Published on and written by Cyril Jarnias
Moving to the United States as an affluent executive or senior manager is about more than just picking a nice house with a view. Between a tight real estate market, unprecedented cost-of-living gaps between major cities, specific tax rules for non-residents, and a highly fragmented economic geography, a successful relocation requires a near-professional approach.
For a high-income profile, the stakes are twofold: preserving purchasing power and securing assets, while choosing an environment that aligns with career and family goals. High-end real estate remains in high demand, rents in certain neighborhoods exceed mortgage payments, and the annual cost of living for an executive can vary by a factor of two or more depending on the city.
A national housing market already expensive, but highly uneven
Nationally, housing is objectively costly. The median home price is around $391,000 to $415,000, with a national median rent close to $2,000 per month. Renting a standard two-bedroom apartment runs about $1,450, but these averages mask huge disparities.
Mortgage interest rates have stabilized in a range of 6.1% to 6.7% for a thirty-year loan, and around 5.5% for fifteen years. In practice, this means a typical monthly mortgage payment (excluding taxes and insurance) is around $2,100 for an average-priced home, while the total payment including property taxes, insurance, and mortgage insurance comes to roughly $3,000 per month.
The monthly payment on a median-priced home has increased by more than $1,500 between 2021 and today.
The gap between rent and mortgage payments: a key factor when settling
In many major cities, renting remains cheaper in the short term than buying. National analyses show that, on average, a mortgage payment is about 38% higher than rent for a comparable home. Across the 50 largest metro areas, renting was generally cheaper than owning in 2020, and this trend remains significant, even if some affordable areas in the Midwest or South are exceptions.
The price-to-rent ratio compares the purchase price to 12 months of rent: under 15 favors buying, between 15 and 20 is neutral, and over 20 favors renting. Some cities far exceed this last threshold.
| City | Approximate price-to-rent ratio | Signal for an affluent newcomer |
|---|---|---|
| San Francisco | 25+ | Renting often more rational in the medium term |
| Los Angeles | 22 | Large gap between buying and renting |
| Seattle | 21 | Seller’s market; buying requires a long horizon |
| Detroit | 8 | Very attractive buying for patient investors |
| Cleveland | 10 | Competitive homeownership opportunities |
| Pittsburgh | 12 | Buying quickly profitable with a long horizon |
For an executive relocating with an uncertain horizon (3 to 5 years), this ratio is decisive: in a city like San Francisco, buying generally only makes sense with a long-term outlook (often more than 10 years to amortize acquisition and holding costs), whereas an executive moving to Detroit or Cleveland can consider buying quickly, even for partial or hybrid use (residence plus rental investment).
Cost of living: a record gap between major cities
The United States is experiencing an unprecedented gap in cost of living between major metropolitan areas, according to the latest studies. Some cities require top-management-level incomes to maintain a comfortable executive lifestyle, while others allow a luxurious lifestyle at much lower costs.
Cities that literally “eat” an executive’s salary
Comparative indices quantify this gap. San Francisco reaches a cost-of-living index of 287% of the national average, meaning an executive life there costs nearly three times the U.S. average. New York follows closely with a housing index of 268%.
For an executive lifestyle including comfortable housing in a sought-after neighborhood, possible private schools, frequent travel, fine dining, and services, the budget range is very wide.
| Metro Area | Annual living expenses for an executive | Summary comment |
|---|---|---|
| Dallas | ≈ $180,000 | Pro-business city, controlled costs |
| Medium-sized “big cities” (Houston, Denver…) | $200,000 – $250,000 | High comfort, lower pressure |
| Miami | > $250,000, despite tax advantage | Sunshine, no state income tax, real estate premiums |
| San Francisco | ≈ $425,000 | Most expensive city in the country |
| New York City | Near the top of the ranking | Very expensive housing and services |
An executive earning around $250,000 to $300,000 a year will therefore find themselves in a very different situation depending on the city chosen: extremely comfortable lifestyle in a major Texas hub, or strong financial pressure in New York or San Francisco, even with a similar salary.
Comparative data for several major cities
Cost-of-living data allow clear comparisons across several key markets. The table below summarizes key structural information for a decision-maker:
| City | Cost of living index (national base 100) | Median home price | Average rent 1 BR | Median household income |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| San Francisco | 195.7 | $1,400,000 | $3,500 | $104,000 |
| New York (NYC) | 187.2 | $850,000 | $3,000 | $81,000 |
| Los Angeles | 148.2 | $975,000 | $2,800 | $72,000 |
| San Jose | 144.6 | $1,300,000 | $2,900 | $103,000 |
| Boston | 142.3 | $750,000 | $2,700 | $85,000 |
| Washington DC | 140.1 | $650,000 | $2,500 | $90,000 |
| Seattle | 136.8 | $800,000 | $2,400 | $87,000 |
| San Diego | 134.5 | $850,000 | $2,600 | $80,000 |
| Honolulu | 131.9 | $700,000 | $2,300 | $75,000 |
| Miami | 127.4 | $550,000 | $2,200 | $65,000 |
In almost all these cities, the median price far exceeds the purchasing power of a local median household, meaning the demand for upscale housing comes largely from highly paid executives, professionals, financiers, tech workers, and international investors. For a foreign senior manager, this creates dynamic but highly competitive markets.
Executive housing: from luxury apartments to C-suite residences
For an affluent executive or senior manager, the issue is not just finding a place to live, but aligning housing with time constraints, representation needs, and often schooling for children.
Price ranges for C-suite level housing
Studies on housing costs specifically targeting executives show striking ranges. For comparable high-end properties (size, neighborhood, amenities, security, environment), the housing budget can range:
– From about $850,000 in Austin for a top-tier property,
– To over $4.2 million in Manhattan for a comparable high-end home.
In New York, the high end is particularly spectacular. Some neighborhoods have staggering medians:
| Neighborhood (NYC) | Median sale price | Typical profile |
|---|---|---|
| Hudson Yards | ≈ $5.95M | Ultra-luxury, flagship address for executives |
| TriBeCa | ≈ $4.15M | Iconic neighborhood for established wealth |
| SoHo | ≈ $3.69M | Prestige lofts, creative and high-end image |
| DUMBO (Brooklyn) | ≈ $1.88M | Brooklyn’s first luxury neighborhood |
These orders of magnitude give an idea of the entry ticket into the most iconic markets. An executive seeking a pied-à-terre in Manhattan can also look at intermediate segments, but data shows that nearly 39 New York neighborhoods already have a median above $1 million, and fifteen exceed $1.5 million comfortably.
For a mobile executive, luxury rentals retain definite appeal, if only to test the city and neighborhood before buying. On Manhattan, asking rents for an executive segment are significant:
The monthly rent for a luxury two-bedroom apartment can exceed $15,000 in the highest-end segments.
By comparison, premium Brooklyn neighborhoods (DUMBO, Downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburg) see their two-bedroom units in the upper range of $4,000 to over $6,000, with significant premiums for waterfront views and state-of-the-art buildings.
In cities like Los Angeles, Miami, or Seattle, high-end rents are also very high but often slightly lower than Manhattan or San Francisco for comparable amenities.
Rent or buy: a strategic decision for an executive
For an affluent senior manager, the question is not so much “Can we buy?” but “Is it worth doing so now, in this city, with this time horizon?” National data provides some useful benchmarks.
Time horizon: often the decisive factor
Comparative cost-benefit analyses of buying vs. renting show an average breakeven point around 5 to 7 years of ownership. Below that:
– For a horizon under 3 years, renting almost always wins.
– Up to 5 years, the curves often still favor renting, especially in expensive markets.
In cities like San Francisco, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, or Austin, in their most expensive neighborhoods, profitability models show breakeven points ranging from 8 to 18 years depending on neighborhood, interest rate assumptions, price appreciation, and rent growth.
Conversely, in more affordable markets in the Midwest and South, the breakeven point drops to around 3 to 5 years. In more than 80% of Midwest counties, buying a typical single-family home is already cheaper than renting a comparable three-bedroom property.
Comparing total cost over 5, 10, and 15 years
Sample simulations, based on a 20% down payment, a rate near 6.75%, average local taxes (1.1% property tax), and 1% annual maintenance, yield instructive orders of magnitude:
| Horizon | Cumulative cost of buying (median scenario) | Cumulative cost of renting (median scenario) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 years | ≈ $248,000 | ≈ $118,800 |
| 10 years | ≈ $432,000 | ≈ $254,400 |
| 15 years | ≈ $618,000 | ≈ $410,400 |
In the short term, the advantage clearly goes to renting, even for a household with a good down payment. The shift in favor of ownership only appears when considering capital accumulation (home equity), possible tax benefits, and anticipated rent increases (often 4% to 6% per year over the past decade).
For an executive relocated for 3 years in an expensive metro area, it is generally better to rent a high-end property for liquidity. Local real estate purchase is only justified if the horizon lengthens or if it is part of an overall wealth strategy (geographic diversification, inheritance, long-term rental investment).
Understanding the true cost of homeownership in the United States
A classic pitfall for affluent expats is to think only in terms of a mortgage payment. However, in most states, the loan is just the first line of a much broader housing bill.
Several studies precisely quantify this hidden cost. On average, a U.S. homeowner spends about $1,510 per month beyond their mortgage payment to cover:
Beyond the purchase price, owning real estate in the U.S. involves recurring annual costs that vary by location and property type.
About 1.1% of the property’s value per year nationally, but up to nearly 2% in some states like Texas, and much lower in Hawaii or Alabama.
Averages $1,500 to $2,000 per year, much more in states with climate risk or for luxury properties.
Often between $100 and $300 per month, but can exceed $700 in some very high-end buildings.
A prudent rule is at least 1% to 2% of the property’s value per year, i.e., $4,000 to $8,000 for a $400,000 home, much more for a high-end villa.
Combined annually, these “invisible” costs amount to around $16,000, excluding the loan, for an average property. For luxury homes with pools, large lots, sophisticated security systems, and custom finishes, these amounts rise quickly.
Homeowners insurance: soaring costs, especially for valuable properties
Another component is starting to weigh heavily on budgets: homeowners insurance. Since 2019, average premiums have risen about 70% nationally, driven by climate risk, rising construction costs, and more frequent claims. The average annual insurance premium already exceeds $2,900 and is expected to surpass $3,000, representing nearly $900 more per year compared to 2021.
Insurance premiums for high-end residences with over $1.5 million in coverage increased by approximately 130% between 2020 and 2024.
For an executive buying a property on the coast in Florida or California, with a pool, outbuildings, valuables (art, jewelry, wine cellar), resident staff, and high liability needs, the insurance premium can become a major budget line, sometimes higher than the property tax itself.
Choosing your city: balancing prestige, taxes, and daily life
For an affluent senior manager, choosing a city is not just about the company headquarters. At comparable salaries, the living experience and savings capacity can be radically different.
New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles: the high-intensity capitals
New York City remains the financial, media, and cultural capital of the country. Housing costs are among the highest: a studio or one-bedroom in Manhattan typically rents for $3,500 to $4,500 per month, while some central neighborhoods average over $4,500. Buying is equally demanding, with high-end apartments in Manhattan often exceeding $1.5 to $2 million for modest sizes.
The monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco often exceeds $3,500.
Los Angeles, more spread out and slightly cheaper than San Francisco, remains an expensive city. Rents for one-bedroom units in desirable neighborhoods range from $2,200 to $3,000, often more for very high-end properties. The cost of living is further increased by car dependency, with $600 to $1,000 per month potentially going toward lease payments, auto insurance, gas, maintenance, and parking.
Miami, Austin, Seattle: attractive cities with very different profiles
Miami is increasingly attracting international executives and leaders, especially for its lack of state income tax, climate, and connectivity. Rents there are far from cheap, however: a well-located apartment can easily reach $1,900 to $2,800 per month, or much more in sought-after beachfront neighborhoods. Insurance premiums, burdened by hurricane risk, are particularly high for coastal residences.
The price of upscale properties for senior executives in Austin, offering a balance between high salaries and moderate cost of living.
Seattle illustrates an intermediate category: very high cost of living (index 136.8), median home prices of $800,000 to $900,000 depending on the neighborhood, rents between $2,400 and $3,500 in central areas. The absence of state income tax is an advantage, but the tech ecosystem and high salaries keep sustained pressure on real estate prices.
Cheap states, expensive cities: don’t confuse the two
Some states are structurally cheap, like Oklahoma, Mississippi, or West Virginia, with a cost-of-living index below 90 (100 is the national average). Yet an international executive will rarely live there, due to the lack of a major economic hub, international infrastructure, or developed high-end real estate markets.
Conversely, some expensive states like Hawaii have very high cost-of-living indices but are not necessarily a rational choice for business-oriented executives, given the distance and local economic structure.
Specific constraints for affluent foreign buyers
A notable advantage of the United States, compared to other Western countries, is the absence of significant federal restrictions on foreign real estate purchases. However, the recent proliferation of state laws targeting certain countries and growing regulation of luxury transactions require caution and legal advice.
Purchase rights: a generally welcoming environment
At the federal level, a non-resident can buy any type of property (residential or commercial) without a visa, without ownership caps, and without specific surcharges. Foreigners on temporary visas (H‑1B, L‑1, etc.) can become owners, as can investors buying from abroad without even setting foot on U.S. soil. Property rights are robust and the legal framework transparent, which explains the appeal of this market for HNWIs.
Unlike Canada (moratorium on residential purchases by foreigners until 2027) or Singapore (60% stamp duty for non-residents), the United States does not impose generalized confiscatory surtaxes on foreign real estate purchases.
Growing restrictions at the state level
Conversely, more and more states are adopting laws targeting land purchases by nationals of countries considered “adversaries”. As of late 2025, about 36 states had already implemented restrictions or bans, mainly concerning:
– Agricultural land,
– Land near critical infrastructure (power plants, ports),
– Parcels near military bases,
– Strategic natural resources.
Florida, for example, prohibits nationals of certain countries (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria) from acquiring property within 10 miles of military installations or critical infrastructure, with penalties including forced sale.
Before any offer, a wealthy foreign executive must systematically check whether the state or county has specific regulations and whether their country is on a local blacklist. Geolocation (GIS) can be used in due diligence to avoid conflicts with these perimeters.
Enhanced compliance for all-cash luxury purchases
All-cash purchases of high-end properties, especially through shell companies or trusts, face particular scrutiny from U.S. anti-money laundering authorities. Geographic Targeting Orders require title companies to identify beneficial owners for transactions exceeding certain thresholds ($300,000 to $1 million depending on the county) in markets such as:
– New York (all boroughs),
– Miami and parts of South Florida,
– Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose,
– Seattle, Dallas, San Antonio, Las Vegas, among others.
For a foreign executive, this means that an all-cash purchase above these thresholds in these areas requires providing detailed information about the true identity of the ultimate buyers and the source of funds, which calls for a properly anticipated legal and tax structuring strategy.
Wealth and tax considerations for high-income individuals
Beyond lifestyle comfort, U.S. real estate represents for many executives a central component of their wealth preservation strategy. However, tax and inheritance rules differ significantly from those in other countries, especially for non-residents.
Local taxes: property and income taxes
Every property owner, resident or not, pays an annual property tax to local governments. The effective rate varies but is typically between 0.25% and 2% of the property’s value. States like New Jersey and Illinois are among the most taxed, while Hawaii and Alabama remain relatively lenient. For budgeting a multi-million-dollar high-end property, the property tax quickly becomes a six-figure amount accumulated over a few years.
Nine states (Florida, Texas, Nevada, Washington…) do not impose a state income tax, while California has a marginal rate of ~13% and New York ~10%. This influences the tax residence and property ownership strategies of international executives and investors.
Ensuring continuity: inheritance and transfer
The U.S. estate tax system is particularly harsh for non-residents. While U.S. citizens or residents benefit from a massive exemption (on the order of several million dollars, still very high in 2026 before potentially dropping if current provisions expire), a non-domiciled individual only has an exemption of $60,000 on assets considered situated in the United States.
A foreign executive owning a multi-million-dollar U.S. property exposes their heirs to an estate tax of up to 40% on a large portion of its value. To optimize and protect wealth, it is crucial to use holding structures such as corporations, trusts, or indirect ownership via non-U.S. entities.
Real estate as a pillar of diversification for HNWIs
Studies on the investment behavior of large fortunes show that real estate remains a key tool for wealth preservation against financial market volatility and inflation. For the most sophisticated investors, ownership of an iconic residence (iconic neighborhood, remarkable architecture, rarity) is considered a long-term asset, on par with works of art or private equity fund stakes.
Strategies vary, from turnkey acquisitions at premium prices for immediate use, to major renovation projects in the best locations (“good bones” in prime neighborhoods) aimed at creating value. Financial sophistication also appears in the use of highly leveraged loans, refinancing after appreciation, and building a portfolio of cash-flow-positive properties to create a self-sustaining real estate base.
Corporate relocation and mobility packages
For an executive relocated by their company, the issue is not just negotiating a bonus, but also calibrating the relocation package to absorb a sometimes bewildering housing environment.
Corporate mobility packages increasingly include:
– Full moving expenses (packing, shipping, storage),
– Temporary furnished housing (often 30 to 90 days),
– Rent subsidy or partial coverage of a mortgage payment,
– Schooling assistance, cultural integration support, and even spouse/family accompaniment.
The budget for a domestic relocation of an executive homeowner, including sale of residence, settlement in an expensive metro area, and schooling for children, can exceed this amount.
For a very affluent profile, what needs to be negotiated with the firm is less about full coverage (which the individual could handle themselves) than about risk sharing: lease duration covered, rent indexation clause, down payment on a future purchase, or inclusion of the local cost of living in the overall package (cost-of-living adjustment).
In summary: treat relocation as an investment project
Moving to the United States as an affluent executive or senior manager means entering a market where:
– The median home value far exceeds the capacity of the local middle class,
– Interest rates remain high, inflating monthly payments,
– Cost-of-living gaps between cities are at record levels,
– Hidden costs (taxes, insurance, maintenance) weigh increasingly, especially on high-value properties,
– Local laws regulating foreign buyers are multiplying.
Given this context, a successful relocation is neither a simple neighborhood choice nor a spur-of-the-moment decision. It must be approached as a comprehensive investment project, integrating several strategic dimensions.
– A clearly defined time horizon (3, 5, 10 years or more),
– A rational decision between high-end renting and buying, based on price-to-rent ratios and projected total costs,
– City selection that combines professional opportunities, quality of life, and financial sustainability,
– Robust legal and tax structuring, particularly for inheritance and ownership of luxury properties,
– Careful negotiation of the relocation package, when mobility is employer-driven.
For an affluent executive or senior manager, the United States still offers unique opportunities: some of the most liquid real estate markets, fast-growing cities, and a protective legal framework. But this appeal comes with increased complexity, and the best way to take advantage of it is to approach your relocation as you would a strategic business project: with data, scenarios, local experts… and a long-term vision.
Affluent executive or senior manager
A wealth planning project or a question? Contact us now to speak with a wealth management expert.
Disclaimer: The information provided on this website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or professional advice. We encourage you to consult qualified experts before making any investment, real estate, or expatriation decisions. Although we strive to maintain up-to-date and accurate information, we do not guarantee the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the proposed content. As investment and expatriation involve risks, we disclaim any liability for potential losses or damages arising from the use of this site. Your use of this site confirms your acceptance of these terms and your understanding of the associated risks.
Cyril Jarnias is an independent expert in international wealth management with over 20 years of experience. As an expatriate himself, he is dedicated to helping individuals and business leaders build, protect, and pass on their wealth with complete peace of mind.
On his website, cyriljarnias.com, he shares his expertise on international real estate, offshore company formation, and expatriation.
Thanks to his expertise, he offers sound advice to optimize his clients' wealth management. Cyril Jarnias is also recognized for his appearances in many prestigious media outlets such as BFM Business, les Français de l’étranger, Le Figaro, Les Echos, and Mieux vivre votre argent, where he shares his knowledge and know-how in wealth management.
