4 ms·

This is the biggest problem with people who oppose Prop 13. They claim that owners "never sell", however if you look at the number of sales, there's nothing to

This is the biggest problem with people who oppose Prop 13. They claim that owners "never sell", however if you look at the number of sales, there's nothing to suggest Prop 13 stops house sales. It's basically a lie, and there's no actual data to suggest that California house sales are drastically lower because of Prop 13. California has 39,512,223 people and 441,900 homes sold in 2018. https://journal.firsttuesday.us/home-sales-volume-and-price-peaks/692/ https://journal.firsttuesday.us/home-sales-volume-and-price-... Texas has 28,995,881 people and 344,030 homes sold in 2018. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/texas-housing-market-breaks-record-for-home-sales-median-price-in-2018-300799910.html https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/texas-housing-marke... Florida has 21,477,737 people and 277,827 homes sold in 2018. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/flas-housing-market-sales-new-listings-median-price-up-at-end-of-2018-300793508.html https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/flas-housing-market... New York State has 19,453,561 people and 134,066 homes sold in 2018. https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/albany/2018/01/24/ny-just-had-record-year-home-sales/1062216001/ https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/alb... I used 2018 data because I couldn't find consistent 2019 data for all those states. California has 1 house sold for every 89 people and Texas has 1 house sold for every 84 people, Florida has 1 house sold for every 77 people and New York state had 1 house sold for every 145 people. Per capita, the rate of housing sales in California is not so disparate compared to the other large states, so anti-Prop 13 people need to come up with real data to show how Prop 13 is actually affecting things instead of whining about how existing home owners don't pay their fair share. There's nothing to suggest that Prop 13 has affected real estate transactions in California. And especially in the Bay Area, the amount of turnover is healthy. In my city alone, I used Redfin to calculate that about 50% of the homes changed hands over the last 10 years. That means that the property tax was getting reset to more current levels. If you look at the property tax rate that California pays, it's higher than Florida and New York, but less than Texas. However, Texas doesn't have state income tax, so overall the taxes being paid in California are exorbitant compared to other states.

foogazi 7y ago
Thanks for the links - I’ve heard the bit about prop 13 causing people to never sell
- redis_mlc 7y ago
  Bay Area owners of multiple dwellings call them "my children" when interviewed. I think that's all that needs to be said.
  - hellisothers 7y ago
    That is what every non-commercial landlord everywhere thinks of their properties, they become an obsession.
rcpt 7y ago
> It's basically a lie, and there's no actual data to suggest that California house sales are drastically lower because of Prop 13. There is real research and data backing my statement. This kind of stuff has been published in serious economics journals for years now. There's no reason to rely on back-of-the-envelope estimates of housing turnover. Please take a look: https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/w11108.html https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/w11108.html
- hellisothers 7y ago
  “From 1970 to 2000, the average tenure of California homeowners and renters increased by 1.04 and .79 years relative to that of homeowners and renters in the control states. These figures represent increases in average tenure of 10 percent and 19 percent, respectively.” 10% for homeowners, hardly the smoking gun.
- ping_pong 7y ago
  Adding a year of house ownership equates to "lock in"? That's hogwash and you know it. It's obvious that the so-called Prop 13 effects are total BS. You would expect a much more pronounced effect but the per capita number of house sales are in line with other states without Prop 13. There is zero evidence that Prop 13 is the cause of home prices skyrocketing. Do some people have a massive advantage? Sure, just like everything else. But I prefer to have property tax stability because as I get older, if I get priced out of my house because I can't afford my property tax because Googlers and Facebook employees are raising the house prices, that would be completely unfair.
- zamfi 7y ago
  I appreciate the data here, but this is a pretty weak argument. It’s not clear how an extra year of ownership between sales would cause home prices to skyrocket, especially compared with the dramatic imbalance between new development and in-migration to California’s urban centers! SF, for example, built 24k new units since 2010, but added 83k new people. I’m willing to bet that more than 83k people would’ve moved in had SF built more housing!
zamfi 7y ago
It’s worth reading rcpt’s links in a sibling comment, but this analysis ignores a) geographic distributions within California of Prop 13 effects, b) the differences in demographics and population growth between those states, c) in California, properties other than single-family homes, and d) differing rates of renting and homeownership. I don’t want to imply that you are being intentionally withholding of data, as I don’t believe that — what I’m saying is that this type of analysis is quite hard to do correctly, accounting for all the factors in play!

foogazi 7y ago

Thanks for the links - I’ve heard the bit about prop 13 causing people to never sell

redis_mlc 7y ago
Bay Area owners of multiple dwellings call them "my children" when interviewed. I think that's all that needs to be said.
- hellisothers 7y ago
  That is what every non-commercial landlord everywhere thinks of their properties, they become an obsession.

rcpt 7y ago

> It's basically a lie, and there's no actual data to suggest that California house sales are drastically lower because of Prop 13. There is real research and data backing my statement. This kind of stuff has been published in serious economics journals for years now. There's no reason to rely on back-of-the-envelope estimates of housing turnover. Please take a look: https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/w11108.html https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/w11108.html

hellisothers 7y ago
“From 1970 to 2000, the average tenure of California homeowners and renters increased by 1.04 and .79 years relative to that of homeowners and renters in the control states. These figures represent increases in average tenure of 10 percent and 19 percent, respectively.” 10% for homeowners, hardly the smoking gun.
ping_pong 7y ago
Adding a year of house ownership equates to "lock in"? That's hogwash and you know it. It's obvious that the so-called Prop 13 effects are total BS. You would expect a much more pronounced effect but the per capita number of house sales are in line with other states without Prop 13. There is zero evidence that Prop 13 is the cause of home prices skyrocketing. Do some people have a massive advantage? Sure, just like everything else. But I prefer to have property tax stability because as I get older, if I get priced out of my house because I can't afford my property tax because Googlers and Facebook employees are raising the house prices, that would be completely unfair.
zamfi 7y ago
I appreciate the data here, but this is a pretty weak argument. It’s not clear how an extra year of ownership between sales would cause home prices to skyrocket, especially compared with the dramatic imbalance between new development and in-migration to California’s urban centers! SF, for example, built 24k new units since 2010, but added 83k new people. I’m willing to bet that more than 83k people would’ve moved in had SF built more housing!

zamfi 7y ago

It’s worth reading rcpt’s links in a sibling comment, but this analysis ignores a) geographic distributions within California of Prop 13 effects, b) the differences in demographics and population growth between those states, c) in California, properties other than single-family homes, and d) differing rates of renting and homeownership. I don’t want to imply that you are being intentionally withholding of data, as I don’t believe that — what I’m saying is that this type of analysis is quite hard to do correctly, accounting for all the factors in play!