Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Only someone with a small mind would fail to see that Prop 13 has both benefits and drawbacks. If it had no drawbacks, it wouldn't be controversial. Avoiding homeowners from being priced out of their neighborhood by adding predictability to their property tax is certainly a worthwhile goal. At the same time, it is not (IMHO) equitable for neighbors to be paying vastly different amounts of property tax when their homes are equally valued. A better law than Prop 13 could be drafted, but at this time it's a moot point. It's already been done, and I doubt anything will change in my lifetime. As it is, I prefer Nevada's system to CA's.
Only someone with a small mind would fail to see that Prop 13 has both benefits and drawbacks. If it had no drawbacks, it wouldn't be controversial. Avoiding homeowners from being priced out of their neighborhood by adding predictability to their property tax is certainly a worthwhile goal. At the same time, it is not (IMHO) equitable for neighbors to be paying vastly different amounts of property tax when their homes are equally valued. A better law than Prop 13 could be drafted, but at this time it's a moot point. It's already been done, and I doubt anything will change in my lifetime. As it is, I prefer Nevada's system to CA's.
Yup...I was in CA when 13 was adopted. And it was to fix a real problem. That problem however had nothing to do with phoney values or such. It was that you could get huge increases in property tax when you got huge increases in property value.
When the NV system was adopted one of the claims made was that it was rational Prop 13. I agree NV is bettter than CA in this one.
Only someone with a small mind would fail to see that Prop 13 has both benefits and drawbacks. If it had no drawbacks, it wouldn't be controversial. Avoiding homeowners from being priced out of their neighborhood by adding predictability to their property tax is certainly a worthwhile goal. At the same time, it is not (IMHO) equitable for neighbors to be paying vastly different amounts of property tax when their homes are equally valued. A better law than Prop 13 could be drafted, but at this time it's a moot point. It's already been done, and I doubt anything will change in my lifetime. As it is, I prefer Nevada's system to CA's.
The same argument can be made for many things, but the system doesn't work this way.
I pay vehicle tags based upon what I paid for my vehicle... irregardless if my vehicle triples in value.
The same can be said for other items... my brother got a heck of a Deal, he paid $1200 for a camera his buddy paid more than $3000 just months before.
Prop 13 is based upon the value at the time of acquisition, plus yearly inflation factor capped at two percent, improvements made and voter approved assessments.
Can you imagine the added turmoil of not having Prop 13 during the Real Estate Bubble... hundreds of thousands of home owners living their lives would have got caught up in the speculative boom and suffered dearly by seeing double digit property tax increases... if not for Prop 13.
Prop 13 is controversial because it does exactly what was intended... it puts limits on how much Property Tax revenue the taxing agencies can collect without 2/3 voter approval and for school infrastructure need only 55% voter approval.
I bought in 2005 and paid many times what my neighbors... didn't bothering me in the least... the man I bought my house from paid nearly 50 years of property tax and all but one of my neighbors is retired... they are the reason the neighborhood is the nice place it is... we watch out for each other.
The is nothing wrong or unfair about being taxed on what you freely choose to pay for something... there is something wrong when under the old system, people were being forced out because someone with money paid an obscene price for the home down the street causing every one's assessment to go way up... the actions of one or a few are not supposed to penalize the many.
The same argument can be made for many things, but the system doesn't work this way.
I pay vehicle tags based upon what I paid for my vehicle... irregardless if my vehicle triples in value.
The same can be said for other items... my brother got a heck of a Deal, he paid $1200 for a camera his buddy paid more than $3000 just months before.
Prop 13 is based upon the value at the time of acquisition, plus yearly inflation factor capped at two percent, improvements made and voter approved assessments.
Actually in NV and in CA the taxes paid on personal property are a percent of market value. The tax paid each year is a percent of the the real value. DMVs use an algorithm to determine what that value is...but the tax is on market value that year.
Quote:
Can you imagine the added turmoil of not having Prop 13 during the Real Estate Bubble... hundreds of thousands of home owners living their lives would have got caught up in the speculative boom and suffered dearly by seeing double digit property tax increases... if not for Prop 13.
Prop 13 is controversial because it does exactly what was intended... it puts limits on how much Property Tax revenue the taxing agencies can collect without 2/3 voter approval and for school infrastructure need only 55% voter approval.
I bought in 2005 and paid many times what my neighbors... didn't bothering me in the least... the man I bought my house from paid nearly 50 years of property tax and all but one of my neighbors is retired... they are the reason the neighborhood is the nice place it is... we watch out for each other.
The is nothing wrong or unfair about being taxed on what you freely choose to pay for something... there is something wrong when under the old system, people were being forced out because someone with money paid an obscene price for the home down the street causing every one's assessment to go way up... the actions of one or a few are not supposed to penalize the many.
You confuse issues. There is nothing wrong with 13. It is just suboptimal. The nv system is likely superior and one tied to the CofL might be superior to both. The worst thing about 13 is that it has become a religious belief rather than simply a tax strategy.
It has the unfortunate propensity of forcing revenue that should come from local property to sales tax and income tax. It protects some limited set of homeowners at a significant cost paid by the rest of the taxpayer base. It is a redistribution of wealth scheme.
Actually in NV and in CA the taxes paid on personal property are a percent of market value. The tax paid each year is a percent of the the real value. DMVs use an algorithm to determine what that value is...but the tax is on market value that year.
It has been years since anyone in the family has had a vehicle registered in Nevada... my Dad's first High School teaching job was at Lake Tahoe.
CA DMV uses a declining value each year... I own a number of cars... my hobby since High School has been restoring antique cars. Most of my tags are at $1 for the license fee and the rest of the charges are all the other stuff.
My 62 Corvette has appreciated significantly over the years since I bought it 30 years ago... the license fee has depreciated from $90 and is now $1
Quote:
You confuse issues. There is nothing wrong with 13. It is just suboptimal. The nv system is likely superior and one tied to the CofL might be superior to both. The worst thing about 13 is that it has become a religious belief rather than simply a tax strategy.
There is some truth to this... but it is easy to see why. Not a day goes by without a politician or public union saying Prop 13 has got to go. No matter that the US Supreme Court ruled it Constitutional since it is based on acquisition cost.
Quote:
It has the unfortunate propensity of forcing revenue that should come from local property to sales tax and income tax. It protects some limited set of homeowners at a significant cost paid by the rest of the taxpayer base. It is a redistribution of wealth scheme.
Disagree completely... all property owners are protected by Prop 13... the law applies equally. I pay the highest property tax on my street and my home is the smallest... 1725 sq ft.
There is no way I would trust politicians to lower my taxes by raising my neighbors.
My tax rate is over 1.5%... the .5% is all the special taxes the voters have approved and most are assessed as a flat fee irregardless of property value... in other words I pay the same as my neighbors.
Nevada has many tax advantages over California... an elderly friend moved to Nevada to die because the taxes on his estate were much less then if he had stayed in California.
Many of my retired law enforcement friends have moved to Nevada citing tax savings as top reason.
You believe that they cost 10% as much because they have been there for 15 years? Does it not in fact mean that old residents have voted themselves a tax reduction compared to new ones?
So you must agree that we old f**ts can pass legislation that lets the rest of the population pay our living and medical costs?
I have to side with the prop 13 proponents. I'm against redistributive taxes and I'm a small government libertarian kind of guy but inthink the greater evil here is taxes rising at a rate that forces people out of homes they own. Their homes! That isn't right. I don't love the idea of a property tax at all to be frank. I'd rather a national sales tax at a much higher rate - I like sales taxes because they are incurred by you doing something to trigger a tax, something you can avoid (especially when simple groceries are exempt). Income taxes penalize success, I'm intensely against them (and thus love Nevada), a low property tax isn't the worst evil but one that rises out of control is unacceptable.
I'm unbothered by the idea that I may be paying way more than my neighbor who bought 20 years ago. That's good for him, he lives there a long time, I just bought. I don't know, the idea doesn't bother me at all on a fairness level. I love the idea that it would have one cap for owner-occupied housing and one for investors - that makes a world of sense! Investors are there to make money, and assume more risk. Home owners are there because it's their home! Their sanctuary.
I admit to some confusion over people calling CA property taxes low by comparison and I completely disagree. If property prices are astronomically high, which they still are, the percentage tax should be very very low compared to other states. I pay $450/month property taxes on a tiny place that wouldn't be worth $150,000 in Vegas but is worth more than twice that here because the cost of living is ridiculously high. It motivates you to being a renter because the idea of "flushing money down the toilet" is counteracted by property taxes and HOA dues. For me those amount to $1,100 per month gone, not tax deductible, and not useful. I could rent for $1,500 so theres really very little incentive to own.
Property taxes should be capped by square footage in my opinion. A place this size shouldn't incur more than $200/month in taxes. As it is I'm paying almost 50 cents per square foot per month in just taxes!
It has been years since anyone in the family has had a vehicle registered in Nevada... my Dad's first High School teaching job was at Lake Tahoe.
CA DMV uses a declining value each year... I own a number of cars... my hobby since High School has been restoring antique cars. Most of my tags are at $1 for the license fee and the rest of the charges are all the other stuff.
My 62 Corvette has appreciated significantly over the years since I bought it 30 years ago... the license fee has depreciated from $90 and is now $1
That is likely an anomoly driven by the dispute over car taxes when everyone went after Davis. Note however that a boat or an airplane is assessed annually and taxed based on that assessment.
Quote:
There is some truth to this... but it is easy to see why. Not a day goes by without a politician or public union saying Prop 13 has got to go. No matter that the US Supreme Court ruled it Constitutional since it is based on acquisition cost.
Disagree completely... all property owners are protected by Prop 13... the law applies equally. I pay the highest property tax on my street and my home is the smallest... 1725 sq ft.
There is no way I would trust politicians to lower my taxes by raising my neighbors.
My tax rate is over 1.5%... the .5% is all the special taxes the voters have approved and most are assessed as a flat fee irregardless of property value... in other words I pay the same as my neighbors.
Nevada has many tax advantages over California... an elderly friend moved to Nevada to die because the taxes on his estate were much less then if he had stayed in California.
Many of my retired law enforcement friends have moved to Nevada citing tax savings as top reason.
And you respond with religious fervor. My tax rate is about 0.8% without 13...
That is likely an anomoly driven by the dispute over car taxes when everyone went after Davis. Note however that a boat or an airplane is assessed annually and taxed based on that assessment.
Can't comment on airplanes... as for boats, I picked up a 1957 model and paid the county assessor tax for several years, and the last tax bill I received was for $4... In that time I re-powered it and restored the rest of it.
Called the Assessor and was told they consider it to have no value due to it's age and what I paid for it 17 years ago.
The DMV uses a formula based on acquisition cost less average depreciation to determine the annual fee... I'm not complaining since most vehicles depreciate... but, some actually appreciate.
Quote:
And you respond with religious fervor. My tax rate is about 0.8% without 13...
Like I said, Nevada has a lot of things going for it... I like the State and most of those I know that moved like it. The ones that don't developed real gambling problems... lost the house and maxed credit cards and 4 people I used to work with moved to "Iron Mountain" outside of Las Vegas and bought beautiful new homes which they no longer have.
I keep in touch with one regularly, she works in medical and her husband is a Ford Dealer journeyman mechanic... the wages they earn doing the same jobs in Las Vegas are no where close to what they earned in the Bay Area and Las Vegas has lost it's charm since they lost their dream house.
I have to side with the prop 13 proponents. I'm against redistributive taxes and I'm a small government libertarian kind of guy but inthink the greater evil here is taxes rising at a rate that forces people out of homes they own. Their homes! That isn't right. I don't love the idea of a property tax at all to be frank. I'd rather a national sales tax at a much higher rate - I like sales taxes because they are incurred by you doing something to trigger a tax, something you can avoid (especially when simple groceries are exempt). Income taxes penalize success, I'm intensely against them (and thus love Nevada), a low property tax isn't the worst evil but one that rises out of control is unacceptable.
I'm unbothered by the idea that I may be paying way more than my neighbor who bought 20 years ago. That's good for him, he lives there a long time, I just bought. I don't know, the idea doesn't bother me at all on a fairness level. I love the idea that it would have one cap for owner-occupied housing and one for investors - that makes a world of sense! Investors are there to make money, and assume more risk. Home owners are there because it's their home! Their sanctuary.
I admit to some confusion over people calling CA property taxes low by comparison and I completely disagree. If property prices are astronomically high, which they still are, the percentage tax should be very very low compared to other states. I pay $450/month property taxes on a tiny place that wouldn't be worth $150,000 in Vegas but is worth more than twice that here because the cost of living is ridiculously high. It motivates you to being a renter because the idea of "flushing money down the toilet" is counteracted by property taxes and HOA dues. For me those amount to $1,100 per month gone, not tax deductible, and not useful. I could rent for $1,500 so theres really very little incentive to own.
Property taxes should be capped by square footage in my opinion. A place this size shouldn't incur more than $200/month in taxes. As it is I'm paying almost 50 cents per square foot per month in just taxes!
To me, you hit the nail on the head... just about every other taxed levied is based on what you choose to buy or what you choose to earn.
What makes property tax insidious is that, through no action of the individual, the individual can be in the situation of not being able to pay.
At least Prop 13 adds predictability to the system and flexibility to increase above the Prop limit if enough voters approve.
Prop 13 would never have become law if the legislature would have simply indexed the Home Owner Exemption for inflation.
50 years ago, a $7500 exemption was real relief when a modest home could be bought form $10,000.
The $7,500 exemption means almost nothing when the median price in my area was over $350,000.
California's constitution prohibits split tax rolls... all accessible property must be taxed under the same rules.
My tax contribution is $750 per month and I must be only one of a handful of property owners that has not seen a decline in value... not at all true, I'm down 25%, but the Assessor maintains I'm down only 2%.... maybe I need to leave my home and buy the one down the street so I can lock in a lower assessment?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
