4 ms·

> very high property taxes CA property taxes are highly regressive. Old boomers get to pay sub 0.1% tax rates because of Prop 13 while new, young, and poorer b

> very high property taxes CA property taxes are highly regressive. Old boomers get to pay sub 0.1% tax rates because of Prop 13 while new, young, and poorer buyers get to pay tax on inflated property valuations. When it comes to increasing class mobility high property tax >>> high income tax.

anfilt 4y ago
I don't live in CA, but forcing low or fixed income people out their homes just because their property increased in value which is often outside their control is not good. From my understanding part of the problem also is even landlords and businesses benefit from prop 13 and same with people that own multiple properties. Honestly, I think something like Idaho's Homeowners Exemption is better. The owner has to live in it to qualify. https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1051.cfm https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1051.cfm Also states like Nevda have done some other interesting things like letting family farms get a Limited Allodial Title for a period in time before stopping. I just think prop 13 was not planned out very well and applies to too many entities, but the idea of not wanting to force people out their homes is certainly a problem other states worry about.
- ceeplusplus 4y ago
  They can take a line of credit on their home and pay for the taxes, then when they die their home is not passed on to their children for free (and inheriting the low property taxes!). At CA property tax rates, people would not be forced out of their home in their lifetime. Unproductive assets like real estate should not be enablers of generational wealth.
  - anfilt 4y ago
    That's kinda how the Idaho Property tax deferral program works. Prop 13 from my understanding applies to businesses, landlords running apartments, people with multiple properties ect... A tax reduction that only applies if the owner is living it seems fine in my opinion. Most other states property tax relief programs require that property to be the owners primary residence. Property taxes are weird as they are basically one of the few taxes that continue to happen even without any transactions. Almost all other taxes happen when there is a transaction. For example sales tax, when you buy something; Income tax when you get paid; Tariffs when something is imported ect... Property taxes can also can increase without you doing anything so if your income is fixed or does not increase fast enough you could lose your house due to a tax lien. If your worried about generational wealth that's why we have inheritance and estate taxes. The federal estate tax can get as high as 40%. However, a home is a productive asset if people are living in it. It may not be as productive as some other uses of property like running a business from it, farming the land ect...
    - ceeplusplus 4y ago
      > Property taxes can also can increase without you doing anything so if your income is fixed or does not increase fast enough you could lose your house due to a tax lien Like I said, you won't lose your house within your lifetime at current property tax rates. I see no reason why we should guarantee owners' houses for any longer than that instead of freeing up those houses on the market for new owners. Tax deferral is a great idea, tax relief not so much.

anfilt 4y ago

I don't live in CA, but forcing low or fixed income people out their homes just because their property increased in value which is often outside their control is not good. From my understanding part of the problem also is even landlords and businesses benefit from prop 13 and same with people that own multiple properties. Honestly, I think something like Idaho's Homeowners Exemption is better. The owner has to live in it to qualify. https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1051.cfm https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1051.cfm Also states like Nevda have done some other interesting things like letting family farms get a Limited Allodial Title for a period in time before stopping. I just think prop 13 was not planned out very well and applies to too many entities, but the idea of not wanting to force people out their homes is certainly a problem other states worry about.

ceeplusplus 4y ago
They can take a line of credit on their home and pay for the taxes, then when they die their home is not passed on to their children for free (and inheriting the low property taxes!). At CA property tax rates, people would not be forced out of their home in their lifetime. Unproductive assets like real estate should not be enablers of generational wealth.
- anfilt 4y ago
  That's kinda how the Idaho Property tax deferral program works. Prop 13 from my understanding applies to businesses, landlords running apartments, people with multiple properties ect... A tax reduction that only applies if the owner is living it seems fine in my opinion. Most other states property tax relief programs require that property to be the owners primary residence. Property taxes are weird as they are basically one of the few taxes that continue to happen even without any transactions. Almost all other taxes happen when there is a transaction. For example sales tax, when you buy something; Income tax when you get paid; Tariffs when something is imported ect... Property taxes can also can increase without you doing anything so if your income is fixed or does not increase fast enough you could lose your house due to a tax lien. If your worried about generational wealth that's why we have inheritance and estate taxes. The federal estate tax can get as high as 40%. However, a home is a productive asset if people are living in it. It may not be as productive as some other uses of property like running a business from it, farming the land ect...
  - ceeplusplus 4y ago
    > Property taxes can also can increase without you doing anything so if your income is fixed or does not increase fast enough you could lose your house due to a tax lien Like I said, you won't lose your house within your lifetime at current property tax rates. I see no reason why we should guarantee owners' houses for any longer than that instead of freeing up those houses on the market for new owners. Tax deferral is a great idea, tax relief not so much.