(TikTok screencap)

Person in a locker room looking into the camera with the caption “ mamdani made taylor swift pay taxes in nyc and now the budget is balanced and there's universal childcare and this is why "but taylor donates to food pantries" will never be good enough. billionaires not paying their taxes is WHY working class people are reliant on food pantries, dumb dumb.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 141 points 4 months ago* (9 children)

Mamdani making T. Swizzle pay NYC taxes was the reason he balanced the budget? I thought it's because he negotiated with NY state for aid (which, fair game; NYC pays more in taxes than it gets back), delayed the city pension, and is finalizing a pied-à-terre tax.

What meaningful raise on Taylor Swift's taxes has Zohran Mamdani imposed? Did she not pay taxes before? What's the source here?

The real world is allowed to be complicated and messy, and ironically, reducing it to "hurr durr he taxed Taylor Swift" is doing a disservice to what Mamdani actually managed to work out to balance the budget – which is imperfect, but he inherited a $12 billion deficit from a grifter. It's good for what it is.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

    Taylor Swift owns multiple secondary properties in New York City.

    She has amassed a massive real estate footprint on a single block in Tribeca, worth an estimated $50+ million. Her holdings include:

    • ​An 8,000-square-foot duplex penthouse at 155 Franklin Street.
    • ​A second-floor unit in the same building purchased for nearly $10 million.
    • ​An $18 million townhouse right next door at 153 Franklin Street.

    Governor Hochul and Mayor Mamdani finalized a deal to implement a pied-à-terre tax surcharge on luxury secondary residences in NYC.

    The tax starts as a 4% surcharge on the property's value and then there is an annual charge that scales up progressively based on the assessed value.

    Rhode Island passed a similar luxury second-home tax targeting non-resident estates over $1 million, a piece of legislation that the press nicknamed the "Taylor Swift Tax" due to its impact on her $17 million Watch Hill mansion.

    To say that this alone is balancing the budget is an oversimplification (what are hot takes if not reductive) but the tax will have a meaningful impact because she owns a lot of property in NYC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    The tax in its entirety is supposed to bring around 500 million. The NYC budget was 12 billion in the red.

    It's a great start, but suggesting that they managed to balance out the budget thanks to something that handled 1/24th of that deficit is just silly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

    Sure, it is reductive but I also get what the image is referring to and don't think we have to be too literal about it. It's saying the spirit of that tax (ie. taxing the ultra wealthy) is how Mamdani is going about balancing the budget - while invoking a very recognizable billionaire to drive the point home. I read it more as using Taylor Swift as an example rather than insinuating her taxes, or the secondary estate tax in general, would be enough to balance the budget on their own.

    Many hot takes are like this. They're meant to capture your attention, and while they may not be literally true on their own, the good ones have a reasonable conceptual foundation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 79 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The good thing is that she still can donate to food pantries too!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 67 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    Giving the freedom to billionaires to not pay taxes because they donate to charity is so very wrong.

    I don't have the power to decide where my taxes go. They shouldn't either.

    "Who knew non-profit would be so profitable?!"

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Well, they're actually not paying taxes on that portion. So they're effectively getting to use your taxes to to multiply their promotion of whatever the goverment defines as charitable, be it food pantries or religious communities "providing" conversion therapy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 46 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Abso-fucking-lutely.

    Every billionaire is complicit, including your favorite billionaire: The pop star, the superstar athlete, the philanthropist, or the guru who cosplays as middle class. They're all motherfuckers.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    This is why I can't stand to watch professional sports anymore, just some millionaire getting payed by his billionaire owner to play a game so you stay distracted by your bread and circuses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 22 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Why are all the memes now text on top of pictures of randos

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Mamdani made Taylor Swift pay taxes

    False: there's no mention of Taylor Swift in particular. This may be an attempt to create a false conflict between the two.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    It's always weird cuz I donate to Charities and I also already pay taxes. How come they can't do both?

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I'm just looking for a reason to bring the plane memes back

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I knew it was Taylor Swift's fault the whole time. :)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 12 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    He balanced the budget by doing some things right! But an additional 4bn came from the Governor that is trying to get reelected and is sucking up. Don't forget that.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] 12 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    I thought he didn’t adjust taxes? I thought pension funds were used.

    I’m not 100% up to date though so i may just be wrong.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    He suspended pensions contributions, took just over $8bn in state aid funding and exemptions from state regulations, and delayed initiatives such as classroom size reduction. The city also over-estimated the number of employees it would have this year so that was an extra special saving of $1.3bn when expected outgoings were reconciled with the actual number. The actual tax increases he has implemented would “only” be worth $500m.

    Basically it was a one-time thing, and the budget won’t be balanced next year, and the tax increases are nowhere near enough. But it got good press for a couple of days which I suspect was the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Did he figure out a way to tax the billionaires that primarily own assets?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    We desperately need a tax on securities. I don't particularly care about taxing luxury products, because those products are produced by workers, who pay taxes and buy things. But securities are the "means of production".

    Don't tax the dollar value of the security. Don't force them to liquidate their shares before they can pay a tax. Just go ahead and transfer a percentage of their shares of each security to the IRS, who can liquidate it on the open market, slowly over time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    That and a fucked up minimum wage

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    Aaaah she’ll shake it off.

    (Which is a mandamitory remark at this point)

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    What you have to understand is that Taylor Swift paid a very tiny portion of her net worth in taxes. And she probably spends more flying around on her jet then she does in paying taxes.

    Rich people don't pay taxes as a sport not to save money. They just want to be part of that club.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›