I was looking to solve one specific complaint taxes out pacing what you could afford when you bought the place.
The core complaint was that people were being taxed out of their homes
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
How do you feel about personal property taxes?
- Thread starter Skel1ingt0n
- Start date
I was looking to solve one specific complaint taxes out pacing what you could afford when you bought the place.
The core complaint was that people were being taxed out of their homes
Yes, because home values have approx.. doubled in 15 years
Median Sales Price of Houses Sold for the United States
Graph and download economic data for Median Sales Price of Houses Sold for the United States (MSPUS) from Q1 1963 to Q4 2023 about sales, median, housing, and USA.
fred.stlouisfed.org
Property taxes…
I think how certain states do them is wrong, while being taxed on something isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I have yearly property taxes on my home, I pay a yearly renewal tax on my car, I pay a tax on items that I buy (becoming my property)
But a depreciating tax on something via a personal property tax (like say, Missouri does with cars). I do not agree with it. There has to be a better way to do it so that it is fair. Because regardless if you are buying an old PoS or new car your PPT is high those first few years and depreciate. This hits poorer people worse than the rich (who, let's face it probably license their vehicles in a different state and just drive them around in Missouri, paying 0 taxes to the state).
It makes sense, in theory, but the way it's executed is faulty
I think how certain states do them is wrong, while being taxed on something isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I have yearly property taxes on my home, I pay a yearly renewal tax on my car, I pay a tax on items that I buy (becoming my property)
But a depreciating tax on something via a personal property tax (like say, Missouri does with cars). I do not agree with it. There has to be a better way to do it so that it is fair. Because regardless if you are buying an old PoS or new car your PPT is high those first few years and depreciate. This hits poorer people worse than the rich (who, let's face it probably license their vehicles in a different state and just drive them around in Missouri, paying 0 taxes to the state).
It makes sense, in theory, but the way it's executed is faulty
Sounds like US property taxes are much higher than UK ones?
We have council tax which is payable to each local authority each month and varies based on the band your house was valued into in 1991 I think? So in my council District, the most expensive houses in Band H would cost around £4k per year council tax. I'm band D so pay around £2k per year. House is worth around £350k so less than 1%.
I don't like it but it's a necessary expense. And amazingly it didn't increase this year.
We have council tax which is payable to each local authority each month and varies based on the band your house was valued into in 1991 I think? So in my council District, the most expensive houses in Band H would cost around £4k per year council tax. I'm band D so pay around £2k per year. House is worth around £350k so less than 1%.
I don't like it but it's a necessary expense. And amazingly it didn't increase this year.
It's a necessary evil, as you have to get revenue from somewhere to maintain the infrastructure of a city.
It's a bit under 1% of the assessed property value here, which seems reasonable enough. Yes, there are some additional taxes and fees that also contribute to city revenue (part of the reason the bulk of natural gas/electricity bills are distribution costs, not use, plus whatever gasoline taxes the province decides to sprinkle down) but snow removal and upkeep of sidewalks and things like parks and libraries and fire service are perks of living in a city that need to be paid for.
My in-laws live outside of any municipal area and pay a flat $50 fee for property tax each year. They also get absolutely nothing in return - no garbage collection, no running water, no plowing of access roads, no public amenities or anything. I don't know if well maintenance or septic upkeep and things like that add up to the ~$3,000 they might be paying for taxes if they lived in the city, but I'd take it to not have to deal with that shit on my own.
It's a bit under 1% of the assessed property value here, which seems reasonable enough. Yes, there are some additional taxes and fees that also contribute to city revenue (part of the reason the bulk of natural gas/electricity bills are distribution costs, not use, plus whatever gasoline taxes the province decides to sprinkle down) but snow removal and upkeep of sidewalks and things like parks and libraries and fire service are perks of living in a city that need to be paid for.
My in-laws live outside of any municipal area and pay a flat $50 fee for property tax each year. They also get absolutely nothing in return - no garbage collection, no running water, no plowing of access roads, no public amenities or anything. I don't know if well maintenance or septic upkeep and things like that add up to the ~$3,000 they might be paying for taxes if they lived in the city, but I'd take it to not have to deal with that shit on my own.
Property taxes cause low housing supply in CA because boomers who are paying property tax on the homes they bought in the 70s and 80s would rather just never sell, understandably so. They don't sell > fewer homes to buy > drives prices up. Meanwhile everyone NIMBYs zoning and new development which exacerbates the problem even more.
It's a vicious cycle, and legislation has passed to let older folks take their current property taxes to other parts of the state if they want to move, but doesn't seem to have had much of an effect.
It's a vicious cycle, and legislation has passed to let older folks take their current property taxes to other parts of the state if they want to move, but doesn't seem to have had much of an effect.
Wait so city/municipal in the USA can not get the tax money from the states/federal other than local sale tax and property tax at all?
In my country, the local judistriction/provinces can get a part/percentages of personal income tax, corporate income tax, VAT/sale tax, property tax that occured with in the local judistriction/provinces and the remaining will be sent to central goverment.
In my country, the local judistriction/provinces can get a part/percentages of personal income tax, corporate income tax, VAT/sale tax, property tax that occured with in the local judistriction/provinces and the remaining will be sent to central goverment.
Massachusetts limits increases to 2.5% without overrides and debt exclusions that are approved by community vote. It's not a perfect system, but it protects people from insane increases in many cases.
Oh right lol. Forgot since you don't need to pay it separately when living in apartment.
They are. The US also pays less income tax I believe.
California needs a lot of reform. The NIMBYs and Prop 13 are double whammies that make it one of the most expensive states in the country.
A necessary evil, but, there need to be safeguards so folks aren't taxed out of their own homes (at least for someone that only owns one home and lives in it rather than using it for an investment/rental).
Basically, I don't want an 80-year-old on fixed income to ever be at risk of losing their home because their property value increased on paper and they can't afford the taxes.
Otherwise, yeah, it's necessary and it's better than sales tax, at least.
Basically, I don't want an 80-year-old on fixed income to ever be at risk of losing their home because their property value increased on paper and they can't afford the taxes.
Otherwise, yeah, it's necessary and it's better than sales tax, at least.
It hurts to pay for sure when you're already strapped with a mortgage. But it's the price of maintaining your neighborhood. No point having a nice house if your town is a shithole.
MFW it takes three fucking pages for someone to bring up Henry George
Income taxes, land value tax, estate tax, and wealth tax. They're the most economically efficient ways to keep money moving in an economy and preventing generational wealth from turning everyone else into renters (though George would've stopped at just land value, but in this day and age you don't need land to produce value and assuming everyone's house could produce the value of a developer working from home is a bit silly)
You absolutely can.
However, it's much easier to hide income than it is to hide your possession of land that you're occupying. The amount/value of land that you're occupying is also a reasonable thing to proportionally assign relative responsibility for the region to, and the value of your home is reasonably correlated with your income, so it's just simpler to use a property tax than it is to use a cleverly schemed income tax.
This comes with some trade offs as has been discussed in this thread. Some people are okay with the trade offs, others not so much.
What's income tax for then? Or fines? Fines pay for roads. So does tax on petrol. And property value has nothing to do with a person's income. At least my income.
As per the Government:
"Income Tax is collected by HMRC on behalf of the government. It's used to help provide funding for public services. For example, the NHS, education and the welfare system, as well as investment in public projects, such as roads, rail and housing."
"Council Tax is an annual fee your local council charges you for the services it provides, like rubbish collection and libraries. Normally you pay it in 10 monthly instalments, followed by two months of not making any payments."
Last edited:
I think they should be expanded to take into account other things too.
Like is this your primary residence? Yes? Lower taxes. No, higher taxes. Is this property used as a bnb? Higher taxes. Is this property sitting empty? Higher taxes. Is this property for rent and is it way over the medan rent on the area? Higher taxes.
Lol can you tell I'm upset? Rents are out of control and even a 2 bedroom apartment starts at 4k a month plus building fees. And then there are the ridiculous ones. There are two apartments near me that go for 12k a month. 12k. For 3 to 4 bedrooms! They are nice apartments with a nice view and one of them has acces to a pool, but 12k a month? There's no way that isn't just pure greed.
Like is this your primary residence? Yes? Lower taxes. No, higher taxes. Is this property used as a bnb? Higher taxes. Is this property sitting empty? Higher taxes. Is this property for rent and is it way over the medan rent on the area? Higher taxes.
Lol can you tell I'm upset? Rents are out of control and even a 2 bedroom apartment starts at 4k a month plus building fees. And then there are the ridiculous ones. There are two apartments near me that go for 12k a month. 12k. For 3 to 4 bedrooms! They are nice apartments with a nice view and one of them has acces to a pool, but 12k a month? There's no way that isn't just pure greed.
I was waiting for thisMFW it takes three fucking pages for someone to bring up Henry George
Income taxes, land value tax, estate tax, and wealth tax. They're the most economically efficient ways to keep money moving in an economy and preventing generational wealth from turning everyone else into renters (though George would've stopped at just land value, but in this day and age you don't need land to produce value and assuming everyone's house could produce the value of a developer working from home is a bit silly)
Those really aren't issues with the concept of property taxes, but the failure of state and local government to encouraging building supply (housing) that matches demand (population increases). The un-affordability of housing in cities like Austin, San Francisco, PNW, and other high demand areas with low supply and strict rules around building aren't because of property taxes.
My reply there was mostly about the benefit of traditional property taxes over something that was suggested, not taxing property value increases until someone sells the property; not so much that "property taxes are perfect and solve all problems," but that the current method of re-assessing properties once a year or once every few years makes more sense than locking in property taxes at the assessed value when the house is sold, which would make housing supply far, far worse.
I'd definitely be interested in changes where property tax rates fluctuate by income level, though I wonder how effective it would be to implement... Similar to challenges around tying sales tax or excise/luxury taxes to income level, it's hard to apply effectively. As it is, property tax collection is a very effective way to raise local revenue. From a revenue and progressive tax perspective that makes sense, though that change probably wouldn't have much affect on supply of housing... The example we were talking about before, the empty nester or retired grandparent who still lives in a 2100 sq foot, 4BR, 2BA house, which would be more appropriate for a family of 5, is probably living on fixed retirement/pension/SSI income and under a truly progressive property tax system tied to income levels would probably pay lower property taxes than the flat method.
Last edited:
I think they are good, in general, but reforms definitely need to happen. Education shouldn't be funded through local property taxes but through the federal government.
In Texas, you do get a tax break for a primary residence and I would assume this is fairly universal in the US.
In Texas, you do get a tax break for a primary residence and I would assume this is fairly universal in the US.
Yeah, I think this is something that contributes to the disparity in education.
I'm all for tax as long as you get services from them. Being from Long Island, yeah the taxes on everything, especially property tax, is ridiculous.
Couldn't this backfire pretty hard though? Landlords aren't going to eat the cost of higher property taxes on rental property, they are going to pass that on to the renter.
That's fair. I don't think fundamentally there's a problem with property taxes, they just need to handle housing scarcity.
It is getting a bit out of hand. For example, our local pharmacy is so understaffed that they're only opened 3 hours on weekends and their way of dealing with still too little staffing is to blockade the drive through to discourage people from using the pharmacy, so I drive 15 minutes to Austin proper so I can fill things in a timely matter. Used to be the north Austin 24 hour Walgreens with a large pharmacy and even it is reduced to 10 hours per day.
I've talked to a friend that is a pharmacist and the problem is there's no techs because 16/hour or whatever they start at doesn't cut it. Wages aren't bouncing up the same rate as the taxes.
Not a fan but I think they're higher in the USA. Too much mission creep for the city and regional governments (tbf there is a lot of downloading from higher levels).
I think you need to separate the tax with how it is used, in the States that is.
A property tax is something that effectively taxes the very rich. That is good.
In the States it is used to fund schools and this perpetuate inequality. That is bad.
Ideally property tax income, would be collected and used on a high enough level where you can actively compensate for weaker districts.
A property tax is something that effectively taxes the very rich. That is good.
In the States it is used to fund schools and this perpetuate inequality. That is bad.
Ideally property tax income, would be collected and used on a high enough level where you can actively compensate for weaker districts.
Last edited:
Not a fan, should not be applicable to your primary residence and only those with multiple properties. But even if those with multiple "investment" properties got hit with higher property taxes they sure as shit would just pass that on to the renter... So not a great solution either.
They suck, but even more egregious here in PA are the school taxes (which cost us WAY more than the property tax collected and used to fund the Gov't). It sucks as while the school taxes are what primary fund our schools (and obviously they are necessary)- only property owners get to foot the bill for schools. And of course its a thing year to year, where schools want more money, so of course they increase taxes basically every year which is at the school boards whim.
There are constant calls to fix this (the solution being some variance on increasing sales tax slightly (take the current 6% to 7%, maybe adjust some other tax code stuff are generally whats on the table), which would then spread the burden to pretty much everyone, and while there is a ton of support (it seems like the vast majority of real world people support this move)- there are factors that shoot it down- basically politicians (and this affects the ranks of some in both GOP and Dems who just don't buy into it)- teacher groups/unions, etc (because they don't want to switch from a "known" tax burden they can collect- raise taxes at will if they want) to sales tax which is less easily quantifiable- and may force them to live within "the means".
But I'm all for it, it can be done (and IS done in much of the country and homeowners (especially elderly on fixed incomes) don't have this massive tax burden constantly threatening to take their homes away, even if paid off and fully "owned".
There are constant calls to fix this (the solution being some variance on increasing sales tax slightly (take the current 6% to 7%, maybe adjust some other tax code stuff are generally whats on the table), which would then spread the burden to pretty much everyone, and while there is a ton of support (it seems like the vast majority of real world people support this move)- there are factors that shoot it down- basically politicians (and this affects the ranks of some in both GOP and Dems who just don't buy into it)- teacher groups/unions, etc (because they don't want to switch from a "known" tax burden they can collect- raise taxes at will if they want) to sales tax which is less easily quantifiable- and may force them to live within "the means".
But I'm all for it, it can be done (and IS done in much of the country and homeowners (especially elderly on fixed incomes) don't have this massive tax burden constantly threatening to take their homes away, even if paid off and fully "owned".
This isn't really true. Rent raises includes any increase in property taxes. So if one is renting, they are still footing the bill.
Didn't Thomas Paine also have an early precursor to Georgism?MFW it takes three fucking pages for someone to bring up Henry George
Income taxes, land value tax, estate tax, and wealth tax. They're the most economically efficient ways to keep money moving in an economy and preventing generational wealth from turning everyone else into renters (though George would've stopped at just land value, but in this day and age you don't need land to produce value and assuming everyone's house could produce the value of a developer working from home is a bit silly)
So you think those costs don't go to renters?
Cars aren't taxed like real estate though. You only pay taxes for personal property (despite the OPs misuse of the term in the thread title, on transfers of ownership)
I'm fine with it in terms of paying for my property lot. What I think is fucking stupid is charging me more for what I do with my property.
Want to extend the home, taxes go up. Want to add a pool, taxes go up. Want to convert your garage to a room, taxes go up. Remodel your basement, taxes go up. That's what I disagree with.
Want to extend the home, taxes go up. Want to add a pool, taxes go up. Want to convert your garage to a room, taxes go up. Remodel your basement, taxes go up. That's what I disagree with.
Yea that's my main issue with property tax is eventually people end up getting priced out of areas when real estate prices keep increasing when it turn increases the assessment amounts. I know in California it's capped how much it increases but seeing other states it can be pretty substantial
Extremely myopic and privileged view on the subject, ff you truly feel people just have no right ot question property taxes.
We get billed for sewage and electricity in my city, and the roads are extremely shitty and beyond in need of repair. Don't get me started on taxes supposedly funding public education.
It's annoying? How are things in your high castle?
Hahaha I was shocked nobody brought him up because like this was his thing!MFW it takes three fucking pages for someone to bring up Henry George
Income taxes, land value tax, estate tax, and wealth tax. They're the most economically efficient ways to keep money moving in an economy and preventing generational wealth from turning everyone else into renters (though George would've stopped at just land value, but in this day and age you don't need land to produce value and assuming everyone's house could produce the value of a developer working from home is a bit silly)
Kinda wild how nobody teaches all the radical and sometimes smart (and dumb) proposals from the late 1800s
This is largely a purpose of property taxes, it promotes efficient use of the land which means people downgrade when they live alone and don't need all that square footage they did when they had 3 kids and a husband.
And usually there are homestead exemptions for primary residences so largely these complaints seem in bad faith and promote anecdotal stories that don't seem to check out on fact checking.
The US understanding of taxes is so wildly skewed because you pay more in tax on stuff with so little return.
They're stupid and seemingly meaningless. Particularly when there's no tangible benefit to most of us homeowners, at least that's noticeable, especially for taxes to keep increasing. Very similar to HOAs fees, a waste of funds that just go into an empty vacuum/void.
CA does something similar (prop 13), which helps to prevent people from losing their homes when property values skyrocket, but it then creates inequity with people paying a ton more property tax when they buy a property in the neighborhood, and for whatever reason this extends to businesses, so you have new businesses paying an obscene amount of taxes compared to the businesses that are entrenched there.