Ad valorem tax on cars (sales, 2014, home)

[rorqual]

I just got my car registered and found out about this tax - thankfully I wont be charged this tax until next year but I wait with baited breath.

[kayrob]

And it really stinks when your birthday is around the Christmas holiday season as mine is. Happy Birthday. Now pay up.

[mich2fla]

In Michigan, they called it plate registration fees. Here in GA, I pay a little more with Ad Valorem tax and plate tabs. For us, it's a wash.

If people kept their cars longer, the state will raise taxes somewhere to make up for the shortfall. I'm curious to see how this works out.

[ATL Golfer]

In my book, it is no different than legalized theft.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by ATL Golfer

In my book, it is no different than legalized theft.

Meh- it takes money to run a state, and they've got to get it somewhere. If they didn't have this tax, we'd have higher property taxes, and we'd be complaining about that.

Having grown up in NJ, I'll gladly pay my current property tax bill and the ad valorem tax in lieu of my NJ property taxes- combined they're still less than 1/2 of what I was paying for property taxes in NJ, and I've got more than twice the house.

[Eunomia]

Originally Posted by cittic10

"Ad Velorum" means based on the value so as the car goes down in value, so will the taxes.

That is usually the case. However, when county governments raise their millage rates (as many in the metro area have done recently) then ad valorem taxes on vehicles will rise. Sometimes they rise so much that the amount you owe is actually more than the previous year even though the value of your vehicle has decreased. Property tax increases on homes make people mad and get all the attention on the local news, so ad valorem increases on vehicles and other personal property are county governments' little secrets.

For example, I live in DeKalb County and last year the millage rate was raised by over 4 mills (a ten percent increase). So even though my car's valuation decreased by $300, I still payed $3 more than the year before. People with newer, more expensive cars felt an even greater impact.

Imagine if amidst all the housing problems of the last several years, your county appraised your home at half its value from a few years ago. Yet they raised the millage rate so high that you actually paid more in property taxes than you did a few years ago. No way they'd get away with it, let alone try it. County governments are willing to stick it to homeowners whose homes are in neighborhoods where values have held steady because they think those people can afford to pay more therefore they should pay more. But if county leaders tried to raise the amount of taxes all homeowners pay then they'd have a riot on their hands.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by Eunomia

Imagine if amidst all the housing problems of the last several years, your county appraised your home at half its value from a few years ago. Yet they raised the millage rate so high that you actually paid more in property taxes than you did a few years ago. No way they'd get away with it, let alone try it.

Why wouldn't the try it, and why shouldn't they do it? Just because the property values throughout the area have dropped significantly doesn't mean the amount of tax needing to be collected has dropped. Do you suddenly use the roads less, use the schools less, use the library less, etc., just because your house lost value??

[Eunomia]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Why wouldn't the try it, and why shouldn't they do it? Just because the property values throughout the area have dropped significantly doesn't mean the amount of tax needing to be collected has dropped. Do you suddenly use the roads less, use the schools less, use the library less, etc., just because your house lost value??

Politicians wouldn't try it because of rule #1 in politics: Do what you must to stay in office. And voting to raise the millage rate by so much would seem like (and would probably be) political suicide. In times like these in which people are out of work or working for less pay, people are not inclined to feel generous towards government spending. The idea is that if I have to do with less than so does government. Now we can debate the finer points of that argument all you want, but the populist, emotional sentiment behind it is what politicians fear. Politicians didn't want to raise millage rates when times were good, hence the backdoor increases via higher tax assessments.

In order to obtain the same amount or even more in tax money from a homeowner whose home is now worth half as much as a few years ago, politicians would have to raise the millage rate extraordinarily high, so much so that homeowners whose values held steady would now pay more than twice as much in property taxes. Some people are okay with that and think those who apparently can afford to pay more property taxes should pay more when governments have to continue providing services to people who now pay less than half the amount of property taxes they did a few years ago.

And why shouldn't government's continue raising the same amount of money, you ask? Because there was (and still is in some cases) plenty of fat to cut. DeKalb County has reduced its budget by 20% from four years ago with no real impact on the quality of services to me. Your argument that we're not suddenly using less services is framing the debate so that everything government provided five years ago was necessary, useful and done efficiently. I disagree. My argument is that there were (and still are) plenty of programs and services that can be reduced and eliminated because I think government has no compelling need to furnish them.

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Why wouldn't the try it, and why shouldn't they do it? Just because the property values throughout the area have dropped significantly doesn't mean the amount of tax needing to be collected has dropped. Do you suddenly use the roads less, use the schools less, use the library less, etc., just because your house lost value??

Maybe the governments, fed, state, county and city need to cut back on their spending...If they were a business they all would go broke as they should...

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by Houston3

Maybe the governments, fed, state, county and city need to cut back on their spending...If they were a business they all would go broke as they should...

Well... We, meaning Georgia, largely has.

But it is also why we are having a wide variety of problems. We invest much less in our transportation system per capita than any other state largely because we keep cutting the gas tax, but the consequences are catching up with us.