8 ms·
Proposition 13 declared property taxes were to be assessed their 1975 value and restricted annual increases of the tax to an inflation factor, not to exceed 2%
by galago 9y ago
Proposition 13 declared property taxes were to be assessed their 1975 value and restricted annual increases of the tax to an inflation factor, not to exceed 2% per year. A reassessment of the property tax can only be made a) when the property ownership changes or b) there is construction done.
Property often increases in value more than 2% per year, so your actual rate goes down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(197...
- aidenn0 9y agoEven more damaging is when housing prices go up much faster than 2%; then there is a disincentive to move or enlarge your unit, because doing so would increase your tax liability by oftentimes staggering amounts.
- djabatt 9y agoOne solution for tax relief for elderly would be to remove or reduce tax payments at age 65 or earlier if one is handicapped. It seems to be a fare method to handle this for issue. For the rent inflation in LA I don't have a answer. That said allowing people to get homeless seems to be a great cost on society as a whole and their should be a smart and scalable solution.
- PretzelFisch 9y agoWhen someone buys a property today, it is subject to the same 2% a year rule. I don't see how this is not a level field.
- mrbabbage 9y agoAge The benefit accrues over many years, similar to rent control. As a result, the benefits flow to long-standing landholders, who skew disproportionately older. The result, at least for me in San Francisco: I pay twice as much in rent for a bedroom in a four bed apartment as my grandmother does in property tax for a 4000 square foot mansion. She bought her place over fifty years ago; by definition, I could not have done so. Indeed, with the direction things are heading, huge categories of people are locked out of all segments of the SF housing market due to excessive prices; there's nothing level about that.
- cynicalbastard 9y agoi hope you've looked into minimizing the property tax liabilities for when that house gets transferred to you.
- function_seven 9y agoMy neighbor pays half the property tax that I do, despite our houses both being worth the same amount. My new neighbors pay %25 more than I do, also in a similarly valued house. That's what parent is likely referring to. I'm not making a value judgement either way. Prop 13 was intended to address the real issue of people being forced out of their own homes due to rising values. But it appears to have the side effect of pushing the values even higher by restricting the sell side of the market.
- eanzenberg 9y agoSucks if you at some point can't afford property tax because house prices went up 1000% around you. Think everyone can pay $20k / year?
- function_seven 9y agoYeah it does suck. No I don't think everyone can afford that.
- stickfigure 9y agosuck is all relative. That person is now sitting on a property worth megabucks. They can't afford the taxes, but they can sell it and retire to Florida. I personally wouldn't mind having a little more of that kind of suck in my life.
- alexqgb 9y agoThat's a pretty shitty solution for everyone involved if they don't actually want to be separated from the rest of their family by 3,000 miles. And not just their families, but their friends and communities, which have a profound impact on overall well-being in their later years. I wouldn't call your suggestion deliberately cruel since you don't seem to have any idea how socially damaging this kind of isolating displacement can be. But I would say that the forced separation of people from their famalies and communities is a really hideous policy outcome, and one that should be strenuously avoided. Obviously, if somebody wants to move far away, fine. But forcing them to do so is horribly wrong.