Remember This Bank Owned 1-Bedroom In Old Town? It’s Now Just $199,500: 1212 N. Wells
We last chattered about this 1-bedroom in the Neopolitan at 1212 N. Wells in Old Town in August 2012.
See our August 2012 chatter here.
We mainly debated whether or not it now made sense to buy this kind of property instead of renting for thousands of dollars a month directly across the street in the new construction apartment high rise.
Obviously, no buyers thought it made more sense to buy because the unit is still on the market and has been reduced $10,000 to $199,500.
If you recall, it is a Fannie Mae Homepath property.
From the listing pictures, it appears the kitchen and bath are intact.
The kitchen has maple cabinets and black appliances.
The unit has two balconies including what looks to be a rather large terrace.
It has hardwood floors in the main living areas and a fireplace.
The unit has central air and washer/dryer in the unit.
However, the listing doesn’t say anything about parking. It looks like the prior sale in 2003 did NOT include it so I don’t believe it has parking.
How low will this go?
Katarina Ciric at Redline Realty still has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #206: 1 bedroom, 1 bath, 900 square feet
- Sold in September 2003 for $276,500
- Lis pendens foreclosure filed in March 2011
- Fannie Mae Homepath property
- Originally listed in August 2012 at $209,500
- Reduced
- Currently listed at $199,500
- Not FHA approved
- Assessments of $473 a month (includes cable, doorman, tennis courts)
- Taxes of $4886
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom: 14×10
Pretty bland and depressing; the terrance redeems the unit somewhat. What could this rent for? I know Old Town is “hot hot hot” right now so this might be approaching a decent deal. Assessments seem a bit high and don’t include much.
No thanks, I could never live in a place like this. Renting it makes sense though.
The terrace is great. I could see lounging out there on a summer day with my dog. I wonder if they would let the owner install grass out there.
This building has never appealed to me…but a friend bought the Penthouse at the height of the boom and sold it for a profit last year. (A small profit, but a profit none the less) It must be a desirable location…or he is the luckiest guy on Earth.
Horrible. $199,000? Not even worth $99,000. Maybe $99.
The price people will pay to be in Old Town always surprises me.
obammacare tax on home sales
if you make 200k and are single or 250k+ and are married
sale OF YOUR HOME WILL GET AN OBAMAMACARE TAX OF 3.8%
ok here it is from snopes who says NO to my above statement BUT BACKTRACKS AND SAYS YES…BUT ONLY FOR CERTAIN HIGH EARNERS
they wont let me C&P
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/realestate.asp
my apologizes for getting the household income incorrect
but make no mistake,, the socialist in chief is making sure Americans fight each other
AND YES THIS IS relevant to all real estate discussions
Fear not elfadelphia – the tax you referenced only kicks in if you have a huge gain on your house. Thus, it might be implicated in a handful of sales in Chicago where a boomer bought in Lakeview, Bucktown/WP or Lincoln Park in the ’80’s or early ’90’s. It will most likely hit boomers in places like SF and NYC sitting on massive gains. Because Medicare is a giant transfer payment from Gen Xers and Gen Yers to boomers and their parents, a tax that actually hits boomers to fund Washington’s grand wealth and income transfer regime is A-OK with me. No one from Gen X or Gen Y will ever pay that tax unless Helicopter Ben unleashes hyperinflation.
Now if you dislike the policy on the basis of a “free market” argument and not because you have Obama Derangement Syndrome, you must ask yourself why the taxpayer who sells his small business with a $100k long term cap gain has a $15k fed tax liability and the taxpayer who sells his home with a $100k long term cap has a $0 fed tax liability with respect to his transaction. The fact that a large chunk of a gain on a home sale is exempted from cap gains taxes at all is just another distortion of the housing market negotiated by the National Association of Realtors (TM) and the other players in the housing lobby. When you consider that distortion along with the other distortions (e.g., government backstop of mortgages through Fannie/Freddie, FHA passing out 3.5% down mortgages like candy on Halloween, mortgage interest and property tax deductions, ultra low rates/Helicopter Ben’s mortgage buying binge), all of which are endorsed by the GOP and the Dems, you have something that doesn’t even remotely resemble a free market. Yet you choose to rant about a relatively small tax that will hit a very limited number of taxpayers, so I just ask you, if you believe in a free market, try to argue in advance of a free market and not call people socialists, as special interests pitted Americans against each other in the housing market beginning decades ago.
“obammacare tax on home sales
if you make 200k and are single or 250k+ and are married
sale OF YOUR HOME WILL GET AN OBAMAMACARE TAX OF 3.8%”
This is completely WRONG. Please stop fearmongering. It is not tied to the sale of your home but the capital gain you make on it. And it doesn’t kick in until after you make $500,000 which means, as PermaBear pointed out, you will have had to buy a long, long time ago in most parts of the country to actually have a GAIN on the sale of your house in order to be taxed. And you will have to be rich, to boot.
It’s funny- because there was only a small outcry when Cook County decided to do its transfer tax of 1.5% of the sale- even though that affected ALL properties.
Very few people will get hit with this medicare tax.
How it works is this:
You make over $250,000.
You bought a house in 1985 for $100,000. You are married. You sell it next year for $1 million. You get a $500,000 exemption. So you have a profit of $400,000. You are then taxed on the $400,000 at 3.8%.
But if you bought a house in 1999 for $450,000. You sell it in 2013 for $650,000. You have made $200,000. But you have a $500k exemption. NO TAX.
“Pretty bland and depressing; the terrance redeems the unit somewhat. What could this rent for? I know Old Town is “hot hot hot” right now so this might be approaching a decent deal. Assessments seem a bit high and don’t include much.”
What would it rent for? Probably $1700-$1900 a month. They’re renting for more than that across the street- but this one has no parking.
What people really need to worry about (and what Suze Orman was talking about on her show last night) is the December expiration of the holiday on paying income taxes on the differences in short sales. That is where you have to pay income tax on the difference between what you owe on the house and the short sale price.
This will affect many more people than the 3.8% tax (and it’s a lot higher tax rate, that’s for sure.) Millions of people will be screwed unless Congress extends it. We’ll have to see what happens after the election. But given the state of Washington- and the looming fiscal cliff which is a bigger issue- the extension of this waiver on taxes may get lost in the shuffle.
Thank you for clearing that up Sabrina, that is an excellent example you used to show how little effect that tax will have on most people. Facts count; a concept that many politicians have recently failed to grasp.
“Millions of people will be screwed unless Congress extends it. ”
No they’ll be held to account for their bad decisions. I hope congress lets this loophole expire.
Debt forgiveness is a taxable event. It should again be so.
Really Bob?
You want millions of people to declare bankruptcy? How is that going to help the economy? It’s not. I’ve known people who have done short sales. They have never walked away scott free (not in Illinois at least- some other states may be a different matter.) Some lost sizable downpayments. Many will never get back to the place they were before the housing bust (financially.)
As a nation, I’d rather we get the housing bust over with as fast as we can so housing can begin adding to the economy again instead of being a drag on it. Getting through all the distress properties is crucial to the healing.
Sabrina – I think Bob is right. Even without the law, there is an insolvency exception that is short of going into bankruptcy, but some people need bankruptcy. Many Americans still need to deleverage, playing kick the can isn’t a great idea and there is no faster way to deleverage than a bankruptcy. The people sending in jingle mail are going to have wrecked credit for the foreseeable future anyway, they might as well flush the CC and other consumer debts as well.
In short, those who can pay the tax on the debt discharge should. The banks have a loss and will have loss carryforwards that will keep them from paying federal income taxes for a long time. For the sake of those of who were careful and responsible and who pay their debts and taxes on time, I’d like to see Uncle Sugar’s coffers at least partially filled up to offset the losses the banks will have. Plus, planning around this additional contingency could help juice up homedelete’s practice.
“In short, those who can pay the tax on the debt discharge should.”
If it’s a short sale- and you have assets- in Illinois the bank will already go after them. I know someone who did a short sale in the burbs because he had to move to Michigan for a new job. He was underwater about $150,000. He paid the banks (there were two) a total of $19,000. The banks ate the rest of the loss.
You really think it’s good for the economy to have Mr. and Mrs. Smith paying $10,000 a year for 10 years to the IRS to pay income tax liability? Really? Because the Feds WILL come up with a tax re-payment plan, I’m sure.
How does this help ANYTHING? How does this help the economy? It is a massive tax on millions of Americans. I’m not condoning the loans that were taken out and the mistakes that were made. But if we want the American economy to heal and to recover we have to get rid of the housing bust as quickly as possible so that people can go out and buy more iPad Minis. We’ve had this tax waiver for 4 years. Why would you want to get rid of it now when a housing recovery is on the horizon? You’re nuts.
“$10,000 a year for 10 years”
A $350,000 loss that doesnt involve a bk filing (or fraud) anyway? How many people are in that boat? 100?
I hope this doesn’t start a trend in the current political season of people using this site to spread their fear-mongering around certain candidates. I’ve always been happy that Crib Chatter has been free, for the most part, of political diatribes like the one above. And calling someone a “socialist” is when I stop reading, by the way. That tactic doesn’t work with me.
“But if we want the American economy to heal and to recover we have to get rid of the housing bust as quickly as possible so that people can go out and buy more iPad Minis. ”
what?
yeah lets buy more chinese slave made, overpriced, disposable, depreciating crap, from one of the greddiest companies in history, that will get the economy going!
I’m just worried the Bush tax cuts will expire seeing as congress and the president will have just been elected. They have no reason to keep those tax cuts in place.
Sabrina – given that the government (e.g., all of us) take the loss when a bank writes off a loss on its taxes AND a loss when Fannie/Freddie/FHA have to make good on a mortgage, yes, I think the person who speculated and lost should have to bear the results of his or her actions unless they want to prove insolvency or try to flush the debt in bankruptcy. I was not a party to the underlying transaction (other than to the extent the government’s actions have put me on the hook for diminished tax revenues from various deductions and backstops) and the tax code is currently written in a manner that none or very little of the upside would ever inure to my benefit as a fellow taxpayer ($500k cap gains exemption). It is just another example of privatized gains and socialized losses and it is bad policy.
As for your friends who lost, under the Internal Revenue Code, they would have $131,000 of taxable income for debt forgiveness. Even though they lost, they had $131,000 of consumption that they siphoned off from some combination of bank shareholders, pension funds who bought mortgage paper from the banks or Fannie or Freddie. Thus, they should have to pay $131,000 times their tax rate – say 31% or approximately $40k in total. They got to live in an aspirational home for some time. I didn’t. If the chips had fallen differently and they turned a $131,000 gain, they would have kept it, tax free. They consumed more than they paid for, now they should have to pay taxes on that amount.
“And calling someone a “socialist” is when I stop reading, by the way. That tactic doesn’t work with me.”
Quit being such a pinko-lover, Dan.
[I agree with you about the generally non-political tone here]
While I too appreciate that this is mostly a politics-free zone, politics can impact real estate. Want to keep the mortgage interest deduction? That’s a political preference.
On a related note, I must say, I’ve been surprised at the number of Republicans I’ve met in Chicago, including in LP. Most don’t seem to reside in the Taliban wing of the party – their political philosophy appeasr to be influenced primarily by taxes. But it’s nonetheless been a bit of an eyeopener.
so a person can either pay the money they owe to the IRS, which would slightly lower the tax burden of everyone. or they can buy Ipod minis.
wonder how much apple stock I’d have to own to prefer they buy the mini
There are lots of closet republicans in the city since they don’t want to be labeled as crazy religious people who don’t believe in birth control. I tend to swing to the fiscally conservative side, but would never call myself a republican because of the religious insanity….but then, I don’t call myself a democrat either.
“Pinko.” That’s what Archie used to call Meathead. (I’m dating myself!)
““Pinko.” That’s what Archie used to call Meathead. (I’m dating myself!)”
See, I was right–Pinko-lover.
(knew people, of my parents generation or so, who used it unironically in the 80s)
“wonder how much apple stock I’d have to own to prefer they buy the mini”
Not that much I think. aapl ownership has to be a lot more concentrated than taxpayers (and profit margin is v high), though it does seem like from any financial discussion on here that everyone owns aapl (bought at the exact bottom).
Also, can’t tell if sonies’ recommendation is buy/sell/hold on the stock.
I bought AAPL at 90, rode it down to the bottom and sold at 97. Winning. Buying low is easy, it’s just a matter of having dry powder when a calamity occurs, holding until the peak is the hard part.
“because of the religious insanity”
It’s the Democrats that have the insanity, trying to attack and tyrannize all believers. The Chicago Bears are sponsoring a conference to address the HHS religion-attacks and tyranny. If you call yourself a Democrat, you have to consider what kind of people you are openly collaborating with these days.
“though it does seem like from any financial discussion on here that everyone owns aapl (bought at the exact bottom).”
Now, now, I don’t think anyone is claiming to have gone big into aapl in 1985.
But I do think that we have at least 100% of the total volume of 12/23/97 represented here (all of which has been held to now). 195x adjusted close!! $10.2B in aggregate gain!!!!
if only federal government had invested the bailout money in apple instead of banks we’d be sitting pretty right now. it’s indisputable! the time to shift all tax revenues to ipad minis is now.
I’ve bought apple a few times rode it for 35-50% gains and then sold it, right now I’d hold it if I owned it, since at least they pay a dividend now but I certainly would not be buying any more right now until under 550
We wouldn’t need any tax increases, we wouldn’t have to be taxed more:
One year ago: “Ron Paul’s plan to slash $1 trillion in federal spending begins and ends at the government bureaucracies he says are most responsible for the mess. Specifically, he wants to eliminate the departments of Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Interior and Education.”
“We are in the midst of the worst debt crisis ever in all of history, so I cannot see how we can get out of this by increasing the debt around the world,” Paul said in a CNBC interview. “Nobody has proposed any cuts and I don’t know how in the world you can get out of the problem of too much spending and too-big government by not cutting anything.”
“right now I’d hold it if I owned it”
What if I bought around or above current price?
I bought it well under $300 and am holding on for now. Not fun watching my paper gains evaporate, though, but I’m still well ahead.
Wish I’d bought in 1997!
I would hold it, unless you needed the money soon
Oops – meant to say well under $400. Don’t want to exaggerate my success. And I’ve bought plenty of losers as well.
“I would hold it, unless you needed the money soon”
Why the asymmetry between your advice for people who already own versus not? Not bc of unrealized gains (by assumption). Surely not bc of transactions costs? Why?
“I bought it well under $300 and am holding on for now. Not fun watching my paper gains evaporate, though, but I’m still well ahead.”
2006 was the time to buy, or when it hit $80 in 2009 crash, I was in vegas in 2009 when I saw it on the ticker on a TV screen at that price. Overlay the $50 silver price (peak) chart from 2011 to the AAPL blow-off top at $705. AAPL owners are in for some serious consolidation, unless this “Apple TV” is truly revolutionary.
“when it hit $80 in 2009 crash, I was in vegas in 2009 when I saw it on the ticker on a TV screen at that price”
Went to Vegas for MLK and stayed an extra day?
I have a feeling you’re right, Helmet. I’ve been thinking about taking some money off the table if it falls below $600.
“Went to Vegas for MLK and stayed an extra day?”
you are the king of awesome for this quip. I’m not going to even check the chart to confirm it’s historically correct.
helmet throws all his party energy into mlk day now that freaknik shut down
“not going to even check the chart to confirm it’s historically correct.”
I was curious, so checked. Closed below 80 only on the day after MLK. Briefly below 80 on Wednesday too.
We *know* that Hof was avoiding DC that week.
“Why the asymmetry between your advice for people who already own versus not? Not bc of unrealized gains (by assumption). Surely not bc of transactions costs? Why?”
Really want to understand sonies’ position on this. It’s one of those many many things I have heard but don’t understand.
“Overlay the $50 silver price (peak) chart from 2011 to the AAPL blow-off top at $705. AAPL owners are in for some serious consolidation, unless this “Apple TV” is truly revolutionary.”
Really? At like 10x earnings? Why is this a “blow-off top”? There’s nothing that indicates it’s expensive. In fact, it’s still downright cheap.
It’s so funny that everyone gets all jittery about Apple when other stocks are way more expensive and not rational- Amazon for one. It barely makes any money! And I don’t hear a peep out of anyone even though it’s trading at 300x.
The TRUE genius stock picking was lululemon at the worst of the Great Recession. What’d it get down to? $2 or something? My gosh. If you bought near the low, a nice house downpayment was made (with a few vacations thrown in.)
“Wish I’d bought in 1997!”
Would you have truly bought it then? The company was literally 30 days away from bankruptcy and had to borrow money to stay afloat. Who would buy it under those conditions?
“Really want to understand sonies’ position on this. It’s one of those many many things I have heard but don’t understand.”
Transaction costs, dividends, tax realizations or losses if needed, and the fact that there are other things that *might* get you a better return, but if you like the stock, keep it, its a good one. I just wouldn’t be buying more at this price point but if you already have some, keep it. I got out at 650 for myself and a lot of other people did as well because of the size of its market cap relative to the rest of the marketplace was getting a bit out of whack, that sort of turned out to be the right call, but I don’t think its going to plummet unless they start having supply issues (which miraculously they haven’t yet) . Id be selling out of the money calls against the stock at a price I’m comfortable selling it at if I had a hundred shares of it, but that’s just me.
Hope that answered your question. Im really tired and probably didn’t make much sense
Leapfrog went from $11.50 to $8.50 in the last month.
“Hope that answered your question.”
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
“Leapfrog went from $11.50 to $8.50 in the last month.”
Even better deal then.
“If you bought near the low, a nice house downpayment was made (with a few vacations thrown in.)”
So, what, you only make moves of $10k or more? $1k into LULU at $3 (adjusted; it was under $3 for 14 trading days, bottom trade of $2.20) is now $25k if you rode it the whole way up.
““Leapfrog went from $11.50 to $8.50 in the last month.”
Even better deal then.”
Somebody (Ze?) is prob shorting Brad F.
“The TRUE genius stock picking was lululemon at the worst of the Great Recession. What’d it get down to? $2 or something? My gosh. If you bought near the low, a nice house downpayment was made (with a few vacations thrown in.)”
I hate to say it because their merchandise is so darn expensive, but it is SO worth every penny.
I was wearing a pair of Lululemon wonder under leggings the other day when I was up on the Bloomingdale Trail. We entered at Kimball and Bloomingdale through an open gate. On our way out the gate was padlocked and we had to scale the fence. My heart skipped a beat for a second because my $90 wonder unders caught on the fence, but miraculously they did not rip. Plus they look great on your butt 🙂
Is this place just down the street from that Old Town building that is supposedly renting smallish 1 bedroom apartments for something like $2,500/mo? It is just plain stupid what people are paying to live in Old Town, which is a cool neighborhood admittedly but not worth anywhere near the price premium that some people seem to think it is.
I’m a BIG fan of pretty much any sort of those lulu pants the ladies doing xfit in my neighborhood wear
“I’m a BIG fan of pretty much any sort of those lulu pants the ladies doing xfit in my neighborhood wear”
Amen, and I don’t know if it is because fat people are too poor to afford Lulu pants or if the company has done society a great service by not making them in plus sizes, but you NEVER see landwhales wearing them.
I don’t know why fat people would be buying expensive workout gear, because if they are that hardcore they will likely not be fat
Those last two posts have me smelling bacon.
lulu does have a plus size line called BeLu, short for beluga
“The TRUE genius stock picking was lululemon at the worst of the Great Recession. What’d it get down to? $2 or something? My gosh. If you bought near the low, a nice house downpayment was made (with a few vacations thrown in.)”
I think bradf aka forrest bought it along with his leapfrong position 🙂