President Trump warned the federal government may try to block New York City’s new pied-à-terre tax after a judge temporarily halted its rollout, arguing the levy risks chasing wealthy residents out and worsening the city’s fiscal and social problems.

The federal probe Trump promised comes after a Staten Island judge issued a temporary restraining order that paused the tax while a legal fight plays out. The pause followed a lawsuit by homeowners who said the city bungled implementation and sent tax notices to people who should never have been flagged.

The pied-à-terre tax is aimed at luxury second homes and hits one-, two-, and three-family properties valued above $5 million, plus condominium and cooperative units worth $1 million or more when the owner’s primary residence is outside New York City. City officials initially estimated the levy could bring in roughly $500 million a year when the plan was unveiled in April.

The legal firestorm flared after the city mailed more than 17,000 incorrect tax notices to homeowners who were not meant to be targeted, turning policy debate into personal panic for thousands. That kind of rollout error handed opponents a potent talking point: if City Hall cannot even send the right notices, how can it be trusted to collect and enforce a complex surcharge?

Trump framed the tax as an economic booby trap that could hollow out the taxpayer base the city depends on. He argued that any short-term revenue gain is dwarfed by the long-term loss if high earners flee permanently to lower-tax states and stop paying income and other taxes that fund public services.

In Tuesday’s post, Trump wrote:

“The NYC Pied-a-Terre Tax is costing New York City and State a fortune in that the money, eventually to be gotten, is very little compared to to the TAXES PAID by the tens of thousands of people who are fleeing the City, never to return.”

Trump followed that with a note about federal options and consequences, saying the White House would look into whether it can step in. He painted the changes as part of a larger pattern pushing wealthy residents toward places like Florida and Texas, where taxes and regulatory burdens are lighter.

He added:

“I am looking to see if the Federal Government has any legal right to avert this disaster, before it is too late, for the millions of people who cherish New York and want to see it thrive, as opposed to becoming a filthy, crime ridden, decrepit place of mockery and scorn.”

Trump also tied the pied-à-terre tax to other local policies such as congestion pricing, saying the combined burden could accelerate departures and undermine the tax base. He used blunt language to describe the city’s approach and said it was hard for him to stand by when he believes policies are destroying a place he once loved.

The mayor’s office defended the levy as a fairness measure meant to make out-of-city owners pay more rather than let elite buyers treat property as anonymous wealth storage. City officials argue the tax targets global elites and absentee owners who they say have been able to avoid contributing their share to the systems they use.

But the broader fiscal plan from the mayor includes much more than the pied-à-terre surcharge, and critics warn the package could push still more people away. The proposed city budget includes plans for higher revenue and tax changes that opponents say raise the overall cost of doing business and living in the city.

At a recent event, Trump publicly criticized the mayor’s agenda, saying those policies chase people out and drive taxes up for everyone else. He has also threatened to withhold federal funding as another lever, though what legal route the administration would take to block a municipal tax remains uncertain.

Governor Hochul pushed back with a direct line aimed at Trump, saying: “It’s about paying your fair share. Donald Trump ought to focus on all the pain he’s causing New Yorkers and knock it off.” That response sidestepped the specific statistical question about whether the tax would net less revenue after accounting for resident flight.

The pied-à-terre tax now sits between courts and political pressure: a trial court put it on hold, an appeals court is considering the case, and the White House has signaled interest in federal involvement. For those thousands who got erroneous notices, this is not theory but a confusing bill and a stress test of City Hall competence.

Whatever comes next, the dispute exposes a wider debate about who bears the burden of funding city services and how aggressive local tax policy should be. When administrative errors combine with sweeping fiscal proposals, the political fallout is swift and the consequences can be long lasting.