Author Topic: question about owning property and property tax (Read 1985 times)

magooch · « **Reply #30 on:** March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM »

My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.

DalesCarpentry · « **Reply #31 on:** March 31, 2009, 04:53:32 AM »

Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM

My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.

How very true. When we were looking to buy a house we always asked how much the taxes would be. Some towns around are a lot higher in taxes than here. Our yearly taxes and school taxes are under $1,000 here. Dale

Oldshooter · « **Reply #32 on:** March 31, 2009, 08:35:20 AM »

In Texas we pay property taxes and school taxes also! It burns my bottom to have to pay school taxes when My kids are grown and the The black rabbit in town pays zip with 6 kids in school!

Cabin4 · « **Reply #33 on:** March 31, 2009, 03:24:51 PM »

Quote from: TM7 on March 31, 2009, 01:21:03 PM

Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM
My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.
.
Property taxes are usually calculated by millage rates...essentially everybody pays at the same rate per 1000 valuation in theory even though more land gets you more taxes regardless of valuation. Your theory seems to imply that in terms of income somebody earning 10 million should pay the exact tax amount as somebody earning 10,000. Even though most property taxes are set up on a millage rates, when one goes to the clerks office or simply reviews real estate advertisements, one quickly learns that real estate taxes are tilted very very favorablely for the benefit of high end property owners. For example, I pay about 12K per annum on an average home in my neighborhood, but the guy down the street in a $4 million estate pays about 27k.
This is one of the best kept secrets all over America, and if common people ever figure it out there would be a revolution.

..TM7

The guy in the $4m house contributed more to the economy than you. He's paying by your numbers more than double what you pay in taxes but receieves the same amount of tax payer services as you do. He uses the same sewer, water, streets, schools, library, etc. Why do you think he should pay yet more?? I think he should pay the same as you given similar size house & lot. House value or income levels should have absolutly nothing to do with property taxes. That's why its called property tax.If he makes more than you, he's paying a higher rate on both state & federal income tax rate.

DalesCarpentry · « **Reply #34 on:** March 31, 2009, 04:42:53 PM »

Quote from: Cabin4 on March 31, 2009, 03:24:51 PM

Quote from: TM7 on March 31, 2009, 01:21:03 PM
Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM
My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.
.
Property taxes are usually calculated by millage rates...essentially everybody pays at the same rate per 1000 valuation in theory even though more land gets you more taxes regardless of valuation. Your theory seems to imply that in terms of income somebody earning 10 million should pay the exact tax amount as somebody earning 10,000. Even though most property taxes are set up on a millage rates, when one goes to the clerks office or simply reviews real estate advertisements, one quickly learns that real estate taxes are tilted very very favorablely for the benefit of high end property owners. For example, I pay about 12K per annum on an average home in my neighborhood, but the guy down the street in a $4 million estate pays about 27k.
This is one of the best kept secrets all over America, and if common people ever figure it out there would be a revolution.

..TM7

The guy in the $4m house contributed more to the economy than you. He's paying by your numbers more than double what you pay in taxes but receieves the same amount of tax payer services as you do. He uses the same sewer, water, streets, schools, library, etc. Why do you think he should pay yet more?? I think he should pay the same as you given similar size house & lot. House value or income levels should have absolutly nothing to do with property taxes. That's why its called property tax.If he makes more than you, he's paying a higher rate on both state & federal income tax rate.

I really only wish I had that problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dale

-Shaggy- · « **Reply #35 on:** March 31, 2009, 04:54:50 PM »

I really only wish I had that problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dale

No you don't. Then you would be one of the evil rich who must be punished.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #36 on:** April 01, 2009, 04:32:02 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on April 01, 2009, 02:04:44 AM

Quote from: Cabin4 on March 31, 2009, 03:24:51 PM
Quote from: TM7 on March 31, 2009, 01:21:03 PM
Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM
My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.
.
Property taxes are usually calculated by millage rates...essentially everybody pays at the same rate per 1000 valuation in theory even though more land gets you more taxes regardless of valuation. Your theory seems to imply that in terms of income somebody earning 10 million should pay the exact tax amount as somebody earning 10,000. Even though most property taxes are set up on a millage rates, when one goes to the clerks office or simply reviews real estate advertisements, one quickly learns that real estate taxes are tilted very very favorablely for the benefit of high end property owners. For example, I pay about 12K per annum on an average home in my neighborhood, but the guy down the street in a $4 million estate pays about 27k.
This is one of the best kept secrets all over America, and if common people ever figure it out there would be a revolution.

..TM7

The guy in the $4m house contributed more to the economy than you. He's paying by your numbers more than double what you pay in taxes but receieves the same amount of tax payer services as you do. He uses the same sewer, water, streets, schools, library, etc. Why do you think he should pay yet more?? I think he should pay the same as you given similar size house & lot. House value or income levels should have absolutly nothing to do with property taxes. That's why its called property tax.If he makes more than you, he's paying a higher rate on both state & federal income tax rate.
.
Obiviously you didn't read what I wrote, or worse, did not comprehend....read it again. What I wrote is that the real estate tax is based on millage rates per $1000 as an example. If you look at what middle and low value properties are assessed it is not in direct proportion to what high end properties are assessed; and in fact high end properties get a break. At my vacation home I pay about $1,800 property tax on a $225k chateau, but guys down the road pay about $4,500 on 3 and 4 million lodges. I suggest doing the math and research on property taxation.

The usual nutter elitist idea ( a Darwinian Theory extension) that just because a guy lives in a 4 million estate and so contributes more to the economy than me, may be completely erroneous and slanted...probably good pablum for the somnomlent masses to feed and dream about though. For all we know he may be a thief, or drained the economy of some resources, conned off people more than me, or is just lucky....and probably there is no correlation of wealth to social contributions in this life, but likely there is a direct correlation of wealth to crime and various deceptive activites and public-politco accesses.
Also, it is incorrect assuming he receives public resources equal to me...likely he relys on police and fire protection more and on a grander scale, uses the septic system more and public utilities more, and generates alot more waste stream from more luxurious surroundings. That's his right, and based on his ability to pay, he can do as he pleases, but don't ask me to subsidize his life style based on skewed property tax assessments favored in his direction. This country was founded on more egalitarian principles than this...at least we are told that.

...TM7

So... then I still don't understand the purpose of your original post as a response to magooch's post if it was NOT to point out your opinion of property tax inequity.

I quess we can try and figure out if the guy is a theif or ban robber. What the heck, he may have even served in Bush's cabinet. But since we don't knwo that why don't we stick with some reasonable set of facts. He has a house a more exspensive house and pays for more services to upkeep it and he pays a higher state and ferderal income tax rate. So as a percentage of his income, he giving more than you. And, he has an inequity in his property tax rate which forces him to pay more for the services that you use and pay at a lower rate. So if there's any unfairness in the tax system, it's unfair to him.

But let me ask question: You said the guy is in a $4m house. How is it possible he did not contribute more if he "paid" for it. By definition, the money left his pocket and went to someone else’s. So the fact is he did contribute more then you in that example.

I don't think your points about grander scale on his use of public services match the variance in tax rate by any means.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #37 on:** April 01, 2009, 05:06:09 AM »

In Alabama, if you are over 65, and on a fixed income, you don't pay property taxes on the home you live in. If you own other property you do. My mother doesn't pay property tax.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #38 on:** April 01, 2009, 06:02:23 AM »

Quote from: DALESCARPENTRY on March 30, 2009, 03:12:24 PM

I worked for a woman in Dublin OH for more than a year. She lived on the golf course in a sub divison called Tartan Fields. These are very wealthy people that live there. There are sports stars and other high profile people in her neighborhood. The guy that started Wendy's resturant son lives a couple streets over. Her home was worth more than a million dollars. She was telling me one day that her property tax there a year was something like $25,000.00. That does not include what she pays Tartan Fields to live there witch is several more thousand dollars. I just shake my head in alw over that. I could not even imagne those kind of taxes. Dale

gee i heard rich people don't pay taxes

i paid over 11 thousand last year
county got 0ver 15% of the rent i collected from this property
state got 7% of the money in sales tax when i spent the money
and then feds get 2?% of whats left after insurance an maitainence

dukkillr · « **Reply #39 on:** April 01, 2009, 07:50:49 AM »

Quote from: 45-70.gov on April 01, 2009, 06:02:23 AM

gee i heard rich people don't pay taxes

That's the crazy talk of the far left (and one of the guys posting on this thread).

I can promise you that they do. In fact the bottom 40% pay no taxes and the top 1% pay 39% of the total take.

Now, quickly, plug your ears because here comes the crazy talk!

SM Outdoors · « **Reply #40 on:** April 01, 2009, 08:23:54 AM »

Now, quickly, plug your ears because here comes the crazy talk![/b]

hahahahaha...... I am waiting for this also....

gypsyman · « **Reply #41 on:** April 01, 2009, 08:24:52 AM »

I know this thread is about property tax's. But to say the bottom 1/3 of income people don't pay tax's is laughable. Income tax,maybe. But even those people have to buy clothes,gas,toilet paper.Soda pop here in Ohio is taxed.There are so many hidden tax's we pay. Look at your phone bill or cable bill,(satillite dish service),cell phone bill. Everybody pays alot more than they realize. I get a kick out of it, when the president,no matter which one, says, the bottom 1/3 or 1/2 don't have to pay tax's. BS-BS-BS gypsyman

dukkillr · « **Reply #42 on:** April 01, 2009, 08:53:57 AM »

Quote from: gypsyman on April 01, 2009, 08:24:52 AM

I know this thread is about property tax's. But to say the bottom 1/3 of income people don't pay tax's is laughable. Income tax,maybe. But even those people have to buy clothes,gas,toilet paper.Soda pop here in Ohio is taxed.There are so many hidden tax's we pay. Look at your phone bill or cable bill,(satillite dish service),cell phone bill. Everybody pays alot more than they realize. I get a kick out of it, when the president,no matter which one, says, the bottom 1/3 or 1/2 don't have to pay tax's. BS-BS-BS gypsyman

Two points:
a) At least in Kansas the poor can get refunds of some of these taxes... so yes, they do pay them, but they get the money back...
b) I should have been more specific above... those statistics are for INCOME TAX. I assumed that would be obvious, but if it's not, I apologize.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #43 on:** April 01, 2009, 09:10:32 AM »

Quote from: gypsyman on April 01, 2009, 08:24:52 AM

I know this thread is about property tax's. But to say the bottom 1/3 of income people don't pay tax's is laughable. Income tax,maybe. But even those people have to buy clothes,gas,toilet paper.Soda pop here in Ohio is taxed.There are so many hidden tax's we pay. Look at your phone bill or cable bill,(satillite dish service),cell phone bill. Everybody pays alot more than they realize. I get a kick out of it, when the president,no matter which one, says, the bottom 1/3 or 1/2 don't have to pay tax's. BS-BS-BS gypsyman

Everyone pays use taxes and at an equal rate, and should.

People making over $250k pay an overwhelming majority of all income tax. The bottom 40% pay no taxes and the top 1% pay 39% of the total take.

Dukkillers assesment is 100% correct as it relates to income.

The income tax process is brutal on high income earners. Only the left wingers claim rich people pay no income tax. Yet, they won't disput that the bottom 40% pay no income tax. So apparently no ones pays any income tax in this country according to the left wing socilalist liars...

LONGTOM · « **Reply #44 on:** April 01, 2009, 03:14:07 PM »

Someone once told me that if they had my kind of money they wouldn't worry about a thing!

Three years ago when my small business was booming I paid $169,000 in FED & STATE income tax.

All I can say is - IF THE RICH DON'T PAY TAXES OR PAY THEIR FARE SHARE THEN I GUESS I JUST AIN'T RICH ENOUGH YET!

LONGTOM

wareagleguy · « **Reply #45 on:** April 01, 2009, 03:31:26 PM »

This is a fact. The more land you own in Alabama the less you pay in taxes!!!
The big paper companies pay less per acre than me (joe farmer). The GOP is hard at work protecting the big companies!!!!

45-70.gov · « **Reply #46 on:** April 01, 2009, 03:39:43 PM »

renters pay more property tax than land owners

with all the property taxes i pay

i get the money from my renters

when taxes go up

i send out rent increase notices
staing their increase is due to local electoate / county commissioners

Cabin4 · « **Reply #47 on:** April 01, 2009, 05:35:27 PM »

Quote from: wareagleguy on April 01, 2009, 03:31:26 PM

The GOP is hard at work protecting the big companies!!!!

At least big companies put big amounts of people to work.

While democrates are protecting illegal aliens, street thugs and the other low life forms our society has to offer that don't pay any taxes and contribute nothing to our country.

As much as I hate the GOP, compared to the democrates, their far, far, far better.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #48 on:** April 02, 2009, 02:14:49 AM »

Remember, we have the highest corporate income tax in the world. China has no corporate income tax. Don't know about India. We can easily lower corporate tax with an incentive to bring some of the jobs back. We do need a viable third party. If congress was split 3 ways, maybe we could get the best from both worlds. Free trade does work, IF it is FAIR trade. We can free trade with Canada or Japan or some developed European countries, but countries with low labor costs, no child labor laws, no social security taxes, no retirement age, no environmental laws, etc., it isn't fair.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #49 on:** April 02, 2009, 03:34:33 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on April 02, 2009, 01:27:41 AM

Quote from: Cabin4 on April 01, 2009, 05:35:27 PM
Quote from: wareagleguy on April 01, 2009, 03:31:26 PM
The GOP is hard at work protecting the big companies!!!!

At least big companies put big amounts of people to work.

While democrates are protecting illegal aliens, street thugs and the other low life forms our society has to offer that don't pay any taxes and contribute nothing to our country.

As much as I hate the GOP, compared to the democrates, their far, far, far better.
.
Ummm,,,excuse me. Wasn't the last adminstration sold as a conservative GOP regime with a Congressional majority? And weren't the borders left wide open, I mean WIDE OPEN, even under the spectre of a 'terrorist' attack and co-party amensty plans? And didn't 6,000,000 million jobs get offshored during this regime alone? So, is this how the GOP and wealthy create jobs in the homeland? And By ejecting indigenous labor and importing 3rd world labor for those remaing jobs they couldn't export.? And while our troops were oversees fighting some questionablely concocted wars, their places in US colleges were filled by foreign students, often at taxpayer expenses.?

Just wondering..?

..TM7

The only measure here is which party is worse, not which one is better. They both are horrible. But if you ask me to choose the least harmfull it would have to be the GOP. ANd yes, they favor big business. But what the heck.....those big business employee people in real jobs that produce real products that have a multiplier effect on the economy. The Dems are all about big governmnet. Thats it. Send all yoiur figgin money to Washington so the feds can blow it on non-multiplier worthless government spending project.

The choice is clear. Its all about what you prefer to see as the economic engine of the country. Private corporations and business or the Berney Frank, Chriss Dodd, Pelosi, Reed and the obamanation.... Seems like a simple choice to me.

wareagleguy · « **Reply #50 on:** April 06, 2009, 04:58:48 PM »

THERE IS THE PROBLEM!!!

"WHICH PARTY IS WORSE."

I got an idea, be damned the party. The crooks stole the farm while we a gripe about with party is to blame. The GOP has turned into a group that cares NOTHING for the working man. The Dems care NOTHING for the working man! We have got to get out of our shells and stop this crap.

jlchucker · « **Reply #51 on:** April 07, 2009, 02:48:03 AM »

Quote from: Foxxtrot on March 30, 2009, 05:55:37 PM

My best years were 2003 - 07. My salary was dog low of $30k (2000 - 06) and when we moved to NE it jumped to $48k. Then we moved to VT and I haven't worked since June 2008. No work up here at all. Short term cutting firewood, some paint jobs, hauling hay, mending fences, but no management positions with any decent corporation. Just think, Pre-law BS degree and tons of experience = no work. Doesn't help moving so much, but my wife was trying to get through residency, fellowship, and now cannot find a job. She is a damn doctor and no one will hire her. She has had three interview and none since January....not even a call back on her resume/CV. I can't believe it, I really can't believe a doctor can't find a job. Come August the Fellowship is over and her student loans come due.... $230K in student loans. We are FUBAR. She is scared shitless and so am I. If she doesn't find a position I am going to have a fire sale on everything I own just to get us out of VT.

I've lived here all my life, as did my parents. This is a State living off the hype of years gone by, but are no more. Once there was (in spite of tourist ads) lots of industry and jobs here. It has systematically been driven away by a steady inward migration of socialism. Good luck to you and your wife at finding a decent job here. I ended up, after the machine tool industry was forced out, working for the Federal Government--a job I retired from but was never really proud of. It let me stay in the State. In retrospect I wonder why I even wanted to stay. My brother just participated in a job fair here for his employer, who had 4 positions to fill. There were over 400 over-qualified applicants from everywhere putting in for these jobs. While I own property here, as well as my home, I too am taking steps to get out of this place. It isn't what it's advertised to be, or anything like it once was--just a place to pay increasingly more taxes to support useless social programs and to provide a haven for those who live off them.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #52 on:** April 07, 2009, 03:38:04 AM »

War Eagle Guy, yes the paper companies pay less in property taxes. However it isn't the GOP's fault. Alabama has been run by Democrats until the 1980's. This was set up by them. They were and still are in control the senate and house. Our current GOP Governor, Riley, tried to rectify that, but it was voted down early in his Administration. Another thing, we do have a lot of paper mills providing jobs, and they thus pay corporate income taxes. The paper companies pay about $2 an acre for forest land. The same companies pay about $4.50 per acre in Georgia. However, Georgia also has higher property taxes overall. From what friends have told me in Georgia, it is about twice as high as Alabama.

jlchucker · « **Reply #53 on:** April 07, 2009, 04:26:11 AM »

Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM

My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.

You must live in Vermont like me.

Foxxtrot · « **Reply #54 on:** April 07, 2009, 05:23:31 AM »

Quote from: jlchucker on April 07, 2009, 04:26:11 AM

Quote from: magooch on March 31, 2009, 04:18:54 AM
My biggest gripe concerning property taxes is that the people of my state have had several opportunities to limit taxes and every stinking time they turn it down, because the do-gooders scare them into thinking the state will go broke.

There is another huge inequity about property tax and that is that the more you do to improve your property, the more you are penalized for doing it. Property taxes should be flat rate for a house and a given size lot. I don't care if a person wants to build a castle on his lot--he shouldn't pay more in property taxes than someone with a shack. The purpose of property tax is to pay for state, county and city services. The owner of a castle gets no more service than the owner of a shack.

You must live in Vermont like me.

I do currently and want to get back to the South. The NorthEast is a hellish place to live most of the year. Summer and fall...love it, the other 9 months of constant cold, snow, rain, taxes, cost of living is way too high, libitards, and socialized living makes me want to run away. Average age of Vermonters is 47...not many younger folks want to stay in a place with very limited access to jobs. This state is great for Gun owners though. I will give you that and lots of fishing and hunting.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #55 on:** April 07, 2009, 05:28:45 AM »

cabin 4 the guy with the 4 million dollar house has more bath rooms , elec. outlets , water heaters , hvac systems etc. he should pay more than the guy in the $300.000.oo house. Besides you most likely have a better chunck of land under the higher costing house . around here the land is about a fourth of the cost of the combo.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #56 on:** April 07, 2009, 10:24:55 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on April 07, 2009, 05:28:45 AM

cabin 4 the guy with the 4 million dollar house has more bath rooms , elec. outlets , water heaters , hvac systems etc. he should pay more than the guy in the $300.000.oo house. Besides you most likely have a better chunck of land under the higher costing house . around here the land is about a fourth of the cost of the combo.

I'm not saying he should not pay more, I'm only saying it's not a linear increase.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #57 on:** April 07, 2009, 10:29:26 AM »

that is true , we buy permits to work in different locations over the state . there is not two locations that use the same payment sch. and they are all under the same code .

wareagleguy · « **Reply #58 on:** April 07, 2009, 01:30:22 PM »

Dixie,
You need to look at Riley's tax as he tried in his first term. He was taxing EVERYONE. We voted that down but he found another way around by doing tax appraises on property. My land tax has almost doubled beacuse of Riley. Yea, a real Republican.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #59 on:** April 08, 2009, 03:31:48 AM »

At one time we had the lowest property taxes in the nation. Also, if it is done right, the tax never changes no matter how the economy goes. The state has a more steady income. However, with sales tax, it fluxuates with the economy and can't be really be relied on by the state. I think only a few western states have lower property taxes now. Georgia's is twice as high as ours. Maybe I missed something, but the average rise in property tax was supposed to be offset by decreasing the state sales tax. That way the state would have a more consistant income reguardless of the economy.