economics and ethics (market), with an appreciation of the urban way of life and its benefits to society (urbanism). We advocate for the emergence of bottom up solutions to urban issues, as opposed to ones imposed from the top down.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Podcast
  • Economics
  • housing
  • planning
  • Transportation
  • zoning
  • Urban[ism] Legends
  • How to Fight Gentrification
  • Culture of Congestion by Sandy Ikeda
  • What Should I Read to Understand Zoning?

The “Foreign Buyers” Argument

March 8, 2017 By Michael Lewyn

A common argument against new housing supply is that in high-cost cities such as New York, demand from foreign buyers is so overwhelming as to make new supply irrelevant.  A recent study (available here) by two business school professors suggests otherwise.  The study does show more foreign involvement in the NYC market than I expected: just over 13 percent of Manhattan buyers, and 5 percent of all regional buyers, come from outside metropolitan New York.  Even this share is less than in some lower-cost markets: the study notes that 17 percent of Las Vegas buyers are from outside the city.

However, the impact of “out of town” buyers is pretty small:  the authors conclude that out-of-town buyers “cause an increase in house prices of 1.1% and an 39 increase in rents by 1.6% in both zones.”

Tweet

Share this:

  • Email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: housing, Michael Lewyn, Policy Tagged With: new york, prices

Comments

  1. RalphUNC says

    March 11, 2017 at 10:33 am

    Aren’t foreign buyers a great asset for a city, particularly ones who never set foot in the property?

    I ask this because it seems like they are paying significant amounts of property taxes (especially if they are non-owner occupied) while using little to no public services (schools, roads, ambulances, etc.)

    It seems like a city would want lots of these buyers so they could funnel the surplus of property taxes into affordable housing for others.

  2. Stephen W. Houghton says

    March 13, 2017 at 4:11 pm

    You would think so yes.

  3. Michael Lewyn says

    March 16, 2017 at 1:22 pm

    But (in a high-demand city) wouldn’t natives be buying the same units and paying the same property taxes instead?

  4. RalphUNC says

    March 17, 2017 at 12:43 pm

    Yes, local residents would likely buy the same units. However, I believe most cities charge higher taxes if you are not using the property for your primary residence. (I believe DC allows owner-occupants to reduce your assessed property value by $30k or so that gives them lower property taxes).

    More importantly, local residents would be using city services. They’d likely be driving on the roads, using the library, taking up street parking spots, taxing the water/sewage/electric systems, possibly using police/fire/hospital resources. A foreign absentee buyer would be paying either the same or higher property tax, but not utilizing any city services. This seems to me to be a great way for cities to earn a surplus that they could use to subdize city services or housing for low-income residents.

  5. hcat says

    March 23, 2017 at 1:58 pm

    I’ve often thought about beach communities, for example, that they’ll never be all that affordable no matter how much housing you put in – five miles inland, another matter.

Trackbacks

  1. Market Urbanism MUsings March 24, 2017 says:
    March 24, 2017 at 6:01 pm

    […] The “Foreign Buyers” Argument […]

Market Urbanism Podcast

Connect With Us

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Recent Posts

  • Unpacking Emergent Tokyo with author Jorge Almazán
  • Book Review: The Making of Urban Japan
  • Review: Homelessness is a Housing Problem
  • Land Value Taxation and Intertemporal Tradeoffs
  • Entrepreneurs and the Changing Political Economy of Housing
  • Protecting Housing Affordability by Protecting the Right to Build Housing
  • Reasons to be a Census skeptic
  • Are there places in America with diversity *and* equality?
  • Do HOAs justify zoning?
  • California should indeed build new cities – but don’t let Nathan J. Robinson anywhere near them
  • Houston Impressions
  • Where investors invest
My Tweets

Market Sites Urbanists should check out

  • Cafe Hayek
  • Culture of Congestion
  • Environmental and Urban Economics
  • Foundation for Economic Education
  • Let A Thousand Nations Bloom
  • Marginal Revolution
  • Mike Munger | Kids Prefer Cheese
  • Neighborhood Effects
  • New Urbs
  • NYU Stern Urbanization Project
  • Parafin
  • Peter Gordon's Blog
  • Propmodo
  • The Beacon
  • ThinkMarkets

Urbanism Sites capitalists should check out

  • Austin Contrarian
  • City Comforts
  • City Notes | Daniel Kay Hertz
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Emergent Urbanism
  • Granola Shotgun
  • Old Urbanist
  • Pedestrian Observations
  • Planetizen Radar
  • Reinventing Parking
  • streetsblog
  • Strong Towns
  • Systemic Failure
  • The Micro Maker
  • The Urbanophile

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2022 Market Urbanism

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.