Replies

From the article: "To further his point, Stewart argued that “money isn’t infinite. A loan that goes to the liar doesn’t go to someone who’s giving a more honest evaluation. So the system becomes incentivized for corruption.”

Except the loan is based upon the bank's appraisal, not the so-call liar's representation and therefore, the "lie" has no impact upon a loan applicant who gives an "honest evaluation."

Also from the article: “The attorney general of New York knew that Trump’s property values were inflated because when it came time to pay taxes, Trump undervalued the very same properties,” Stewart added. “It was all part of a very specific real estate practice known as lying.”

Trump did not undervalue the properties when it came time to pay taxes because the tax assessor -- a public servant -- determines the assessed value for purposes of taxation. In NY (and many other states), assessed value for taxation is rarely the same as a market value market appraisal for loan purposes. (Depending upon a the type or use of the real property, the appraised value for loan purposes may also be based upon the cost to reconstruction less depreciation or capitalization of income.)

Tax assessors simply do not have the time or resources to appraise each and every property on an annual basis and often, the tax assessment is based upon the most recent sale, which could have been years ago. In some municipalities, properties are lumped together based upon use and location, and assigned a value that is a composite of similarly situated properties - but not specific to any particularly property - based upon comparative sales over the previous three years. Many municipalities, assess at less than full market value, which is fine as long as all properties in that class are assessed at the same percentage of full market value. In NYC, for example, properties are assessed for tax purpose at 6% to 45% of market value depending upon the property classification. A single family home with a market value of $1,000,000 would have a taxable value of $60,000, and a multi-unit residential property with a market value of $10,000,000 would have a taxable value of $4,500,000. In addition, some municipalities limit the year-over-year increase in taxable assessed value, and as a result, when market values are rapidly rising the difference between taxable value and market value will grow larger. Using the above example, NYC limits the increase in assessed value for single family residences to 6% per year, not to exceed 20% over five years. Assume that market values increase 50% over five years. In year one, the $1,000,000 single family residence has an assessed value of $60,000. Five years later, the property has a market value of $1,500,000, but the assessed value is capped at $72,000, instead of $90,000 (6% of $1.5 million).

The point of this lesson is that determining assessed values can be complicated and rarely does the assessed value equal anything close to market value, which is why dumb-ass liberal judges and late night talk show hosts should not be opining on things they no nothing about.