3 ms·

It’s bad because the tax rate you pay on your property should not be tied to how long you’ve owned it. Right now two different families living in identical pro

It’s bad because the tax rate you pay on your property should not be tied to how long you’ve owned it. Right now two different families living in identical properties in CA can be paying vastly different property taxes depending on when they bought (or inherited) their house. This is manifestly unfair.

AdrianB1 7y ago
Paying an increasing tax is not fair too. You don't get more services from higher tax, the city is just extorting more money because it can and because enough people think this is fair.
- ridgeguy 7y ago
  Inflation is a real thing. I doubt we'd have any workers paid through property taxes if we were paying like it's 1955.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  The services cost more to deliver as cost of living rises. Cities don't usually have a profit motive, can you name cities in booming areas that you think are 'extorting' money and wasting it?
  - AdrianB1 7y ago
    No, no profit$$$, just throwing money on stuff that is either a way to siphon it or not the purpose for a city. Like you organize people in a city and instead of providing services like clean roads you do politics, social care, welfare etc (most cities in Europe spend more on benefits and welfare than on proper services to tax payers).
shados 7y ago
One could argue that tying it to the value of the property (or owning property AT ALL!!!) is not great either. Why do renters not pay taxes? Sure, they're "property taxes" so from that angle it makes sense, but really they're taxes to run the city. Renters can vote and decide policies just like owners do, but they only indirectly pay for what they get (the landlord pays it from their rent). My house being more expensive than next door's doesn't mean Im a bigger burden on the city. The only reason it kinds of sortoff make sense is as a proxy to income. So why not just have everyone pay taxes based on residency (those who get to vote and receives city services), like we do for federal/state taxes? And if someone owns property and don't live there (investment), then their burden should be from it being an investment and be kind of unrelated. Only (albeit significant) hiccup is maintenance of the property and the responsibility of the owner via the city.
- e12e 7y ago
  Renters do pay taxes - it's added to the rent, effectively?
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    This is true if you're looking at rent prices in a cost model, where the price of rent is basically the cost of providing housing plus a little extra for profit, similar to low-margin commodities like basic groceries. But in a high demand area with constrained supply, it's more of a supply & demand model: landlords charge what the market will bear, which is mostly based on how many people there are around with decent/high-paying jobs. Prices haven't risen rapidly in recent years because the actual cost of building housing rapidly increased, obviously. So using the latter model, increased property taxes probably wouldn't have much impact on rent prices.
  - shados 7y ago
    Thats what I meant when I wrote "but they only indirectly pay for what they get (the landlord pays it from their rent).". The other poster explained it better than me, but basically it's too indirect. A renter sees rent go up, but not always why it goes up. We had that happened in our city, where people voted for an exceptional tax increase, which immediately got passed down in rent increases, and then people complained about -that-, not making the obvious link.

AdrianB1 7y ago

Paying an increasing tax is not fair too. You don't get more services from higher tax, the city is just extorting more money because it can and because enough people think this is fair.

ridgeguy 7y ago
Inflation is a real thing. I doubt we'd have any workers paid through property taxes if we were paying like it's 1955.
Dylan16807 7y ago
The services cost more to deliver as cost of living rises. Cities don't usually have a profit motive, can you name cities in booming areas that you think are 'extorting' money and wasting it?
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  No, no profit$$$, just throwing money on stuff that is either a way to siphon it or not the purpose for a city. Like you organize people in a city and instead of providing services like clean roads you do politics, social care, welfare etc (most cities in Europe spend more on benefits and welfare than on proper services to tax payers).

shados 7y ago

One could argue that tying it to the value of the property (or owning property AT ALL!!!) is not great either. Why do renters not pay taxes? Sure, they're "property taxes" so from that angle it makes sense, but really they're taxes to run the city. Renters can vote and decide policies just like owners do, but they only indirectly pay for what they get (the landlord pays it from their rent). My house being more expensive than next door's doesn't mean Im a bigger burden on the city. The only reason it kinds of sortoff make sense is as a proxy to income. So why not just have everyone pay taxes based on residency (those who get to vote and receives city services), like we do for federal/state taxes? And if someone owns property and don't live there (investment), then their burden should be from it being an investment and be kind of unrelated. Only (albeit significant) hiccup is maintenance of the property and the responsibility of the owner via the city.

e12e 7y ago
Renters do pay taxes - it's added to the rent, effectively?
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  This is true if you're looking at rent prices in a cost model, where the price of rent is basically the cost of providing housing plus a little extra for profit, similar to low-margin commodities like basic groceries. But in a high demand area with constrained supply, it's more of a supply & demand model: landlords charge what the market will bear, which is mostly based on how many people there are around with decent/high-paying jobs. Prices haven't risen rapidly in recent years because the actual cost of building housing rapidly increased, obviously. So using the latter model, increased property taxes probably wouldn't have much impact on rent prices.
- shados 7y ago
  Thats what I meant when I wrote "but they only indirectly pay for what they get (the landlord pays it from their rent).". The other poster explained it better than me, but basically it's too indirect. A renter sees rent go up, but not always why it goes up. We had that happened in our city, where people voted for an exceptional tax increase, which immediately got passed down in rent increases, and then people complained about -that-, not making the obvious link.