A New York judge has put a temporary halt to Mayor Zohran Mamdani's controversial pied-à-terre tax rollout, ordering the city to remove a list that identified over 900,000 New York City homeowners, along with their addresses and property values. The decision by Judge Wayne Ozzi temporarily restrains the administration from proceeding with the disputed property roll or mailed notices and bars the city from enforcing looming deadlines.
The order also prevents the city from imposing, assessing, or collecting the surcharge without first making individualized determinations and providing the notice required by state tax law. The lawsuit was filed by three homeowners who are not challenging the legality of the tax itself, but rather the method of its implementation.
Attorney Randy Mastro, representing the homeowners, argued that the city mishandled the rollout by publishing a broad property roll and sending notices before verifying whether properties qualified as non-primary residences. He contended that the city should have borne the burden of making these initial determinations. "The city screwed this up… got it wrong… stop the train and make them do it over," Mastro told the court.
Mastro described the publication of homeowners' information as a "doxxing" that caused confusion and backlash, stating, "This is ludicrous. It is not right." He added that the city allegedly sent letters to thousands of individuals who occupy their own homes and should not have been subjected to the surcharge.
Lawyers for the city defended the rollout, arguing that freezing the process would negatively impact taxpayers seeking exemptions and disrupt deadlines. However, Judge Ozzi found that the notices caused irreparable harm and that the city had failed to conduct due diligence. The judge noted that while he could not undo notices already sent, he could prevent further mistakes.
Mamdani's administration expressed disagreement with the ruling and vowed to appeal, stating confidence in the pied-à-terre surcharge and the city's ability to implement it. "This surcharge asks those who own second homes valued at $5 million or more to contribute their fair share to the city they benefit from," said Matt Rauschenbach, a spokesperson for the mayor. The administration intends to continue with the surcharge's implementation.
Mamdani had previously criticized legal challenges from Mastro and expressed confidence in the surcharge's legality, asserting that the revenue generated from second homes valued over $5 million would fund essential city services. He acknowledged that "with any new tax, there are more questions than there are answers" but maintained that only about 17,000 homeowners out of 8.5 million residents are potentially affected.
Oral arguments on the merits of the case are scheduled for August 31. The legal fight is proceeding rapidly, with the court ordering the defense to submit its order to show cause by August 24 and plaintiffs' replies due August 27.