Issue 122 - Foreign Demand Re-Emerges as Luxury Buyers Underwrite Political Risk

450 East 52nd Street 11FLDP

1001 Fifth Avenue 110C

260 Park Avenue South 10I

155 West 68th Street 1203

536 2nd Street GARDEN

53 West 53rd Street 24D

53 West 53rd Street #38C

53 West 53rd Street #PH78

320 East 42nd St 2403

1593 Deerfield Road

136 East 56th Street 8H

51 Crosby Street 3

445 Lafayette 110C

53 West 53rd Street #30B

53 West 53rd Street #66

53 West 53rd Street #72B

53 West 53rd Street #21A

53 West 53rd Street #53A

53 West 53rd Street #17B

53 W 53rd St #PH76

53 West 53rd Street #71

53 West 53rd Street #20B

53 West 53rd Street #16F

Issue 122 – Foreign Demand Re-Emerges as Luxury Buyers Underwrite Political Risk

June 1, 2026

As we head into summer, we are seeing a very notable resurgence of international buyers entering the New York market — and frankly, in a way we haven’t seen in years.

Let’s explore why.

Historically, global capital gravitates toward stability, discretion, and internationally recognized assets. In New York City, that typically translates to park-facing residences, trophy properties, and globally recognizable “name-brand” buildings. These include Aman, Four Seasons, Related developments, and legacy Park Avenue or Central Park South product with strong service infrastructure and long-term value preservation.

Right now, buyers are looking for quality, security, and assets that feel insulated in uncertain times. NYC, despite all the headlines, remains a strong, long-term store of value internationally.

When there is instability abroad, New York City benefits. It offers legal transparency, deep liquidity, world-class education, finance, culture, and healthcare — and a real estate market that, while imperfect, is still well understood around the world.

What’s different now is that buyers are not necessarily purchasing because they think New York is “hot.” They are buying because New York is established. That is an important distinction: the capital is less speculative and more preservation-oriented. For many international families, a New York apartment is part lifestyle asset, part hedge, part legacy planning.

The headlines about wealthy buyers fleeing New York City are often too simplistic. Yes, some buyers have moved capital to Florida, Texas, or other lower-tax markets. But that does not mean New York has lost its global relevance.

The newly announced pied-a-terre/second-home tax in New York targets luxury second homes valued at $5 million or more, with the goal of creating an annual surcharge on non-primary residences. This proposal is certainly something international buyers are paying attention to, though it remains to be seen if this will impact continued investment. Rather than eliminating foreign demand, the tax likely makes buyers more selective, becoming part of the broader cost-of-ownership analysis alongside the mansion tax, carrying costs, and currency exposure. It may create pause around marginal purchases, but for a trophy asset, it won’t stop the buyer. It simply raises the bar for what feels worth owning.

The concern is less the dollar amount itself and more the perception. International buyers are highly sensitive to whether a market feels welcoming, predictable, and stable. Policy often moves perception before it moves fundamentals.

We’re consistently seeing foreign buyers generally gravitate toward turnkey product. The appetite for renovation or operational complexity is far lower than it once was. Buyers want ease, service, security, and a property that immediately translates internationally, both from a branding and lifestyle standpoint. For these global buyers, New York remains one of the few carrying both emotional and financial prestige.

Enter: Japanese buyers. The Real Deal recently reported a massive resurgence in Japanese capital, providing a lifeline to aging multifamily walk-ups. “Japan-linked firms have acquired at least $2.1 billion worth of New York City property since the start of 2024, according to analysis by Okada & Company and TRD Data,” the piece details.

This surge is driven by a stark yield gap: With low interest rates at home, Japanese buyers can borrow cheaply in Japan to acquire higher-yielding assets, a strategy supercharged by domestic tax incentives for multi-family purchases.

We are also seeing diversifying residential demand from Australian, Brazilian, Taiwanese, and Western Europe buyers. Eastern European activity is still highly selective compared to prior cycles, but international demand as a whole has undeniably re-entered the market. The usual suspects — such as Central Park South, Tribeca, Billionaire’s Row, and select Downtown properties — remain the primary anchors.

Target price points for these foreign investors vary by country of origin and the purchase’s purpose, with the most active international demand falling into clear segments:.

The serious lifestyle buyer ($3M to $7M): Typically targets a strong two or three bedrooms in a premier building, prioritizing service, security, and an easy lock-and-leave lifestyle.

The wealth-preservation buyer ($7M to $15M+): Focuses heavily on blue-chip locations — Central Park, Fifth Avenue, Park Avenue, Tribeca, Billionaires’ Row — or globally recognized branded residences.

The ultra-high-net-worth buyer: Prioritizes the asset above any price point, focusing on scarcity, pedigree, privacy, views, service, and long-term relevance. They are not asking, “Is this affordable?” They are asking, “Will this matter 10 years from now?”

Today’s foreign buyer is much more disciplined. They want turnkey and certainty. They want building quality, service quality, financial stability, and a residence that translates globally.

The biggest shift is that foreign buyers are not chasing the market — they are underwriting it. They are asking better questions: What are the monthly carrying costs? Who is the resale audience? How strong is the building financially? How liquid is this asset? Does this location hold value in multiple cycles?

Overall, cultural nuance matters more than ever. Buyers are underwriting not just the apartment, but NYC itself.

Five years ago, there was still more appetite for optionality — buyers were more willing to consider renovation, new development premiums, or speculative upside.

On the Japanese side specifically, what I’m noticing is a renewed comfort level with NYC real estate as a legacy asset class. The buyers I’m seeing tend to be highly analytical, long-term focused, and extremely quality-driven. They’re not chasing hype — they’re buying permanence.

The Brazilian and Australian buyers we’re seeing tend to be incredibly lifestyle-oriented while still highly aware of long-term value, whereas many Western European buyers continue to prioritize pedigree buildings, architecture, privacy, and stability. Taiwanese buyers similarly appear very focused on security, quality, and established global positioning.

For foreign investors, New York City still represents something very specific: legal stability, cultural prestige, liquidity, access, education, healthcare, and global identity. The buyers I’m seeing are not ignoring the headlines. They are simply looking past them when the asset is strong enough.

New York is no longer a market where everything trades easily. It is a precision market. But for the right property — the right building, the right view, the right service, the right location — foreign buyers are still very much there.

The common denominator across almost all of them is that they are buying selectively — but decisively — when the product feels globally relevant.

Issue 124 – “The Freeze Heard Across New York”

August 1, 2026

Even those of us who spend most of our days in the world of sales rather than rentals cannot ignore the conversation dominating New York real estate this summer: the city’s newly approved two-year rent freeze on nearly one million rent-stabilized apartments. The decision, fulfilling one of Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s signature campaign promises, has ignited passionate debate from tenants, landlords, developers, and economists alike.

As Time Magazine recently reported, “’Freeze the rent’ became the definitive rallying cry of Mamdani’s affordability-focused mayoral campaign for New York City, one of the most expensive cities in the world. Despite skepticism that he could actually pull it off, a board he controls made good on his pledge just six months into his term.”

In a 7-1 vote this June, the Rent Guidelines Board approved a rent freeze on one- and two-year leases on rent-stabilized apartments — which, according to the Time article, “make up about 27% of overall NYC housing stock.”

For tenants living in stabilized housing, the appeal is obvious. In a city where affordability persists as one of the defining challenges of our time, freezing rents offers immediate relief and greater certainty in an increasingly pricey environment.

Yet, as is so often the case in New York real estate, the story is more nuanced than the headlines suggest.

The New York Post presented the other side of the story, explaining that building owners are grappling with rising operating costs: insurance premiums, labor expenses, property taxes, and capital improvements have all increased substantially.

Critics argue that while the freeze protects tenants in the short term, rising expenses without corresponding rent increases may make it harder, particularly for smaller landlords, to maintain and improve aging buildings.

Rent freezes are not unprecedented. Previous freezes have provided short-term relief for tenants while renewing debates over maintenance, capital improvements, and investment in aging housing stock.

The broader issue is supply. Economists across the political spectrum generally agree that New York’s housing shortage cannot be solved through rent regulation alone. As Vox reported, demand continues to outpace inventory, making new housing production, zoning reform, and development incentives essential.

Although the freeze does not directly affect market-rate apartments, landlords with both stabilized and market-rate units may feel pressure to offset constrained revenue by increasing free-market rents where legally permissible. New York State’s 2024 Good Cause Eviction law, however, limits annual rent increases to the lesser of 10% or the local inflation index.

For buyers, particularly investors considering multifamily assets, the freeze introduces additional uncertainty around future income growth. Buildings with significant rent-stabilized components may trade at lower valuations because purchasers will have to underwrite higher operating costs against stagnant revenue.

For sellers, especially owners of mixed-use or rent-stabilized assets, the challenge becomes demonstrating long-term upside. We may see some owners delay sales, while others bring assets to market sooner out of concern that future regulation could become even more restrictive.

From a residential perspective, one unintended consequence may be increased demand for condominiums and co-ops. When rental policy becomes less predictable, many affluent New Yorkers begin to view ownership as a more stable, controllable alternative.

Foreign investors are unlikely to retreat from purchasing trophy condominiums or prime co-ops, which operate outside the stabilized system. In fact, increased regulation in the rental market could strengthen the appeal of luxury ownership as a store of wealth.

The greater consequence will be on institutional and international investors exploring multifamily acquisitions, where limits on revenue growth coupled with rising operating expenses may prompt some capital to pause, reprice risk, or seek opportunities elsewhere.

A major concern today is that the economics are more challenging than they were a decade ago. The Rent Guidelines Board’s own data shows that operating expenses continue to rise, with insurance costs increasing by more than 10% and overall operating costs rising by more than 5%. The effects will likely be felt most acutely in neighborhoods with large concentrations of rent-stabilized housing, while luxury condominium markets such as Tribeca, SoHo, and much of the West Village, where condominium and market-rate inventory dominate, will experience relatively little direct change.

New York remains one of the most desirable real estate markets in the world. The larger question is whether future housing policy can strike the right balance between protecting tenants and preserving the incentives necessary to maintain and improve the city’s housing stock. Recent reporting suggests that landlords and tenants alike are increasingly worried about the long-term sustainability of that balance.

Perhaps most interesting is what this moment reveals about New York itself. Housing has become far more than an economic issue—it has become a cultural and political one. The debate over rent stabilization reflects larger questions about who gets to stay in the city, who can afford to enter it, and what balance should exist between protecting existing residents and encouraging future investment.

As someone whose business focuses primarily on the sales market, I often remind clients that New York real estate rarely moves in straight lines. Policy shifts ripple through every corner of the market, shaping rental demand, buyer behavior, and investment strategy alike.

Yet what doesn’t change is New York’s capacity to reinvent itself. The conversation around housing will evolve, administrations will change, and policies will come and go. But the city’s enduring challenge — and opportunity — will always be finding ways to be both livable and aspirational.