3 ms·

We are subsidizing their existence when we charge them below market property tax rates based on property values that are 40 years old instead of current market

by TimPC 4y ago

We are subsidizing their existence when we charge them below market property tax rates based on property values that are 40 years old instead of current market rates. You went to ad hominem very quickly on having your ideas challenged. It’s not a gross moral failing to want property tax to work the way it’s supposed to and does in nearly every jurisdiction on the planet. Except California because of weird historical accident.

teakettle42 4y ago
> below market property tax rates There’s no such thing as a “market rate” when you’re discussing invented taxation schemes. > You went to ad hominem very quickly on having your ideas challenged. No, I went very quickly to calling out the immorality of your position upon your succinctly demonstrating the same. > It’s not a gross moral failing to want property tax to work the way it’s supposed to … Taxation schemes are an arbitrary invention. They’re not supposed to do anything other than whatever they’re designed to do. Furthermore, the LVT scheme you proposed is not how property tax works in nearly every jurisdiction on the planet, and is designed to force people from their homes, coerce them into selling their property, and control how that property may be used under penalty of ruinous taxation for a failure to comply.
- Guvante 4y ago
  You are ignoring the numbers because they don't support your version of events. A $500,000 home is taxed $12,500 a year or a little over $1,000 per month in New Jersey the state with the highest property tax in the United States. However that is an extreme example given few homes outside of super dense urban areas are worth that much and most states have much lower property taxes. If we replace it with a $300,000 home and a tax rate of 1% (which is representative of most of the country) you instead get $3,000 a year or $250 a month. HoA fees are higher than that in many communities. That isn't ruinous at all.

by TimPC 4y ago

teakettle42 4y ago

> below market property tax rates There’s no such thing as a “market rate” when you’re discussing invented taxation schemes. > You went to ad hominem very quickly on having your ideas challenged. No, I went very quickly to calling out the immorality of your position upon your succinctly demonstrating the same. > It’s not a gross moral failing to want property tax to work the way it’s supposed to … Taxation schemes are an arbitrary invention. They’re not supposed to do anything other than whatever they’re designed to do. Furthermore, the LVT scheme you proposed is not how property tax works in nearly every jurisdiction on the planet, and is designed to force people from their homes, coerce them into selling their property, and control how that property may be used under penalty of ruinous taxation for a failure to comply.

Guvante 4y ago
You are ignoring the numbers because they don't support your version of events. A $500,000 home is taxed $12,500 a year or a little over $1,000 per month in New Jersey the state with the highest property tax in the United States. However that is an extreme example given few homes outside of super dense urban areas are worth that much and most states have much lower property taxes. If we replace it with a $300,000 home and a tax rate of 1% (which is representative of most of the country) you instead get $3,000 a year or $250 a month. HoA fees are higher than that in many communities. That isn't ruinous at all.