Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9585

Bill Overview

Title: American Property Act

Description: This bill imposes an excise tax on foreign persons who own any specified under-utilized residential real property for more than one-half of any taxable year. The amount of such tax is 1% of the estimated value of such property. The bill defines specified under-utilized residential real property as any specified residential property located in the United States that is occupied as a dwelling unit for less than 180 days during the taxable year. Specified residential property means a single-family home or structure consisting of four residential units or less, or a part of a building that is a semi-detached house, rowhouse unit, residential condominium unit or other similar premises that is, or is intended to be, a separate parcel or other division of real property, and includes any land that was conveyed with such home, structure, or building.

Sponsors: Rep. Jacobs, Chris [R-NY-27]

Target Audience

Population: foreign persons owning under-utilized residential properties in the U.S.

Estimated Size: 50000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

real estate agent (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might reduce demand from foreign investors causing property values to stabilize.
  • I think this might encourage local ownership, but could affect my commissions initially.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

property manager (Miami, FL)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy will make my job harder as foreign owners may sell properties.
  • It could lead to fewer contracts in the short-term but might stabilize the neighborhood.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 7 4

retired investment banker (New York, NY)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I would rather sell my under-utilized condo to avoid this tax.
  • I suppose this might increase local housing availability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 7 9
Year 10 7 9
Year 20 8 9

small business owner (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might result in more housing availability and stable rents.
  • Lower property values could make buying a home more feasible for me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 6

real estate investor (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 55 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could present opportunities to buy properties as foreign owners sell off unprofitable assets.
  • Long-term, the market might stabilize but immediate impacts are uncertain.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 9
Year 5 9 9
Year 10 10 9
Year 20 10 9

software developer (Austin, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy encourages better community dynamics, I'm in favor.
  • Temporary market fluctuations might be stressful, but stability is good.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 5

university professor (Boston, MA)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy seems to tackle inefficiencies in the housing market caused by absentee ownership.
  • Urban communities could see improvements in social cohesion.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

retired engineer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 65 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy complicates my retirement planning as my property usage is affected.
  • It might prompt me to restructure or sell my property.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

urban planner (Seattle, WA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could lead to positive changes in community utilization of spaces.
  • Economic volatility in the housing market is a potential risk.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

graduate student (Dallas, TX)

Age: 26 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might indirectly lead to more affordable housing in my area.
  • If international students face more housing availability, it would ease off-campus living constraints.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $30600000, High: $71400000)

Year 3: $52020000 (Low: $31212000, High: $72828000)

Year 5: $54080000 (Low: $32448000, High: $75712000)

Year 10: $58320000 (Low: $34992000, High: $81568000)

Year 100: $140020000 (Low: $84012000, High: $196028000)

Key Considerations