4 ms·

This misses the point. All states tax different things at different levels. You need to look at your personal situation and finances as well as lifestyle to see

by bogota 4y ago

This misses the point. All states tax different things at different levels. You need to look at your personal situation and finances as well as lifestyle to see what makes sense.

redavni 4y ago
Actually, you are missing the point. While we are at it, taxes in Idaho are even higher. Also Idahoan bears prefer the taste of Californians too.
bombcar 4y ago
And you can vary how you do things; in CA you should acquire lots of land twenty years ago, in Texas you should maximize your income and minimize your property.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  Or do what a ton of wealthy people do in Texas (Michael Dell most famously?) and apply for and receive asinine “agricultural” exemptions for your property taxes that slash your land tax rate by 95% for things like letting cattle occasionally graze or preserving land in the suburbs for deer hunting.
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    > preserving land in the suburbs for deer hunting Uhhh.... what?
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      Apologies, meant to include the link; https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/tax-day-farms-owned-rich-provide-massive-tax-shelter/ https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/tax-day-farms-owne... > That’s exactly what Michael Dell did with the suburban Austin ranch he uses as a second home. Periodically hunting and maintaining a “well-managed deer herd” reduced the property’s 2005 market value from $71.4 million to an agricultural value of $290,000, which saves him—and costs Texas—$1.2 million a year. > It’s all perfectly legal under Texan law. As long as property owners stick to the state guidelines, country officials have no right to deny them agricultural status. Korea’s Samsung Electronics qualified for a “wildlife management” agricultural tax exemption on fifty-four acres of land outside its semiconductor plant in the Northeast Austin by putting up a few birdhouses, eradicating ants and taking a wildlife “census,” which reduced its tax bill from $21,080 to just over $135 (a reduction of over 99.4 percent), reported the Wall Street Journal in 2007. If wildlife isn’t your thing, dedicating a few acres to Christmas trees is enough to qualify for a property tax exemption under “timber production,” which is exactly what Hewlett-Packard opted for on its corporate campus in Houston. The company saved half a million dollars in property taxes in 2004, despite the fact that it openly plans to develop that land.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        This is present in some form in almost every state, the states vary in how they penalize switching to development (some require timber land to be dedicated for 30 years, others let you switch whenever you want). See https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/wisconsin/ https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/wisconsi... for some examples or even California: https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/california/ https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/californ... > Description: Annual timberland property tax is based on its current use. Standing timber is exempt from local ad valorem tax system and instead is subject to a state tax at the time of harvest. The revenue generated from timber yield tax is collected by the State Board of Equalization and then is distributed back to the counties where the timber was harvested.
        mikeyouse 4y ago
        In addition to the point of this thread (overall tax incidence of the wealthy), surely you can see the difference in reduced taxation of property being used for timber and Michael Dell avoiding $1M/year in property tax by claiming his massive estate in the suburbs of Austin is an agricultural property because they 'maintain a deer herd'? Or companies claiming parts of their campus are "agricultural" based on a few head of cattle who are brought in to graze it? Why on earth should the rest of Texans subsidize Dell or HP's campus? California has its own screwed up property tax policy - all of Prop 13 should be immediately repealed - but it's different in impact and abuse potential than Texas's ag. nonsense.
        bombcar 4y ago
        Anytime you have laws you’ll have people who follow them to the letter. Though I guess it would be more “Texas” to instead establish a church or non-profit to hold the land for you.
wyldfire 4y ago
I believe the comment you replied to is just the meme of "don't California my Texas" :eyeroll: But seriously - if any of y'all decide to go back to Cali please cast a vote in November before moving back ;)
- MerelyMortal 4y ago
  That seems like a pretty underhanded request (meddling in someone else's affairs that you have no intention in being a part of).
  - wyldfire 4y ago
    It was in jest. But, still -- do people in transit not deserve representation? Casting a ballot for a US Congress seat before you depart does not seem dishonest to me; especially if you cannot vote in the destination locale yet.
MerelyMortal 4y ago
I think it's sarcasm (hinting that OP doesn't want people moving from California to Texas).

by bogota 4y ago

This misses the point. All states tax different things at different levels. You need to look at your personal situation and finances as well as lifestyle to see what makes sense.

redavni 4y ago

Actually, you are missing the point. While we are at it, taxes in Idaho are even higher. Also Idahoan bears prefer the taste of Californians too.

bombcar 4y ago

And you can vary how you do things; in CA you should acquire lots of land twenty years ago, in Texas you should maximize your income and minimize your property.

mikeyouse 4y ago
Or do what a ton of wealthy people do in Texas (Michael Dell most famously?) and apply for and receive asinine “agricultural” exemptions for your property taxes that slash your land tax rate by 95% for things like letting cattle occasionally graze or preserving land in the suburbs for deer hunting.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  > preserving land in the suburbs for deer hunting Uhhh.... what?
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Apologies, meant to include the link; https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/tax-day-farms-owned-rich-provide-massive-tax-shelter/ https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/tax-day-farms-owne... > That’s exactly what Michael Dell did with the suburban Austin ranch he uses as a second home. Periodically hunting and maintaining a “well-managed deer herd” reduced the property’s 2005 market value from $71.4 million to an agricultural value of $290,000, which saves him—and costs Texas—$1.2 million a year. > It’s all perfectly legal under Texan law. As long as property owners stick to the state guidelines, country officials have no right to deny them agricultural status. Korea’s Samsung Electronics qualified for a “wildlife management” agricultural tax exemption on fifty-four acres of land outside its semiconductor plant in the Northeast Austin by putting up a few birdhouses, eradicating ants and taking a wildlife “census,” which reduced its tax bill from $21,080 to just over $135 (a reduction of over 99.4 percent), reported the Wall Street Journal in 2007. If wildlife isn’t your thing, dedicating a few acres to Christmas trees is enough to qualify for a property tax exemption under “timber production,” which is exactly what Hewlett-Packard opted for on its corporate campus in Houston. The company saved half a million dollars in property taxes in 2004, despite the fact that it openly plans to develop that land.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      This is present in some form in almost every state, the states vary in how they penalize switching to development (some require timber land to be dedicated for 30 years, others let you switch whenever you want). See https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/wisconsin/ https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/wisconsi... for some examples or even California: https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/california/ https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/californ... > Description: Annual timberland property tax is based on its current use. Standing timber is exempt from local ad valorem tax system and instead is subject to a state tax at the time of harvest. The revenue generated from timber yield tax is collected by the State Board of Equalization and then is distributed back to the counties where the timber was harvested.
      - mikeyouse 4y ago
        In addition to the point of this thread (overall tax incidence of the wealthy), surely you can see the difference in reduced taxation of property being used for timber and Michael Dell avoiding $1M/year in property tax by claiming his massive estate in the suburbs of Austin is an agricultural property because they 'maintain a deer herd'? Or companies claiming parts of their campus are "agricultural" based on a few head of cattle who are brought in to graze it? Why on earth should the rest of Texans subsidize Dell or HP's campus? California has its own screwed up property tax policy - all of Prop 13 should be immediately repealed - but it's different in impact and abuse potential than Texas's ag. nonsense.
        bombcar 4y ago
        Anytime you have laws you’ll have people who follow them to the letter. Though I guess it would be more “Texas” to instead establish a church or non-profit to hold the land for you.

wyldfire 4y ago

I believe the comment you replied to is just the meme of "don't California my Texas" :eyeroll: But seriously - if any of y'all decide to go back to Cali please cast a vote in November before moving back ;)

MerelyMortal 4y ago
That seems like a pretty underhanded request (meddling in someone else's affairs that you have no intention in being a part of).
- wyldfire 4y ago
  It was in jest. But, still -- do people in transit not deserve representation? Casting a ballot for a US Congress seat before you depart does not seem dishonest to me; especially if you cannot vote in the destination locale yet.

MerelyMortal 4y ago

I think it's sarcasm (hinting that OP doesn't want people moving from California to Texas).