Fined by the taxman for slashing property prices

Colin Camilleri

Dec 20th 2011, 08:55

What I find dishonest from this Government is not actually the unrealistic evaluations of its appointed architechts but the double standards it uses to collect more taxes.

So while the Government does not accept the contractual price paid when purchasing a property, it does take it into consideration when selling it, to compute and maximise its due tax...

eg. I buy a property for €100,000 - comes the "beloved" government appointed architecht and declares a value of €120,000. Therefore I have to pay 5% on €120,000 plus the fine.

2 years pass and I sell the property for €130,000.

One would argue that tax due is on the profit, right? and that would be €130,000 - €120,000 (because that is what the architecht declared it and I paid taxes for). But NOOOO..... all wrong!!!!

The government does not recognise his own architechts declaration now, but yours! So you will be charged CGT on the profit between €130,000 and my declared €100,000.

Isn't this SHAMEFULL????

Ramon Casha

Dec 20th 2011, 05:07

The same applies to people who buy property at a good price and then are forced to pay inflated taxes by the government architect who arbitrarily decrees that the buyer paid more. Anyone who has ever been house hunting knows that you can sometimes find bargains, and you can sometimes negotiate a price, then the government architect takes a look at the place and decides a different price, which takes none of this into account.

Doris Filer

Dec 19th 2011, 23:51

Actually as ex-pats residing on Gozo, to us this is one main reason why we and many others from my home land will not invest in a property on the isands or even Spain or any other medit.country, in Malta primerily because of the loss we will definitly encounter had we decided to buy and now also the burden of extra taxes imposed on us by our most adorable government back home for a second home abroad, nott mention all the red tape and bureaucracy and all the red tap[e that goes with it, so most of us have no more worries but to take long let without any hasstle of selling should we decided to leave the island, which i hope will not happen for a long time, however if Malta decides to revert back to the Maltese pound, then i can see a exodus of foreingers leaving because of the exchange rate of various curancies., so my advice would be to take long let, as now Malta and more so Gozo has more empty properties then people. Its wht we call either a buyer's market or in our case renting galore to choose from at a good price (preferably downgraded).

George Camilleri

Dec 19th 2011, 23:24

What is the market value if not what the buyer wants to pay and what the seller is willing to accept? A free market should mean exactly that. A man should be able to dispose of what's his at whatever price he wants especially if he has serious cash-flow problems which could ruin his business/life. Whether this unnecessary interference in market forces and evident additional over-valuation is the idea of the governing party or is a sick relic of a previous regime, it is clear that there is a need for change, both in laws and lawmakers.

Bertrand Malley

Dec 19th 2011, 23:10

This is a government-led scam and one that is inconsistent with the realities of today. I never thought I'd be agreeing with the speculators lobby on anything, but on this they are absolutely right.

If I ever had to be in that situation I would make sure to go to the local Ombudsman foirst and the EU Ombudsman after that, and if nothing materialised out of that I'd be suing Government all the way up to Strasbourg or Brussels. One cannot be deprived of his property (money) on a whim and an unfounded allegation that something costs more than it actually does. That is a breach of fundamental human rights that happens only in Malta.

Jean Paul Galea

Dec 19th 2011, 23:01

From experience i dont know what competence the property tax dept has on valuation property. I recently bought a property in a rundown area of malta. I bought it there because i coulldnt afford a better area which would come at a premium. Still it was considered expensive so much so that most architects i got including the bank where complaining i was getting the property too expensive. Only one bank accepted the loan after a lot of convincing. After the property valuation by tax dept i got a bill of about 6000euro they said the property value is about 90K more. I couldn't believe it because at that price i could havegot a propert in the prime area of malta. It seemse like they dont consider zones if the architect likes it its expensive. What kind of valuation is that. I complained sent a letter and I got a new architect valuation.. this timeabout 40k more was the valuation..still way off the price i bought it which was published in a known property magazine. They say Ihave to pay about 4600 euro now but f i pay it in 1 week i get to pay 2600, Whats this some kind of USURA rachet sponsored by the government?When I asked how they arrived at the value they said they dont have any calculation only the architect value...What kind of tax is subject to a persons opinion...i guess this happens only in malta

Ms.D. Galea

Dec 19th 2011, 22:45

If the present market is full of unsold properties , why should developers be allowed to ruin what is left of the island in order to flood the market with more ugly blocks of garages, flats, maisonettes, penthouses etc?

George Farrugia

Dec 19th 2011, 21:03

Can the tax authorities tell us what qualifications does an architect have in valuing the market value of properties. What accademic studies and/or experience in selling property does an architect have? Far better to employ estate agents who have a far better experience on this issue. The slapping of a tax bill on income one has not in fact earned is illegal and contrary to one's human rights

Joseph Goerge Borg

Dec 19th 2011, 20:47

A house was sold by court auction, the bright government appointed architect, not a valuer, decides the property should fetch a higher price and slaps a penalty. Who was/is supposed to pay the penalty; the court, creditor, debtor who??
Moreover one has to wait for months and months for the architect's inspection.
So who is putting up prices of property definitely the authorities.

George Farrugia

Dec 19th 2011, 20:19

What does an architect know about the market value of property. He may be able to work out the cost of building such a property, but as for the market value of the same property he is neither qualified nor experienced. How many properties do architects sell? So what qualification can an architect present to prove he is an expert at market valuation of properties? I believe that the MALTA DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATION should work for amendment to the law and request that instead of an architect, the government users estate agents who have a wider experience in property sales and a much deeper experience of the market factors affecting a particular property.

Also they should put up a test case in court since paying taxation on profits not earned is both illegal and against one's human rights.

Setting up a fixed tax rates is not the proper solution since this will still put a lot of different criteria in the same basket.

The government should put its money where its mouth is and buy property at the value placed on it by its architects. This should preferably be done at conveniu stage and thus will need a far quicker action time from the government's side than at present where a property may only be value around a year after the actual contract is signed.

R. Cilia

Dec 19th 2011, 20:16

While the Finance Ministry said it was willing to consider alternatives to the present system, which it described as an “effective tool to curb tax evasion”, the “proposals made so far give rise to more problems than solutions” because the tax amount could scare buyers.

You know what scares me as a prospective buyer dear finance minister, the possibility of having to pay an unjust tax and a fine just because one of your architects decides that the property I bought is worth more than I actually paid for! This is daylight robbery.I shall not oblige!!

A. Xuereb

Dec 19th 2011, 17:10

What about when someone buys a house for say 200,000 euros but the developers tell you to say you bought it for say 170,000 for tax purposes?why do they keep building if the market is slow?and can anyone explain how from a demolished house the developer manages to build 10 garages, 2 maisonettes, 4 flats and a penthouse?

A. Xuereb

Dec 19th 2011, 17:00

293,000 for a 3 bedroomed maisonette?and that s an advantageous price?

J. Debono

Dec 19th 2011, 16:40

The best solution is for the govt. to waive the tax altogether. Or else there is this simple solution:-

The amount paid to the government should be fixed. I.e. it will not depend on how much you bought the property, but on the type of property (flat, maisonette, terraced house etc.), as well as the size and location of the property.
This should be reveiwed regularly, and of course should reflect the average value of the property.

For ex. for a flat an x amount per square metre
for a maisonette a y amount per square metre etc.

Then let the open market decide the price, as the tax you will pay will not be tied to the price paid.

Jay Oatmon

Dec 19th 2011, 16:12

When the developers were selling at more than the valuation they were making extra - now the boot is on the other foot, and so they complain.
Why do they have to keep on building flats into a massive glut of flats - the fact is the property slump will bring new construction down and force some out of business - this will bring demand and supply back to manageable levels. Artificuially propping up failing builders / developers with daft schemes will make the problem worse.

Mr twanny borg

Dec 19th 2011, 15:51

familjari tieghi xtara post u dan gie evalwat lm.15,000 izjed. dan kien it-tort tieghu ghax ma hax parir ta' min qallu biex jiddikjarah anqas. imma peress li huwa kollu qdussija mexa kif suppost imma aktar wehlu. il-gvern irid jipprova li kien hemm qerq jew inkella ikun dispost li jixtri l-post bil-valur li jiddikjara l-perit tieghu. inkella x-demokrazija hija din? din dittatura! kullhadd jaf bil-kazijiet ta' kurruzzjoni li inkixfu kull fejn tmiss u ghaldaqstant nixtieq nistaqsi jekk issirx investigazzjoni jew kif jinhatru l-periti biex jevalwaw il-proprjeta?

Joseph Vassallo, (Bugibba)

Dec 19th 2011, 15:49

Is there a different valuation structure between property valued for taxation purposes (taxman's architects, taxpayers' payouts) and value for property appropriated by government (Lands Dept. architects, government payouts)) as "needed for public use" such as party clubs or requisitioned property, for instance?

I mean, it's the same government but are they the same architects, because they seem to differ greatly in their opinions?

Mrs Mary Fisher

Dec 19th 2011, 15:12

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER CHRISTMAS WHEN ALL THE SHOPS SLASH THEIR PRICES? DOES THE TAXMAN CHARGE THE SHOPKEEPER ON THE PERCENTAGE THAT HE SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED INITIALLY OR ON THE MONEYS RECEIVED AFTER THE REDUCED ITEMS HAVE BEEN SOLD? NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE IN THIS CASE - THAT IS MY HUMBLE OPINION.

Mr Mike Rizzo

Dec 19th 2011, 14:51

The value of property is not absolute. If I needed cash quickly, and found a cash buyer for my property at half the prevailing market price, then who is the government to tell me that I cannot do this? And how dare a government-appointed architect accuse me of underdeclaring?

The government's starting position is that everyone is assumed to be guilty of tax fraud until proven innocent. But there is no way to prove innocence in such a situation i.e. how does one prove that they did not make an undeclared payment? One can only find evidence that such a payment has been made, not that it has not been made!

Surely one should be assumed innocent until proven guilty, with the onus on the government to find evidence of an undeclared payment. Finding such evidence may be difficult to do, but it is at least possible.

C. K. Barbara

Dec 19th 2011, 14:23

Remember that the current resession started because of bank property loans were not being repaid. Hello and welcome, Malta, to the resession! I guess we are not different after all and we have the same problems and these have been on everyone's minds. Are we that stupid to let this happen. Even the dumbest would relise that building new property without promise of purchase (kunvenju) before hand is sucide tactics. Personnaly the best way to save Malta from bankrupcy is to halt new development applications until at least 80% of all vacant properties are accupied. We have to slash prices and remove stupid taxes on valuations. The deal is between the buyer and the owner and not the goverment. As far as I am concerned the owner has already paid taxes to build it up and on the land. Whats next a tax on oxygen!!

Adrian Sacco

Dec 19th 2011, 13:39

I advise on UK tax for a living. The UK's statutory definition of "open market value" in the tax legislation is: "...the price which the property might reasonably be expected to fetch if sold in the open market at that time..."

Having myself been the victim of a further tax bill - plus penalty - in Malta, courtesy of one of the government-appointed architects materially overvaluing premises that I bought, I agree that the system is flawed both in conception and in operation.

For a start, the profession of architect is, as far as I am aware, not generally involved in establishing open market value. That is the business of the estate agency trade. I know of cases where government-appointed architects have materially overstated property values. The taxpayers concerned have appealed the additional tax demand, and have produced one or more estate agents as expert witnesses to support their cases - nevertheless their appeals failed. That cannot be right.

Secondly, markets fluctuate, and "open market value" today might be more or less than a year ago or a year hence. It isn't unusual for there to be a long konvenju of a year or more. Also, the instinctive first act of a buyer who purchases premises that are in need of work is to clean them up and commence works as soon as possible. The government very generously gives itself a year within which to have its inspection carried out. During that time, a great deal of work can be carried out, thereby enhancing the property value. I know two cases involving tradesmen who carried out the work on newly-bought properties themselves (so there were no bills for building works carried out by third parties). The government-appointed architects valued the properties based on their condition after works had been carried out, and the purchasers received substantial tax demands. The solution would be for the government to be obliged to carry out its valuation as early as possible - indeed even during the konvenju period.

Thirdly, it seems that inspections are sometimes carried out cursorily. I know one purchaser who received an additional tax demand even though no appointment had been made for the government-appointed architect to inspect the premises properly. It appears that an assessment was made based purely on a "drive-past" viewing of the facade. This strays into the category of "extracting the urine". Any tax demand based on revaluation in those circumstances should be thrown out automatically on appeal, and the civil servants responsible should personally pay the tax and penalties improperly demanded.

Fourthly, the additional tax demand is accompanied by a penalty charge which is applied in all cases even where parties have acted in good faith, and have based tax paid on actual (open market) price paid. This effectively criminalises the innocent, and again is fundamentally wrong.

I don't expect for one minute that the government will kill this cash cow at any time soon. Let's hope that in the meantime someone with the means and inclination takes an additional tax demand/penalty based on unreasonable assessment to the European courts, who it is to be hoped will in time drag Malta kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

F. Pisani

Dec 19th 2011, 13:33

this is a discrimination of the government architect. if i am happy to sell my property for a stipulated price how dare they tell me it worths more and i should pay more tax.!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Peter Murray

Dec 19th 2011, 13:23

Why can't the architects simply get together to reach a compromise or some form of equitable agreement on the current market evaluation of any property ? As currently there are vastly disparate and unexplainable evalutaions on property between professional architects which makes a mockery of their profession - which is as mysterious (if tax payments are excluded for the rationale )as it is unjustifiable.

James Tyrrell

Dec 19th 2011, 13:12

Michael Falzon my heart bleeds for you!

"Mr Falzon, an architect by profession, said the system was exasperating an already dreary situation for developers, some of whom had considerable stocks of unsold properties." Probably a stupid question but have your developers considered the idea that with so many unsold properties it might be a good idea not to build any more? You admit yourself that the demand for property is on the decline so why the hell do you all keep building like it's going out of fashion?

A. Caruana

Dec 19th 2011, 13:08

The best thing is that one has an option complain and have the property revalued. But lo and behold the tax department sends it to the same perit that did the original valuation for revaluation. ( a well known PN major in my case )

Pity he did not follow his own advise.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100322/local/government-architects-to-use-checklists.299358

Mr Joe Micallef

Dec 19th 2011, 12:41

I bought a 1 car garage for 4450 Maltes Lira the architect came and valued it moor and I was given 275euro fine for nothing because that what I paid this is not right I bought it because I thought it was cheap and save me a few fines because it is not easy to park and who sold it to me he told me I need the money urgent as I have bills to pay.I don't know what the Law in the EU is but surley it is not like this and most probabley it is against the EU law.

Charles Mangion

Dec 19th 2011, 12:28

It tiefel tieghi waqa vitma wkoll Xtara post il fgura valur ta Euro 104000 u perit tal gvern stmah Euro 12000 aktar u al xejn ogezjona an kellu jhalas it taxxa u multa fejna gustizja ghalek iz zazah qed jaqtu qalbom u ma iizewgux C.Mangion

Joseph N. Attard

Dec 19th 2011, 12:26

Stop moaning. If you want to avoid paying fines, just go grab some land in Armier or San Tumas, and build a mini villa. The government will not only not tax or fine you, but will give you immunity, as elections are getting near.

Carmelo Aquilina

Dec 19th 2011, 12:19

who should decide the market price ? the market -of course not the government !

Tonio Farrugia

Dec 19th 2011, 12:18

another case in which legislation does not follow the market trends.

We are acting totally unjust on the tax payer here.... be it a corporate or an individual tax payer. Legislation which does not reflect reality is, in my humble opinion, unconstitutional in itself, and we should have the tools to combat such issues!

where is the opposition on this (and i do not mean PL only)... they should be highlighting such issues with force!

David Galea

Dec 19th 2011, 12:03

I am another victim of this grave situation. It seems that the government's architects, under order from above, value the property on the asked price and not on the actual selling prices. It is normal that a price for a product is inflated by the seller then reduced during negotiations to a more reasonable and fair price. In this situation the government seems to increase its tax revenue but very probably reducing the amount of sales.

Joe Xuereb

Dec 19th 2011, 12:00

Surprise! Surprise! The bubble has burst, for the developer and the colluding Government, both.

martin chetcuti

Dec 19th 2011, 11:52

The Taxman should note that under declaring the value of a property by developers particularly when the buyers are first time buyers is NOT POSSIBLE for first time buyers hardly can pay the 10% deposit at the time of konvenju, let alone the difference from the''real'' price to that declared....

Alfred E. Zahra

Dec 19th 2011, 11:49

It is not just the vendors who are taxed but also the purchasers. This is not only unfair but unjust.

Jeremy Gambin

Dec 19th 2011, 11:34

I did not read all the comments- but one must also take note of the 12% final tax on sale of property- which was a good idea when property prices were increasing. If a person buys a property for 100k using a bank loan- and after 7 years- something happened to lower the value of the property- or he has to sell @ 100k to settle off the loan (very common in today's situation) then he will have to pay 12000 euro tax - even though there was a loss- after accounting for interest etc- the 7 year limit should be removed; how can one be taxed on a loss or more than the actual profit- as the 12% is on the selling price

Charles Cremona

Dec 19th 2011, 11:23

The property bubble in Malta has finally burst, it was kept quiet until now, but now that the banks have started breathing down the necks of developers the panic has started. Tha tax one should pay on a property should be based on the amount payed and not on what the government thinks its worth. Anyone can see that the market has come to a standstill, however even today most property up for sale is vastly overpriced, owners are still living in a dream world of yesteryear, at the end of the day any property is worth only what a buyer is willing to pay for it otherwise you will not sell and as the recession in Europe takes hold it is going to get a lot worse, it will be many years if ever when property prices in Malta will rise again.

Peter Murray

Dec 19th 2011, 11:21

Irrespective of the price the developer or a private seller actually sells at the true valuation, and subsequent tax paid by the buyer, can only be determined and established by the only professional evaluer of the market ,or so it would appear,this being -THE GOVERNMENT -APPOINTED ARCHITECT.Are these architects more profcient and skilled at property evaluation than private ones' and why are the valuation discrepancies so vast and always inexplicably much more higher when submitted by the government architects ?

Joe Scerri

Dec 19th 2011, 11:21

three-bedroom maisonette in Għargħur for €350,000? That's obscene.

Frans van Avendonk

Dec 19th 2011, 11:11

If one buys something during a sale, VAT is not charged at the original price but over the price actually paid! So why does it have to be different with property?

victor bonello

Dec 19th 2011, 11:04

This is a doble edged knife. On one side the Govermeant is trying to protect itself from frauists that declare the value much less with money changing hands under the table, on the other side the innocent seller/buyer who just want to make the deal.. it is not an easy situation.
However the Governmant architects should be realaistic and value the property on the least reasonable cost not the highest.
Also what is lacking in this country is accountable responsibility. The architects who do evealuations should be liable to buy the property they inspect and value at the price they decide... the story would soon change!

Borg Mario

Dec 19th 2011, 11:01

The architect sent by the Inland revenue is remunerated with a commission % on the assessment. This is in his interest to value properties higher than what it really cost. However, I can also testify that they send their architects months after the purchasing of the property, right after that works are carried out. Which means that it is easy for teh architect to over estimate a property in these conditions...No matter what you can prove to the Inland Revenue by providing them with VAT receipt, oath or whatever you always end up paying. This system is not productive at all and is not encouraging people to buy property or even like refurbish a property that was falling into pieces...Result after paying my assesment, I do not have sufficient funds to finish it...They are just thiefs...Someday their system will work against them...and they will pay for it....

Mr Joe Scerri

Dec 19th 2011, 10:52

It's supply and demand as in all other things. So why is property an exception? This could be good for those looking for a first home. For a good 10-15 years property prices were super-inflated. Now, it's a buyer's market.

And aren't we supposed to be exercising a freemarket economy?

Alex Caffari

Dec 19th 2011, 10:47

This problem has been percolating for a very long time. Even the Auditor General of Malta has criticized the current system, yet nothing has been done to improve or replace it. See http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100322/local/government-architects-to-use-checklists.299358

There should be no distinction between market value and selling price, since the market value of any property is what buyers are willing to pay, and therefore the selling price. If the buyer and seller choose to engage in a side deal in order to evade taxes, then it is up to the taxing authority to prove such a side deal was made. Otherwise, all buyers and sellers become victims of an assumption of guilt without the benefit of a fair trial. I commend the government for putting deterrents in place to avoid any such evasion of taxes, but this is not the right way to do it. The suggested fixed tax per square meter is much more realistic and fair as it spells out in advance what the buyer has to pay, rather than waiting for a surprise 6 to 12 months later. Such a scheme will also reduce the government's costs of administering and policing. Therefore, it will be a positive for both the market and the tax authority.

In absence of a per square meter taxing scheme, the only time an assumed market value should be used is when a transfer of property is made between family members, such as during inheritance or gifting of any such property. In such a case, the property can then be valuated by a person qualified to perform such a task. Such person must be familiar with the market and their evaluation must be based on the actual historical selling prices of similar properties in the same area. That is how one truly arrives at determining market value... from actual historical "selling" prices. Not from advertised "asking" prices.

Perhaps it is time for a common sense revolution in Malta. Any political party that proposes such common sense and seems to have the ability to follow through, will certainly have my vote and those of people who are tired of the same old outdated policies and laws.

Anton Zammit

Dec 19th 2011, 10:47

The irony of it all is that even if the Government architect agrees to the contract price, you will find out the Income Tax Dept itself adding again to your income when assessing the tax returns, and asking for more tax payments. Just wait for your assessments to be assessed.

Joseph Fenech

Dec 19th 2011, 10:43

The price of Property has gone down by 30% since October 2009 and the Taxman should be made aware of this fact. Malta Developers Association Chairman , Architect Michael Falzon should take the bull by its horns and challenge the Government in the Constitutional Courts and the European Court because surely, the Inland Revenue can assume the role of Prosecutor, jury and Judge. TAKE ACTION NOT !!!!

Etienne Bonanno

Dec 19th 2011, 10:33

The system of government architect inspection is well known to be one of the factors contributing to the inflated housing prices. If this is not the government setting prices I don't know what is. Unless there is a well defined system of valuation for estimating proper taxation levels the system will remain arbitrary and subject to corruption. Besides, if the seller and buyer agree on a price that is below market value, who is the government to intrude? This happens for no other transacted commodity. Why should the housing sector be different? There are other, more just and more foolproof methods to make sure that the sale is not under-declared and that make sure not to put artificial upward pressure on prices.

Joseph Fenech

Dec 19th 2011, 10:29

The architect sent by the Inland Department to value the property sold is paid by the same inland Department. So the Inland Department is the Prosecutor, Judge and Jury at the same time. Is this Constitutionally correct ! Can anyone please advice ! When the Property sale is effected, the developers pay 12% Witholding Tax on the Selling Price and not 5% as stated in the article .

marco caruana

Dec 19th 2011, 10:19

'' records showed that only a third of properties sold were actually inspected ''

gidba fahxijja....jien anki fuq 1 car garage gieni darbtejn perit tal gvern !!

A Spiteri

Dec 19th 2011, 10:16

government is essentially the root of all problems - milton friedman

S. Camilleri

Dec 19th 2011, 10:00

Seems like the Government is living in Cuckoo land ... It is convenient though for it to act as jury, judge and executioner in this case.

Franco Abela

Dec 19th 2011, 09:57

“(This) proves that architects’ valuations are close to market realities,” the spokesman noted.

BUT IF YOU FIND A BARGAIN... YOU'RE PUNISHED!

GOVT.... UPDATE YOUR MARKET PRICES!

NOWASDAYS IT IS RARE TO UNDERCLARE AS MOST BUYERS NEED A LOAN TO BUY A PROPERTY AND IF YOU UNDERDECLARE IT YOU ARE GIVEN A LESSER AMOUNT BY THE BANK, WHICH CERTAINLY IS NOT AN OPTION FOR MOST!

Mr Steve Cassar

Dec 19th 2011, 09:45

“(This) proves that architects’ valuations are close to market realities, the spokesman noted"

yeah right!
Im really sure that all the apartment/maisonettes/houses etc etc they visited were slapped with a fine!
I wonder from where those architects get the market values! (newspaper classified maybe???)

John Micallef

Dec 19th 2011, 09:40

This is no lie.

Only last August, I bought a one-car garage for € 2,300 less in price than what the owner was asking in February!

Developers are cash strapped (or rather, stripped!!) and have to do something.

This story is too ironic! Goes to show that regulators and enforcers are on another planet.

Christopher Scerri

Dec 19th 2011, 09:32

Ftahru bil-gid li hawn fil-pajjiz...morru aqghtu id-donazzjonijiet taghkom fid-dar centrali...

Mr Daniel Jones

Dec 19th 2011, 09:18

Does anyone seriously feel sorry for them? Because of these people, the island is an ugly concrete mess. Plus everyone else has seen the value of their property fall.