Prop 13 (megatopic) (comparable sales, pricing, appraisal)

[DougStark]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

If that's how you feel, explain to me how it's fair for a new homeowner to expect the long term homeowner to pay the same amount in taxes when the long term homeowner was paying taxes on their home probably longer than you've been alive. Do you just dismiss the decades of those taxes?

Oh and another thing. Those taxes aren't fixed. Here, in California, they go up 2% a year but would probably be more if it wasn't for Prop 13.

Sorry, your logic makes no sense. Dismiss the decades of taxes paid by long-time residents? No one dismissed it--it was spent on teachers, police, parks, etc.

Plus, the new homeowner wouldn't be paying what the long term homeowner is paying---the prop tax would be based on the value of the home, whether it's old or new.

[Pyramidsurf]

Originally Posted by DougStark

The number of homes under Mello Roos is small? Give me some evidence, data. All of the new homes I looked at in suburban San Diego had that damn levy.

Did homeowners who bought 40 years ago have to pay a friggin Mello Roos? NO. That's why I said long time residents are living off the backs of new home buyers.

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

"ponzi scheme"?

All of Prop 13's success is based on the assumption that property values change hands in the future and assessment values are reassessed at market rate.

[DougStark]

Originally Posted by suissegrl702

i'm not from california so when i hear californians defend prop 13 it just amuses me. Somehow the other 49 states + district of columbia have figured out how to keep grandma in her home without paying exorbitant taxes and the other states plus dc do this without giving corporations massive tax breaks, without giving the children of homeowners massive tax breaks, and without giving the grandchildren of homeowners massive tax breaks.

My parents bought a house in salt lake suburbia back in 1996. They pay the same taxes as everyone else with a similarly aged house sitting on a lot of comparable size does. They don't get a tax break because they got there in the 1990s. And their next door neighbor, who has occupied his house since 1983, doesn't pay less than my parents do. The family that buys a house this year on that same street will be assessed the same as my parents and all the other people in the area.

I will very likely, along with my sister, inherit a house in salt lake suburbia sometime in the distant future. We will not be getting a tax break. We will pay the same taxes as all the neighbors who have a comparable house on a comparable lot. That's how it should be. I don't get why californians don't get this.

thank you!! (but to be honest, I don't give a rip what California decides to do because I have no plans on moving back. Let all the nut jobs run the place into the ground for all I care, haha)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Reziac

Here's another thing: if your property tax can go up drastically at the drop of a hat (which is what happens when there's no brakes a la Prop 13) -- how do you budget your mortgage? When you've budgeted, say, half of your income to cover the bank payment, property tax, insurance, and maintenance -- what happens when property tax suddenly balloons to as much as all the other costs combined, and suddenly the total cost is 90% of your budget??

But this is exactly what happened in the late 1970s before Prop 13 passed. People--and they were not all Grandpa and Grandma--were furious. That's why they called it the taxpayer's revolt. I remember that my parents, their friends, and all the neighbors we knew talked about escalating property taxes constantly.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

"ponzi scheme"?

Next, they'll say that Social Security and Medicare are ponzi schemes...

[k374]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Right, so when a new car of the same model and make as the older one you own comes up for re-licensing you will pay the same amount as the new car is charged when you re-license your car. Why should you pay less.


Oh and be sure to pay back to the old home owners all the taxes he paid for things you now enjoy and did not pay for. Fair is fair.

your argument is totally illogical. In fact, you actually make the point. A car is in fact reassessed at current value, it just happens to be a depreciating asset. A home is appreciating and a homeowner participates in the increased worth hence an increase in the tax base using the new valuation.

[k374]

Originally Posted by Reziac

Here's another thing: if your property tax can go up drastically at the drop of a hat (which is what happens when there's no brakes a la Prop 13) -- how do you budget your mortgage?

No state in the union offers this type of Prop 13 system and they are all doing just fine, this is a bunch of baloney concocted by the Real Estate industry and disproportionately transfer burdens onto renters and newer residents.

Infact, Prop 13 was hugely opposed when it was created, ultimate the Real Estate lobbies won by creating a lot of fear mongering. It has hugely deprived local jurisdictions of desperately needed revenues, this is fact.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by DougStark

Sorry, 2sleepy. I'm not shedding tears for your dear aunt who has ridden to the top of the real estate roller coaster in uber expensive San Jose. Options: reverse mortgage, or sell (and reap a huge profit) and move somewhere that has "normal" home prices. She would live lavishly in most metros not on the coasts.

And I'm not shedding tears for you. If you can't afford a home in California you have 49 other choices

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by k374

No state in the union offers this type of Prop 13 system and they are all doing just fine, this is a bunch of baloney concocted by the Real Estate industry and disproportionately transfer burdens onto renters and newer residents.

Infact, Prop 13 was hugely opposed when it was created, ultimate the Real Estate lobbies won by creating a lot of fear mongering. It has hugely deprived local jurisdictions of desperately needed revenues, this is fact.

Nevada has a very similar tax law. Property tax increases are capped at 3% per year. It came about after a taxpayer revolt when appraisers went crazy and peoples tax bills got so high they couldn't pay them.

https://www.npri.org/news/the-birth-of-a-rebellion/

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by k374

Infact, Prop 13 was hugely opposed when it was created, ultimate the Real Estate lobbies won by creating a lot of fear mongering.

Proposition 13 was not "created." It was an initiative approved by California voters, who passed it with 62.6% of the vote.