The Co-op Pied-à-Terre Tax in NYC: Who Is Billed, Who Pays, and How Is a Unit Valued?

Updated September 10, 2026. The co-op pied-à-terre tax is the NYC non-primary residence surcharge as it lands on a cooperative apartment: a unit the Department of Finance values at $1 million or more, by share allocation, that is nobody’s primary residence. The bill goes to the cooperative corporation, which the law directs to collect it from the shareholder. The DOF exemption application for a co-op unit is due October 6, 2026, on DOF’s separate co-op filing; a Tax Commission appeal on Form TC107 is due March 1, 2027; and proof of residency for one unit clears that unit only.

Three things make the surcharge different in a cooperative: two turn on a line of the statute and the third on a line of DOF’s rule. The value the tax runs against is not a number anyone appraised: it is the building’s market value multiplied by the unit’s share of the corporation’s stock, a formula in Administrative Code section 11-3201. The bill does not go to the person the law is aimed at: it goes on the corporation’s statement of account, and section 11-3205(f) tells the corporation to collect it from the tenant-shareholder. And proof of residency that clears a house clears only the one apartment in a co-op that offers it. The surcharge itself, its rates and its thresholds, is on the pied-à-terre tax page; the documents that prove a primary residence are on the surcharge explainer.

This is written for a shareholder holding a notice, and for a board or managing agent holding the building’s copy. The shareholder and the corporation are both “owners” under the statute, both may file, and both are exposed if nothing is filed; a managing agent files for one of them, as a duly authorized representative. The law is state law, enacted May 28, 2026 as Part HH of Chapter 59 and written into the Administrative Code as Chapter 32 of Title 11, which is why, as DOF told commenters, its structure cannot be changed by a City rule.

Check your property in MGNY’s app using the building address or BBL. The free co-op lookup returns the public DOF building record, not a unit-level surcharge estimate. Sign in for review and document steps. MGNY provides surcharge notice review and filing assistance for apartment notices, ownership records and residency evidence.

Who is billed for the co-op pied-à-terre tax?

The corporation. Section 11-3205(a) directs DOF to add the surcharge to the statement of account of a covered property, and for a cooperative to add “the sum of any surcharges authorized by this chapter for each residential cooperative dwelling unit” that is over the threshold and not a primary residence. Tax Law section 1354(a), the state enabling statute, says the same. No abatement, credit or exemption on the building’s own taxes reduces it: “Any abatement, credit or exemption of the real property taxes owed by such covered property shall not apply to such surcharge.”

Two terms in the statute are not interchangeable. The “residential cooperative property” is the real property the corporation owns or leases; the “residential cooperative dwelling unit” is the apartment. A cooperative becomes a “covered property” as soon as “at least one residential cooperative dwelling unit” has a phase one market value of $1 million or more and is not a primary residence, and on a plain reading it stays covered until each unit over the line is cleared or paid. “Owner” is defined to mean the tenant-stockholder “or such corporation,” so either may file and the corporation may be billed; the “covered owner,” whose residency is tested, is the tenant-stockholder alone. The corporation’s own use of the building is never the question; the question is always who lives in the apartment.

How does DOF put a value on a co-op unit?

DOF values a cooperative building as one parcel, on the income of comparable rental buildings, and does not value the apartments inside; as an appraisal-industry analysis of August 19, 2026 put it, “cooperative buildings receive a single building-level market value.” The surcharge therefore needs a unit number that does not otherwise exist, and section 11-3201 supplies one by definition. The “imputed cooperative phase one market value” is “the product of” the building’s market value for the year “and (ii) the quotient of (A) the shares of stock in such cooperative corporation representing an interest in such residential cooperative dwelling unit; divided by (B) the total shares of stock in such cooperative corporation.” That imputed figure is the “phase one market value” of a co-op unit, so the threshold and the rate both run against it. The Tax Commission puts it the same way: the portion of the building’s full value attributable to a unit “is imputed to such unit based on the portion of the shares in the co-op building that represent an interest in such co-op unit.”

The section number is worth getting right. Section 11-3205(f) contains no formula; it is the collection duty, which DOF’s preamble calls “the statutory provision relating to allocation of the surcharge to an individual shareholder.” The valuation methodology, “including the use of share ratios,” DOF wrote, “is established by provisions of state statute. See Administrative Code §§ 11-3201, 11-3202.”

Within one building the building value is the same for everyone, so the only variable is the share fraction. Take a building DOF values at $60 million with 20,000 shares outstanding. An apartment holding 400 of them carries 2 percent of the building, $1.2 million, and is in scope: at the 4.0 percent phase one rate the surcharge is $48,000 a year. The apartment next door holding 300 shares carries 1.5 percent, $900,000, and is under the line. Neither sale price entered the calculation. That is a reading of the formula, not an official finding that it produces wrong answers; one attorney told DOF during the rulemaking that “for 2026 and 2027 the surcharge will hit some coop owners in coop units with a market value less than $5 million,” and DOF’s answer was that the methodology is the legislature’s and outside what a rule can change. The arithmetic does establish one thing: a cooperative’s review has to be unit by unit, and share by share.

Where does a shareholder see the number? DOF says the imputed value “will be included in the rolls described above and will be included in the notices provided pursuant to 19 RCNY § 62-06.” The published supplemental roll lists each unit in a co-op building where at least one unit may be caught, with its final market value, but its layout has no field for the share count, so a board cannot check DOF’s arithmetic from the roll alone. From July 1, 2028, phase two, the imputation ends: a co-op unit’s market value becomes a value DOF determines for the unit itself, using “a method that considers sales of comparable residential cooperative dwelling units or comparable residential condominium dwelling units,” and the threshold becomes $5 million, the same line as a house.

What are the threshold and the rate on a co-op unit?

For the fiscal years beginning July 1, 2026 and July 1, 2027, a co-op unit is in scope when its phase one market value “is equal to or greater than one million dollars.” The rate applies to the whole imputed value: 4.0 percent from $1 million to $3 million, 5.25 percent above $3 million to $5 million, and 6.5 percent above $5 million, under section 11-3204(a)(2). DOF’s own FAQ answers the objection every board hears first, that the apartment is not worth anything like $5 million: “Under state law, co-ops and condos are valued differently from other residential properties. For the first two years of the surcharge, a co-op or condo may be subject to the surcharge if the Department of Finance has determined that its value is at least $1 million. Generally, under state law, a co-op or condo valued at $1 million or more by the Department of Finance is comparable to a single-family home valued at $5 million or more.”

The first bill carrying the surcharge is the one due January 1, 2027. Section 11-3205(e) makes the fiscal 2026-27 surcharge “due and payable on the same date as the second semi-annual installment of real property taxes is due,” and DOF’s page says it plainly: “If your property is subject to the surcharge, charges will appear on your property tax bill that is due January 1, 2027.” For a cooperative that is the building’s bill.

Who gets the notice, and does the board have to pass it on?

The statutory notice of DOF’s initial determination goes “to the owner of a covered property, or, in the case of a covered property that is a residential cooperative property, a residential cooperative dwelling unit.” For fiscal 2026-27 the outside date was August 30, 2026; in later years the rule sets February 15. DOF said in its preamble that for the first year it planned to mail a copy to each unit’s address and also to “the residential cooperative corporation mailing addresses for cooperative corporations containing such a dwelling unit,” so a board or managing agent may be holding the building’s copy of a letter about an apartment.

Passing it on is not a courtesy; it is section 11-3205(h): “Upon receipt of a notice of surcharge by a residential cooperative property, the cooperative corporation that holds such residential cooperative property shall provide such notice to the owners of the residential cooperative dwelling unit that is the subject of such notice as soon as practicable.” The state statute has no counterpart; Tax Law section 1354 runs from (a) to (g) with no forwarding provision, so this is a City-code duty on the corporation. A penalty notice under the rule is a separate instrument and must go to “both the owner of record of such residential cooperative property and the owner of record of the applicable residential cooperative dwelling unit,” and either may petition for the hearing on it. And a missed notice does not void the surcharge: “Failure by the department to provide this notice shall not affect the validity of the imposition of the surcharge.”

What happens if a shareholder does not pay?

The statute answers in three layers, and none stops at the shareholder’s door. First, the surcharge, with penalties and interest, “shall continue to be a lien on the covered property,” a tax lien that “may be sold, enforced or foreclosed,” and for a cooperative the covered property is the building. DOF’s preamble does not soften it: “State law provides that the surcharge is imposed on a property, rather than a particular owner of property. See Administrative Code § 11-3202. The surcharge, along with any penalties and interest, constitutes a lien on the property.” Second, section 11-3208 lets the Corporation Counsel sue “a cooperative corporation” that fails to pay, and lets the Commissioner issue a sheriff’s warrant against “the real and personal property of such owner or cooperative corporation.” Third, section 11-3205(f) directs the corporation to collect from the tenant-stockholder, which is where the building’s own documents take over.

One number in circulation needs correcting. Trade coverage has quoted interest “compounding at 18% per annum against the entire building” while a board pursues a shareholder. Interest on the surcharge runs under section 11-224.1, the ordinary property tax interest section, and DOF sets the rate by assessed value: for July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027 it is 16 percent above $450,000, 9 percent above $250,000 up to $450,000 and 6 percent at $250,000 or less, compounding daily, and for tax class 2 properties of more than 10 units the measure is the building’s “actual assessed value,” before phase-ins and exemptions. Read that value off the building’s own statement of account before quoting a rate to a board.

DOF was asked, during the rulemaking, to fix the collection problem by rule, and declined. One comment in the record asked that the statute “automatically amend all proprietary coop leases so the Board can pass through the surcharge.” DOF’s reply to the commenters worried about building-wide liability is the passage every board should read: “These state law provisions cannot be amended through a City rulemaking process. Instead, cooperative corporations could consider amending their proprietary leases to accommodate these charges so that liability is allocated in accordance with Administrative Code § 11-3205(f). DOF will not promulgate a rule that would seek to directly supersede the terms of these proprietary leases or cooperative corporation governance documents and regulate the payment obligation of shareholder to their cooperative corporations.” It would not take up legislative proposals either, and offered to keep talking to co-op representatives afterwards.

The comments on the rule describe the gap from both sides, and the trade press, which is commentary rather than law, describes the workarounds. The same attorney set out the consequence of a lease that does not reach the charge: “since the failure to pay would not be a lease default, the corporation could not recover its attorneys’ fees.” 120 W.70 Owners Corp., the cooperative at 120 West 70th Street, told DOF that a board “cannot create new categories of financial obligation” outside its proprietary lease, while “every shareholder in the building is exposed to the consequences of any one shareholder’s inability, or failure, to pay an assessed tax.” The Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums put the timing first: the corporation is responsible for paying “even before it might be able to collect it from a covered shareholder,” and that “In many cases in smaller cooperatives, this pied a terre tax is greater than the real estate taxes attributable to the unit,” while in some cooperatives it “may exceed the taxes for the entire cooperative.” One firm’s position, per Brick Underground, is “that the surcharge should be treated as additional rent”; Habitat quoted counsel on the board’s choice when a shareholder refuses, pay from building funds, “effectively advancing the nonpaying shareholder’s PAT tax obligation from reserves that belong to all shareholders,” or leave it unpaid on the building’s account with interest running; a third firm’s checklist asks whether the governing documents let the cooperative “Charge the surcharge back to the affected shareholder” and use “the cooperative’s existing remedies for collection, including eviction and foreclosure, where applicable.” Commenters used the word “guarantor” for the corporation’s position; whether it is one in law is a question for the building’s counsel, and this page does not answer it. Read the proprietary lease before the first bill, not after.

Does one shareholder’s proof of residency clear the building?

No, and this is the carve-out that makes a cooperative different from every other covered property. Under 19 RCNY 62-06(d), proof of primary residency for one or more dwelling units “is sufficient to exclude such property from the surcharge,” except that for a cooperative such proof “is sufficient to exclude only such residential cooperative dwelling unit.” A two-family house with one resident family is out; a cooperative with one resident shareholder has cleared one apartment. Every covered unit needs its own showing, and the corporation is the only party that sees the whole building.

The grounds are the same as elsewhere: the primary residence, as of the taxable status date before the fiscal year, of a covered owner or an immediate family member, “provided such covered owners are natural persons,” or of a natural-person lessee or sub-lessee “pursuant to a bona fide lease agreement negotiated in an arms-length transaction with a term of not less than one year.” Shares held through an entity count as entity-held only where the entity “holds all such shares of stock,” and residency is then tested on the partners, shareholders or members “holding a majority interest.” A sponsor’s unsold unit under an offering plan is “excluded property” for as long as it “has not been sold, or an economic interest in such unit has not been transferred” by the sponsor. DOF’s first-year determinations ran on income tax data; its preamble says “this final rule provides that DOF will use income tax data to make initial determinations of primary residency for the 2026/2027 fiscal year.” The rule treats a unit as a primary residence where a covered owner’s most recent state or federal return shows it as the permanent home address, or claims the STAR credit under Tax Law 606(eee) for it, or where a listed residency-based exemption is on it, “Unless credible information in the possession of the department, including but not limited to information collected by the department in administering the abatement authorized pursuant to section 467-a of the real property tax law, indicates otherwise.” Abatement records can defeat a finding of primary residence, not make one, and DOF’s FAQ says a letter may have gone out where a unit “receives the co-op or condo abatement, but we did not have a sufficient tax filing on record.” A current co-op and condo abatement filing is no substitute for a return on record; a client alert adds that “many cooperative boards restrict shareholders from renting out or subletting their units, so it may be more difficult for shareholders to fall under an exemption.”

How does a co-op file with DOF, and by when?

DOF runs a separate application for cooperative units: its program page lists “Residential homes and condos (deadline October 6, 2026)” and “Cooperative units (deadline October 6, 2026),” and the second resolves to a SmartFile filing type of its own, “Non-primary residence surcharge (co-op).” The date is the same for both. The rule behind this year’s window is the emergency rule effective August 3, 2026, which rewrote 62-06(b)(1) so that for fiscal 2026-27 the appeal may be filed “no later than: (i) September 18, 2026; or (ii) a date selected by the commissioner of finance, where good cause is shown, whichever is later,” through an electronic portal “or may file such appeal in person at a location designated by commissioner.” That emergency rule “will remain in effect for not more than 60 days,” extendable “for a further 60 days while the DOF prepares a permanent rule,” so the paragraph can change again before October 6. DOF’s page now carries October 6, 2026, for homes, condominiums and co-op units alike, and clause (ii) is the rule’s only route to a date later than September 18.

Who files? The amended rule names the owner of the unit “or a duly authorized person,” and a “duly authorized representative” under 62-01 includes anyone who files a power of attorney on DOF’s form, “any individual who provides the password included in the initial notice” and certifies they are authorized, and “with respect to a corporation, an officer of such corporation.” So a managing agent files under a power of attorney or the notice’s password, and a board officer files for the corporation, which is itself an “owner”; DOF’s preamble confirms that “statutory provisions authorize cooperative corporations to file appeals in relation to the surcharge.”

Three consequences of the choice of forum are the same for a co-op as for anyone else, and they are set out on the Form TC107 page. A residency challenge filed with the Tax Commission switches DOF off: “the department shall not consider any appeal filed pursuant to this section.” Filing nowhere makes DOF’s initial determination final, “unless such owner has challenged such initial determination of primary residence” at the Tax Commission together with a value challenge. And a DOF denial “shall be a final determination and may be challenged in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 11-3206.” The rule also lets an owner self-disclose in writing that a unit is not a primary residence, which for an investor-shareholder settles residency and leaves only the value.

How is a co-op unit’s value challenged at the Tax Commission?

The statute gives the challenge to the unit, not the building. Section 11-3206(b) lets an owner aggrieved by the market value “of a residential cooperative dwelling unit within such residential cooperative property” apply to the Tax Commission for correction. Three things may be challenged: the market value; DOF’s initial residency determination, but only “at the same time” as a value challenge; and DOF’s final residency determination. The application is Form TC107, and its instructions say “A separate Application is required for each Property, including separate Applications and supporting documentation for each unit in a condominium or cooperative.” The form has a “Cooperative Dwelling Unit” box, a “Tenant-Shareholder of A Cooperative” ownership type, and a box for an applicant that “Is A Cooperative Corporation Filing On Behalf Of Dwelling Unit Owner”; the unit ID comes from DOF’s surcharge notice. There is no building-wide protest. A commenter asked that shareholders in one building be allowed to join their appeals for hearings; DOF answered that “The Tax Commission’s administrative procedures are outside of the scope of this rulemaking,” and that its own residency appeal “does not involve hearings; rather, it is a written appeals process.”

One rule reaches across the building. Under section 11-3206(g), where the Tax Commission decides a co-op unit’s value, it “shall consider such determination in any proceeding relating to any other residential cooperative dwelling unit in such residential cooperative property for the same fiscal year,” so the first unit decided becomes a reference for every other unit that year, and a board has an interest in the quality of the first filing even where the corporation is not the applicant. For fiscal 2026-27 the window opened when the notice of surcharge was issued “to a cooperative corporation,” and it closes March 1, 2027, the Tax Commission’s date for tax class 2, which is what a cooperative reached by the surcharge as a cooperative is by the statute’s own definition; the March 15, 2027 date is for class 1 property. Two things are settled before any filing. Identifying a unit on the roll “by the street address and unit number” is expressly not an “unlawful” ground under the statute. And for every applicant, co-op or not, the Tax Commission’s page says DOF’s Market Value Determinations “are presumed to be correct,” with the burden on the applicant, who “need not prove that DOF’s methodology or calculations used to make the assessment were wrong and offering such proof will not necessarily establish your claimed Full Value.”

Whether the Tax Commission is ready for unit-level co-op cases is the question commentators have raised, and the record has moved since. A July 15, 2026 client alert wrote that “the Tax Commission has never handled individual co-op apartment valuation protests of this kind, and it remains unclear whether the Tax Commission has the capacity or procedural framework to adjudicate a wave of unit-level disputes arising from building-level assessments.” The TC107 form and instructions carrying the co-op boxes are dated the same day, and DOF’s answer to a commenter who asked for a unit-level challenge was that “These valuation challenges are already authorized by law.” DOF would not, however, open the share ratio itself to a sales-price rebuttal: proposals to let owners “use sales price data to rebut or parametrically limit phase one valuations” of co-op and condominium units “conflict with the valuation methodologies authorized by the legislature.” The evidence standard is the part that stays open; as the August 19, 2026 analysis put it, neither the statute nor the rules specify “what evidence must be submitted to challenge market value; whether independent appraisals are required or permitted; the degree of deference that will be given to the Department’s valuation methodology; or how competing valuation evidence will ultimately be evaluated.”

Where does the share count come from, and can DOF’s copy be wrong?

The share count is the whole case, because it is the only term in the formula that belongs to the unit. The count sits on the stock certificate where the corporation issues certificates, and the Tax Commission’s own evidence list names the “stock certificate (coop)”: Business Corporation Law section 508(c) requires each certificate to state “The number and class of shares, and the designation of the series, if any, which such certificate represents.” DOF’s rule ties those shares to the proprietary lease, defining an economic interest at 19 RCNY 62-01 as “shares of stock in a cooperative corporation entitling the holder of such shares to a proprietary lease in a dwelling unit,” which is why the lease is the other document to read; whether the lease itself recites the number is a matter of the building’s own drafting. The total, the denominator, is the corporation’s. DOF does not say where its copy of the two numbers comes from. Its cooperative abatement application is one place it collects them: the form collects “Total Units/Shares” for the development in its Development Information block, carries a per-unit “Shares” column in Section D, has a change code “S = Update Shares,” and is signed by an officer or the managing agent. That is the form a managing agent works from when asked to confirm a unit’s shares against the total, and it is why CNYC warned DOF that it “may not have correct or updated shareholding information for all residential cooperative dwelling units in covered property (especially in the case of cooperatives that have not recently taken advantage of the Cooperative and Condominium Property Tax Abatement).” A July 15, 2026 client alert, commentary, says the per-unit values must be derived “using unit-level shareholders’ stock information from the Real Property Assessment Database cooperative unit files.”

CNYC asked for a procedure to supply and correct that data. The adopted rule, read from 62-01 to 62-08, contains none. The rule names two correction routes, and neither is co-op specific. 62-05(b) is a petition “for correction of a clerical error or error in description related to the surcharge” under the City’s clerical-error chapter, and whether a wrong share count fits that description is not stated. 62-05(a) amends the market value itself under DOF’s ordinary assessed-value correction rules, but only “For any fiscal year beginning on or after July 1, 2027,” so it is no help in the first year; DOF pointed commenters at the section when they asked about challenging valuations based on share ratios. The other route is the Tax Commission value challenge, where an allocation that overstates a unit’s interest produces a market value that “exceeds the Full Value of the Property or co-op unit,” the ground the instructions call Excessive. Either way the building’s own share schedule is the evidence, and the trade press advice to boards is to build one now, “a schedule of the units and the number of shares in the corporation to identify which apartments are likely to exceed the $1 million threshold.” That is commentary, and it is also the arithmetic above.

Frequently asked questions about the co-op pied-à-terre tax

Is the surcharge the shareholder’s debt or the co-op’s?

Both, in different senses. DOF bills the corporation, on the building’s statement of account, and the unpaid amount is a lien on the building and collectible from the corporation by suit or warrant. The statute then directs the corporation to collect it from the tenant-shareholder of the unit. Whether the corporation can do that through maintenance depends on the proprietary lease, which DOF declined to override by rule.

Can the co-op corporation file the DOF application for a shareholder?

Yes. The corporation is an “owner” under the statute, DOF’s preamble says “statutory provisions authorize cooperative corporations to file appeals in relation to the surcharge,” and the co-op filing type on DOF’s portal is where it goes, by October 6, 2026. The proof is still the shareholder’s, and the documents DOF asks for are listed on the surcharge explainer.

Does one shareholder’s proof clear the building?

No. Under 62-06(d) proof for a cooperative unit excludes “only such residential cooperative dwelling unit.” Each covered unit needs its own filing, at DOF or at the Tax Commission.

What if the share count DOF used is wrong?

The rule gives two routes, neither co-op specific: a petition under 62-05(b) for “a clerical error or error in description related to the surcharge,” and, for fiscal years beginning on or after July 1, 2027 only, an amendment of the market value itself under 62-05(a). For fiscal 2026-27 that leaves the Tax Commission, on a value challenge on Form TC107 for the unit. Start with the stock certificate and the corporation’s total shares, and with the last co-op abatement filing, one place DOF collects share data.

Is the deadline different for a co-op?

Not at DOF: the co-op application and the homes-and-condos application both carry October 6, 2026. At the Tax Commission the date is keyed to tax class, and a cooperative reached by the surcharge as a cooperative is class 2 by the statute’s own definition, so the date is March 1, 2027; March 15, 2027 is the date for class 1 property such as a one- to three-family home.

What changes on July 1, 2028?

Phase two. The share-ratio imputation ends, a co-op unit’s market value becomes a value DOF determines for the unit itself from sales of comparable co-op and condominium units, and the threshold becomes $5 million. The phase two ladder is on the pied-à-terre tax page.

Is the court challenge relevant to a co-op?

The lawsuit is covered on the lawsuit page. As of this page’s date DOF’s program page carries no litigation notice, and the October 6, 2026 date stands on both filing links.

What does it cost to ask MGNY?

Nothing. A real person answers at (212) 343-1111, right away, and the consultation is free. You engage us only if you want the filing handled for you. MGNY has worked NYC property tax since 2008, with $50M+ in tax refunds secured for owners, 900+ developments with tax abatements secured and $30B+ represented in appeals.

Sources, all read September 10, 2026: New York State, S.9009-C / A.10009-C, Part HH (Chapter 59 of the Laws of 2026, which added Chapter 32 to Title 11 of the NYC Administrative Code; quoted above from the enacted bill) and Tax Law Article 30-C; NYC Rules, Rule Relating to Surcharge on Certain Non-Primary Residences (19 RCNY Chapter 62, effective July 14, 2026, with DOF’s Statement of Basis and Purpose in the signed rule) and the emergency amendment effective August 3, 2026; the rulemaking comments of the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums, Eric H. Berger, Esq. and 120 W.70 Owners Corp.; NYC Department of Finance, Non-Primary Residence Surcharge, its co-op filing type on SmartFile, Property Assessments, Late Payments and the Cooperative Property Tax Abatement application (Rev. 01.29.2026); NYC Tax Commission, Surcharge Appeal and the TC107 Instructions and the TC107 Application (both Rev. 7-15-2026); New York Business Corporation Law section 508. Commentary: Akerman (July 15, 2026); Miller Samuel (August 19, 2026); Habitat (July 24, 2026); Brick Underground; Schneider Buchel. MGNY Consulting is a private consulting firm and is not affiliated with the NYC Department of Finance or the NYC Tax Commission.

Get our updates first on Google. Deadlines move: the DOF filing window for this year went to September 18, 2026 under an emergency rule and then to October 6, 2026, the date DOF’s page now carries, and the Tax Commission’s March 2027 dates come after it. Tap the button and Google adds MGNY Consulting to your preferred sources, so our coverage surfaces first in your results. No signup and no email, and one tap undoes it.

Share on: