Rhode Island’s Taylor Swift tax is to hit her and her rich neighbors with six-digit bills

Rhode Island weighs a proposal that could be achieved by the Pop Taylor Swift, and dozens of its rich neighbors, with a six -digit tax bill to leave their mostly unemployed coastal mansions.

The so -called “Taylor Swift tax”, an unofficial moniker for a proposed surcharge on luxury properties not used as a primary residence, would charge major annual rates in the second homes valued by more than $ 1 million.

The Swift estate in Watch Hill, valued at about $ 17 million, could be subjected to an additional $ 136,000 in taxes each year if the measure is approved, according to Realtor.com.

Rhode Island legislators are pressing a new tax aimed at the second luxury houses: the “Taylor Swift Tax” is nicknamed after the pop star, which has $ 17 million, Hill Hill Hill Hill’s mansion would be among the worst affected. © Ryan Turgeon // Splash News/Corbis
The proposal would impose a surcharge on non -primary residences with more than $ 1 million, charging $ 2.50 for every $ 500 above this threshold. DEMERZEL21 – Stock.adobe.com

Although the legislation does not solve the name Swift, its high profile ownership has put it in the spotlight of a wider debate through the enclave in the New England elite Sea.

The initiative, which formally refers to budgetary documents such as a “property tax not occupied by owners”, is part of a growing effort of legislators to deal with the accessibility of housing in the oceanic state, taking advantage of the richness of seasonal residents.

In the heart of the proposal there is a simple formula: the properties valued in more than $ 1 million that are not used as a primary residence will face a surcharge of $ 2.50 for $ 500 valuables evaluated beyond the first million.

Taylor Swift saw in his Rhode Island house. Taylor Swift/Instagram

This rapidly adds high -end houses to coastal cities such as Westerly and Newport, where property values ​​have increased in recent years, partly due to out -of -state buyers and short -term rental demand.

The legislators who support the measure argue that absent property contributes to the scarcity of homes and erodes the life of the community. They say that many luxury homes are vacant for much of the year, while local workers and families are struggling to find affordable homes.

Supporters believe that the tax could help balance this equation.

By imposing a cost to keep houses empty, they hope to encourage owners to spend more time on their homes or open them to tenants, both who would inject life and possibly revenue, to quiet communities outside the season. The revenue generated will be intended for housing initiatives.

For Swift this could mean additional $ 136,000 a year. Richard Beetham / Splashnews.com
Supporters say the tax would help finance affordable housing and promote employment throughout the year in coastal cities dominated by seasonal owners. DEMERZEL21 – Stock.adobe.com

The opponents, however, warn of unwanted consequences.

Realtors and property owners of a long time warn that the measure could dissuade investment, depress the values ​​of the home and even press multigenerational families to sell dear beach homes for decades.

They argue that politics emits a network too wide, penalizing not only speculative investors, but also those with deep roots in the state.

Critics, including real estate professionals and a long time, argue that the high -end market could refrigerate and harm local economies. Jonbilous – Stock.adobe.com
The proposal reflects the increasing tensions between full-time residents and part-time homeowners, with a July 2026 period for owners affected to pay, move or rent them. Noah Hansionton/Wirestock Creators – Stock.adobe.com

The debate on the bill has developed clear lines between legislators and real estate professionals, full -time residents and part -time neighbors. Although some consider the measure as a necessary corrective for a distorted housing market, others see it as a gaze play that could harm local property rights and economies.

If approved, the law would not come into force immediately. The owners of housing would have until July 2026 to adjust, demonstrating that they spend at least 183 days a year on the property (the rule of primary residence state) or list their homes as a rent.

#Rhode #Islands #Taylor #Swift #tax #hit #rich #neighbors #sixdigit #bills
Image Source : nypost.com

Leave a Comment