4 ms·

Maybe property tax should be inversely related to improvements, considering that improved land generates tax revenue in other ways, e.g. wage tax, sales tax, et

Maybe property tax should be inversely related to improvements, considering that improved land generates tax revenue in other ways, e.g. wage tax, sales tax, etc.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
That's quite hard to measure. Build a 200 unit apartment complex in an area with a housing problem and jobs currently unfilled ... yep. Build a gigantic house to be occupied by a single very wealthy family .. not so much. But how to measure the difference? The simple market value of the improvements is not going to be accurate.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
A lot of property taxes go to funding schools, so...more housing = more kids = more money need to educate them. It is nice that they use property taxes from businesses as well, but to completely detach the education need formulas from tax formulas sounds really dangerous.
- senkora 3y ago
  Surely more housing also means more working adults and more taxable income, so this could be handled with a local income tax.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    Are any school districts outside of Prop 13 California funded by primarily income or sales tax? But ya, you would need to do something like that if you were to tax land rather than improvements given schools, police, and lots of infrastructure needs scale up with improvements.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      A significant part of the educational budget of the US comes from federal funds and federal funds are almost entirely income taxes (some other sources exist).
      - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        Most schools receive very little funding from the federal government. Maybe the poorest school districts this makes up a significant part of their funding, but for most school districts it doesn't.
        bombcar 3y ago
        > In 2021, state and local governments in the United States collected about 630.21 billion U.S. dollars via property taxes. > In FY 2023, the Department of Education (ED) had $271.01 Billion distributed among its 10 sub-components. Maybe they just burn that quarter trillion, but I suspect it ends up in the districts eventually.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        Here is a good breakdown of funding in CA: https://peecs.net/2021/03/10/how-are-california-school-budgets-determined/ https://peecs.net/2021/03/10/how-are-california-school-budge... So federal is...7%?
        bombcar 3y ago
        The problem is that federal grants often go through the state, so some percentage of "state" may source from the feds. Of course it's all academic in a way, because money is fungible.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        The table implies funding origins via taxes (local vs. state taxes, for example). I don't think any ED money is going to CA first before going to the districts. CA is also a special case where more funding is state level (due to Prop 13).
bee_rider 3y ago
Then you have to come up with a way to evaluate the improvements, which might be tricky and subjective It seems easier to just have a land value tax, so you don’t specifically disincentivize development. Then, you can spend that tax money to provide services that promote the other stuff: beautify downtown and add public transit, that sort of thing.

Maybe property tax should be inversely related to improvements, considering that improved land generates tax revenue in other ways, e.g. wage tax, sales tax, etc.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

That's quite hard to measure. Build a 200 unit apartment complex in an area with a housing problem and jobs currently unfilled ... yep. Build a gigantic house to be occupied by a single very wealthy family .. not so much. But how to measure the difference? The simple market value of the improvements is not going to be accurate.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

A lot of property taxes go to funding schools, so...more housing = more kids = more money need to educate them. It is nice that they use property taxes from businesses as well, but to completely detach the education need formulas from tax formulas sounds really dangerous.

senkora 3y ago
Surely more housing also means more working adults and more taxable income, so this could be handled with a local income tax.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  Are any school districts outside of Prop 13 California funded by primarily income or sales tax? But ya, you would need to do something like that if you were to tax land rather than improvements given schools, police, and lots of infrastructure needs scale up with improvements.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    A significant part of the educational budget of the US comes from federal funds and federal funds are almost entirely income taxes (some other sources exist).
    - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
      Most schools receive very little funding from the federal government. Maybe the poorest school districts this makes up a significant part of their funding, but for most school districts it doesn't.
      - bombcar 3y ago
        > In 2021, state and local governments in the United States collected about 630.21 billion U.S. dollars via property taxes. > In FY 2023, the Department of Education (ED) had $271.01 Billion distributed among its 10 sub-components. Maybe they just burn that quarter trillion, but I suspect it ends up in the districts eventually.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        Here is a good breakdown of funding in CA: https://peecs.net/2021/03/10/how-are-california-school-budgets-determined/ https://peecs.net/2021/03/10/how-are-california-school-budge... So federal is...7%?
        bombcar 3y ago
        The problem is that federal grants often go through the state, so some percentage of "state" may source from the feds. Of course it's all academic in a way, because money is fungible.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        The table implies funding origins via taxes (local vs. state taxes, for example). I don't think any ED money is going to CA first before going to the districts. CA is also a special case where more funding is state level (due to Prop 13).

bee_rider 3y ago

Then you have to come up with a way to evaluate the improvements, which might be tricky and subjective It seems easier to just have a land value tax, so you don’t specifically disincentivize development. Then, you can spend that tax money to provide services that promote the other stuff: beautify downtown and add public transit, that sort of thing.