The think tank chief who argued for taxing the rich joins the team tasked with making that argument real
The Policy Becomes the Job
For years, Nathan Gusdorf ran the Fiscal Policy Institute, one of New York’s most influential progressive economic policy organizations. The Institute publishes research documenting the economic case for taxing the wealthy, closing corporate loopholes, and investing in public services. It has been a primary intellectual source for the arguments Mayor Zohran Mamdani has made throughout his campaign and into his administration about how to close New York City’s budget gap. Now Gusdorf is leaving the Institute to join the Mamdani administration as deputy director of policy, planning, and delivery at the New York City Office of Management and Budget. The person who made the case is now inside the room where the decisions get made.
What the Hire Signals
The appointment of a Fiscal Policy Institute leader to a senior OMB role is a direct and deliberate signal from the Mamdani administration about how it intends to approach budget negotiations. Gusdorf’s expertise is in exactly the intersection of policy and fiscal strategy that the administration needs most: how to structure tax proposals for maximum political viability in Albany, how to model the revenue implications of different approaches, and how to present progressive fiscal arguments in terms that persuade legislators who are not already convinced. His departure from the Institute is immediate. Emily Eisner, the Institute’s chief economist, will serve as acting executive director during the leadership transition. The Institute said Gusdorf will continue to advocate for the same priorities he championed there, now from within city government.
OMB Director Sherif Soliman and the Budget Team
Gusdorf joins OMB Director Sherif Soliman, who leads the administration’s budget office. Together, they are building the analytical infrastructure for what the Mamdani administration needs to accomplish: close a $5.4 billion budget gap without cutting services, without raising property taxes if possible, and while funding the 2-K child care program, the parks investment, the bike infrastructure, and the other commitments the mayor has made. That is an extremely difficult fiscal task, and it requires people who can both model the numbers and argue for them convincingly in public and in legislative negotiations.
The Millionaire Tax and the Albany Stakes
The Fiscal Policy Institute, under Gusdorf’s leadership, published research concluding that a modest increase in the top marginal rate on incomes above $1 million could generate between $2 billion and $4 billion annually for state and city priorities. That research has been central to the Mamdani administration’s public case for the millionaire tax in Albany negotiations. With Gusdorf now inside OMB, the administration can draw on his institutional knowledge of that research, his relationships with Albany staff and legislators, and his understanding of how fiscal arguments land in different political contexts. The Fiscal Policy Institute remains an independent advocacy organization that will continue to publish research relevant to these debates. The hire does not make the Institute an arm of city government. But it does mean that the city’s budget team now includes someone who spent years developing the intellectual case for exactly the policies the mayor is pursuing.
The Citizens Budget Commission Counterpoint
The Citizens Budget Commission, which takes a fiscally conservative approach to city budget analysis, has consistently raised concerns about the sustainability of the Mamdani administration’s fiscal strategy. The Commission has noted that the city’s reliance on state-delivered tax increases introduces significant uncertainty into the budget, that the millionaire tax may not generate the revenue projected if high earners alter their behavior in response, and that the administration needs a more robust contingency plan than the 9.5 percent property tax hike currently serves as fallback. These are serious analytical arguments, and the administration’s response to them will be shaped in part by the OMB team Gusdorf is joining. The Citizens Budget Commission has a long track record of engaging seriously with city budget questions from a different fiscal philosophy than the Fiscal Policy Institute. The two organizations represent the genuine intellectual tension at the center of New York City’s budget debate, and that debate is now partially being waged inside city government itself.
