Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view
About OCR text.
Net Revenues From Office Buildings Decline
Higher Taxes and Greater Operating Costs Not Fully Covered by
Increased Gross Rentals
DURING the discussions over the terms of the
Boylan bill limiting the tax on real estate which
failed to pass the Legislature, the claim was fre¬
quently made that realty taxes were passed along by
owners to occupants of buildings in the form of rentals,
these being advanced in proportion to the increased
taxes, and that therefore a higher tax rate worked no
disadvantage to the holders of property.
Real estate men have admitted that a certain propor¬
tion of the increased cost of the operation of high-class
buildings has been covered by the advance in rentals
that has taken place in the last year or two. But they
have also contended that the new scale of rents does
not equal the larger operating expense. The Boylan
bill, they have pointed out, was introduced as much for
the benefit of tenants as owners of buildings, because
unless the relief w^as granted it would be necessary to
make further additions to rentals. The burden of the
constantly augmented cost of city operation would,
therefore, unless the bill became law, fall more and more
heavily on the tenants.
Without a fixed tax rate, as provided in the bill, the
probability of higher taxes was sufficiently strong to
justify a promise of higher rents. In the hearings before
Senator Cromwell's Committee on the Affairs of the
City of New York it was freely predicted that unless
the Boylan bill was passed the tax rate next year would
be 20 to 30 points higher than for this year. It was also
universally conceded that it was practically impossible
to reduce or even to materially retard the constantly
increasing cost of running the city government.
Those who opposed any change in the existing system
of taxing realty to cover about ninety per cent, of the
city's budget declared that the burden of taxation did
not fall upon the owners of real estate, but upon the
tenants and that this was the most equitable form of
taxation because it reached the largest possible number
of citizens, many of whom would otherwise escape pay¬
ing any share of the expenses of the city government.
That this phase of the question may be justified to a
certain extent was admitted by real estate men, but it
was emphatically stated that gross rentals had not
begun to keep pace with the great increase in operating
expenses, which included the considerable item of taxes
and insurance, and that it was always impossible to
advance rentals in the same ratio that these expenses
mounted up.
With the object of ascertaining what is the real
situation with respect to these various issues, the Real
Estate Record and Guide has obtained the actual figures
bearing on the question of the relation between oper¬
ating expenses, including taxes and insurance, and the
I rentals which can be obtained. For this purpose the
i managers and owners of ten modern office buildings in
1 the district south of City Hall were induced to give the
I real figures covering these items and these statistics are
I presented to the readers of this newspaper for their
careful consideration.
These figures were secured on the understanding that
the totals only for the ten buildings were to be used, the
classification of items having been arranged so^ as to
cover all the expenses incurred in the operation of
structures of this character. By this arrangement two
things were accomplished—the owners are protected as
to the exact figures relating to any one building, and
the analysis itself made much more valuable as showing
the actual condition of realty, because an average can
be struck which applies generally to office buildings of
high type in the downtown district.
It was essential to the value of this statement that
the buildings should be uniform in character and conse¬
quently only office structures of the first class were
included in the analysis. It was equally important that
the figures should be genuine, and these conditions have
been rigidly adhered to. The buildings are all well
known, and some of them have national reputation, and
the figures have been carried out to dollars and cents.
As the real estate fiscal year ends on May 1, it was
necessary to obtain figures for eleven months, to March
31, and for the comparative period of eleven months of
the previous year.
The comparison of the gross and net returns on these
buildings shows conclusively that the owners did not
receive as large net income on their investments during
the eleven months ending March 31 last as they did for
a similar period of time in 1917. The cause for the great
increases in operating expenses are shown in the accom¬
panying table. Of these, the increase in taxes was con¬
tributory, but the full effect of the high tax rate now in
force will be felt this year. Only three months of the
time for which the figures are taken were affected by
the new and increased rate.
The gross rents for the ten buildings for the period
ending March 31, 1918, were $6,287,804.30, and for the
corresponding months in 1917 were $5,970,323.34, show¬
ing an advance in gross rentals of $317,480.06, or 5.32
per cent, increase.
The operating expenses were $1,801,533.80 in 1918 and
$1,403,522.00 in 1917, the gain being $398,011.80 or 28.4
per cent, increase. Fixed charges (taxes and insurance)
for 1918 were $1,156,242.20, and for 1917 were
$1,120,058.94, the addition to this item being $36,183.26,
a gain of 3.23 per cent.
These figures might be considered fairly satisfactory,
unless the comparison between the two years is worked
out. Deducting the total operating expenses, including
taxes and insurance, from the gross rentals it is found
that the net rentals for 1918 were $3,330,028.30, and for
1917 were $3,446,742.40, showing a loss in net of
$116,714.10, or 3.38 per cent.
With gross rentals increasing this year 5.32 per cent.
over last, the net rentals actually decreased 3.38 per
cent., which the owners of the buildings say is sufficient
evidence that conditions are very unsatisfactory. There
are several other unfavorable factors to be taken into
consideration.
Building managers of many years' experience state
that a safe estimate of operating cost for a modern
building should be based upon 18 per cent, of the gross
rents, with the building 85 per cent, rented. This year,
as the statistics compiled show, the operating costs have
amounted to as high as 30 per cent, in some cases, or
within from 6 per cent, to 10 per cent, of what operating
expenses and taxes and insurance combined used to cost.
What is equally important is that the figures pre¬
sented are made up for the 1918 period to include eight
months' taxes at the former rate of $2.02 per thousand,
and only three months, since January 1, at the new rate