Austin MSA vs SFBA and TX vs CA

Austin

Price rises 69%
Rent rises 21.9%
Property tax rises 69%
So don’t expect rent to decline with price declines. Rent would continue to increase.

1 Like

Kyle Bass Wants to Turn Texas Into Its Own Asset Class

The hedge fund manager who scored big gains against US housing has spent $90 million buying undeveloped property in the Lone Star State.

  1. Affordability
    DT Austin and West Lake Hills are not that cheap.

  2. Intense heat
    Not suitable for people born in a temperate climate or dislike hot and humid.

  3. Red state
    Sorry, democrats.

  4. Increased homeless and crimes
    Avoid city of Austin. Live in suburbs.

  5. Increased Californification!
    :sob:

:smiling_imp:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-07/a-text-alert-may-have-saved-california-from-power-blackouts?fbclid=IwAR1uBR8KeNUkivEn_hrYwfklvvy3zdK-VaqInt7qeoh57vhNQKECgF0HMxI

The San Francisco Chronicle shed some light on that phenomenon when one of its reporters dove into Internal Revenue Service data that revealed favorite destinations of high-income former San Franciscans.

The newspaper found that 39,000 San Franciscans who had filed federal tax returns for 2018 had moved out of the city before filing 2019 returns. Collectively, they took $10.6 billion in income with them while people who moved to the city during that period reported just $3.8 billion in income.

California’s top income tax rate, 13.3% on taxable incomes over $1 million, is by far the nation’s highest and when added to the top federal rate of 37% pushes the overall bite to more than 50%.

If anything, California’s taxes on the wealthy are likely to increase. Proposition 30, a measure on the November ballot, would boost the top marginal rate to over 15%, raising money for programs to battle climate change, and another tax hike is headed for the 2024 ballot.

Income taxes account for three-quarters of California’s general fund revenues and the top 1% of California taxpayers generate nearly half of those taxes.

That’s just 150,000 taxpayers in a state of 40 million, so even a trickle of departures has a potentially huge impact on the budget.

Recent visits to new construction in Austin, met many Indian couples from California.
House prices $550k-$700k, so these Californians should be able to buy in cash.

I didn’t realize California is trying to increase the top rate even more. That’s the obviously solution to losing tax revenue from high income people leaving. Increase the taxes on the remaining ones. Remember when the 13% rate was considered temporary?

“ However, they are vitally important to California’s schools, health care and myriad other public services. Income taxes account for three-quarters of California’s general fund revenues and the top 1% of California taxpayers generate nearly half of those taxes.”

Talk about a top heavy income tax system…

I’m sure Wyoming is just thrilled.

Now that the ultra rich are moving, the landlords who rent out their multi house portfolio can pay for the salaries in Milipitas schools :wink:

Now the rich will spend their money in Wyoming,NV,Utah, while the people who moved in to CA/SF with 1/3 the income as compared people who moved out will demand more support from the govt. CA govt will have to raise more revenues(read taxes) to fulfill their aspirations. Of course they can’t directly tax the poor, so the poor will be taxed indirectly, while the rich will be taxed directly(to send a message- We stand with the downtrodden). Problem is the equation does not balance, you can’t have more to spend when you have less revenues.

1 Like

.

Tax companies more.

  1. Headcount tax regardless where they stay i.e including those out-of-state.
  2. Tax based on revenue of companies.

If this happens disproportionately as compared to other states, the Golden goose will fly away, so effectively the golden goose will be killed for CA, while new gold gooses will appear for other states.

I’ve been thinking about this and how it relates to startup funding data. Lately, I know multiple people who switched to SF based startups and don’t live in SF. The startups aren’t requiring people to relocate anymore. So yes, the HQ is SF, and reporting shows it as SF raising VC money. However, when there’s an exit the winnings will be scattered all over the place. They won’t all be in SF driving the local economy and home prices. That’s a game changer.

2 Likes

.

You just broke @manch SF permabull thesis.

2 Likes

Now CA can’t even keep its cows.

2 Likes