MP York: Land protection for locals must not mean a free pass for foreign investors

GREAT BAY--Member of Parliament Darryl York used the Central Committee discussion on the proposed repeal of the land tax and inheritance tax to underscore a point he said must not be misunderstood: his questions on the subject was not a call to impose land tax on local families, but a call to ensure foreign investors contribute fairly to St. Maarten when they acquire property and profit from the island’s economy.

Additionally, his questions to Minister of Finance Marinka Gumbs were not intended as obstruction, but as a consistent call for data, direction, and a policy framework that protects local ownership while requiring foreign investors to “pay their due” through appropriate mechanisms. The MP recognized that his comments and questioning approach could be misconstrued.

In other words, he supports removing taxes that could pressure local families off their land, but in doing so, he wants government to make sure investors who buy and profit on St. Maarten still pay a fair share.

During the meeting, MP York acknowledged the Minister of Finance’s consistency in bringing forward legislation to abolish both taxes and stated he did not expect significant opposition to the overall direction. He said the issue is not whether St. Maarten should protect local landownership, but whether government is simultaneously using every available policy tool to avoid a one-sided outcome where investors benefit while the country receives too little in return.

“People come to St. Maarten, investors come to St. Maarten and they benefit,” York said, adding that “the benefit does not go both ways.” He argued that if St. Maarten removes certain instruments from its tax framework, the country must be equally serious about designing other revenue and policy measures that ensure those who come to invest still “contribute to St. Maarten.”

York emphasized that his concern centers on foreign investment, not local landholders, particularly families who are land rich but cash poor and already carry the weight of historical and legal complexities surrounding succession property. He said St. Maarten should not treat itself as if it is competing for investor attention from a position of weakness, noting that the island’s strategic value and demand from investors give policymakers room to require fair contributions rather than offering concessions by default.

He further stated that he supports open dialogue on how to structure that contribution fairly and effectively, including looking at whether alternatives to a broad land tax could better achieve the country’s goals. His central request, repeated several times in the meeting, was for clarity: what is the government’s long-term tax reform vision, what is the target outcome, and which options have been evaluated to ensure that policy changes strengthen St. Maarten’s fiscal resilience instead of narrowing the state’s tools without replacement.

York also raised the importance of transparency in decision-making as the draft law advances, stressing that Parliament and the public should be able to understand the “vision” and “goal” guiding tax reform, including how St. Maarten intends to balance competitiveness with fairness and ensure that economic gains do not flow outward without adequate return.

‍