Does New York City have a public wealth tax

1. What people mean by “wealth tax” — and why the distinction matters

The phrase “wealth tax” is used loosely in current coverage: some commentators mean an extra city income surcharge aimed at the richest residents (a proposed 2 percentage-point hike on incomes above $1 million that Mayor Zohran Mamdani has campaigned on), while others mean a true tax on net wealth or unrealized gains like the mark‑to‑market proposals advanced in state legislation ^{[6] [5] [3]}. Those are fundamentally different fiscal tools — an income surcharge taxes realized income and requires state approval for a city to enact, whereas a mark‑to‑market wealth tax would directly target annual gains in assets and would be a new form of base and administration ^{[7] [3]}.

2. The current legal and political landscape: city limits, state power

New York City cannot unilaterally impose new local income taxes or a new wealth tax without action in Albany; most of the coverage emphasizes that any city-level income surcharge or novel tax would need state authorization and legislative votes ^{[7] [8]}. Meanwhile the state has already extended temporary high-income surcharges enacted in 2022 through a later budget action, meaning high earners in the city already face substantial non‑federal tax rates without a separate “wealth tax” ^{[2] [7] [1]}.

3. What proposals exist and who backs or opposes them

Mayor Mamdani’s plan includes a flat 2% city surcharge on New Yorkers earning more than $1 million and an increase in the state corporate tax, framed as a way to raise billions for services; his campaign estimates the millionaire surcharge could hit roughly 34,000 households and raise large sums for childcare, transit and housing ^{[6] [5]}. Separately, state bills — including a mark‑to‑market proposal drafted in the Senate — would tax unrealized asset gains for the very wealthiest and have been floated as a way to capture gains that escape ordinary income tax ^[3]. Supporters argue these measures are popular with voters and necessary to stabilize municipal finances ^{[9] [10]}, while opponents — business groups and some policy analysts — warn of capital flight, damage to the city’s tax base and administrative complexity ^{[11] [2] [12]}.

4. What’s actually being collected today

Today’s reality is that New Yorkers at the top already face some of the nation’s highest combined city‑and‑state income tax bills because of state surcharges and the city’s top income rate; those combined rates, not a standalone wealth levy, are the immediate source of revenue from high-income New Yorkers ^{[1] [11]}. Reporting repeatedly distinguishes between increasing an existing income tax rate (a familiar levy that affects realized income) and creating a distinct wealth tax that would assess net worth or unrealized gains — only the former is functionally in play for city policy without new state action ^{[13] [7]}.

5. Bottom line and open questions

The bottom line: New York City does not currently impose a municipal wealth tax in the sense of a recurring levy on residents’ net wealth or unrealized asset gains; what exists is high income taxation and state surcharges, and proposals — whether a city millionaire surcharge or a state-level mark‑to‑market tax — remain politically contested and legally contingent on Albany or new legislation ^{[1] [3] [7]}. Reporting does not yet show implementation of a city-run wealth tax, and critical unknowns remain about enforcement, revenue durability and whether higher rates would prompt migration or deliver projected revenues ^{[6] [2] [8]}.