Prop 13 (megatopic) (Alameda: good schools, cost of, farm)

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Prop 13 is a good idea but it could be improved. I would think moving a bit toward NV might be good. Apply it only to primary owner occupied for instance. And come up a little more quickly on the rise...get it above the generic inflation rate so it eventually closes.

Why? Improvement for who?

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Why? Improvement for who?

No particular reason that various commercial operations should pay different taxes. And it is reasonably clear that commercial ownership can be rigged so a property never changes hands. You simply sell some entity that owns the property but never the property.

And having a reasonably equitable property tax system would not seem a bad thing. We are aware of a block in Santa Monica where the property tax on equivalent lots varies by a factor of 10.

It is also distorting the real estate system. Families are going through all sorts of rigmarole to avoid the P13 update. That is not healthy.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

No particular reason that various commercial operations should pay different taxes. And it is reasonably clear that commercial ownership can be rigged so a property never changes hands. You simply sell some entity that owns the property but never the property.

And having a reasonably equitable property tax system would not seem a bad thing. We are aware of a block in Santa Monica where the property tax on equivalent lots varies by a factor of 10.

It is also distorting the real estate system. Families are going through all sorts of rigmarole to avoid the P13 update. That is not healthy.

Uh, that really didn't answer the question. What's so non-equitable about the current system?

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Uh, that really didn't answer the question. What's so non-equitable about the current system?

Similar property owners pay vastly different sums. Similar commercial properties pay vastly different sums.

All receive the same services.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Similar property owners pay vastly different sums. Similar commercial properties pay vastly different sums.

All receive the same services.

Similar owners earn vastly different amounts of money. Again, how is it non-equitable?

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Similar owners earn vastly different amounts of money. Again, how is it non-equitable?

That has nothing to do with it. The municipality provides services. Billing similar customers very different amounts is inequitable. Fact of life.

One could go to a flat tax system that would be equitable...that is all pay the same flat sum. But we prefer the value of the property rather than its existence as the determinant.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

That has nothing to do with it. The municipality provides services. Billing similar customers very different amounts is inequitable. Fact of life.

One could go to a flat tax system that would be equitable...that is all pay the same flat sum. But we prefer the value of the property rather than its existence as the determinant.

It has everything to do with it.

[boxus]

Well, as has been mentioned, the entire problem is the property tax system itself. Until the way it is carried out is changed, there will be this debate we are having, no matter the location.

Basing it on property value is the first issue, the second issue is basing it not on the ability to pay but the value, third issue is not linking it to use of services.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

No particular reason that various commercial operations should pay different taxes. And it is reasonably clear that commercial ownership can be rigged so a property never changes hands. You simply sell some entity that owns the property but never the property.

And having a reasonably equitable property tax system would not seem a bad thing. We are aware of a block in Santa Monica where the property tax on equivalent lots varies by a factor of 10.

It is also distorting the real estate system. Families are going through all sorts of rigmarole to avoid the P13 update. That is not healthy.

The inherent beauty of Prop 13 is applies equally to all... a few short paragraphs replaced volumes of tax code and a cadre of Assessor staff.

Part of the pitch way back when is Prop 13 subsequent Props prevents selling the family farm or closing the family business due to taxes...

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Similar property owners pay vastly different sums. Similar commercial properties pay vastly different sums.

All receive the same services.

Yes and NO...

All property is taxed at the same rate in the same jurisdiction... the rate cannot vary or it would violate the equal protection clause...

So same rate for all.

Since Prop 13 is based on value at the time of transfer... this too is universally applied.

As for services that we hear a lot about... I would disagree.

Mentioned many times I bought into a neighborhood of very long term owners... 50+ years...

I can say without equivocation that none of my neighbors has had a child in the public schools in many decades... most it has been easily 50 years.

About 50% of the budget is for public education... so here we are still paying for schools with tax dollars without any hope of receiving any service.

Interesting in Washington State they had repeatedly tried to pass measures to build a new school and it always narrowly lost and this was due to a voting block of seniors... so the redid the bill and exempted seniors and it passed...

The seniors made the case they received no direct benefit and those with kids liked that at age 65 they would no longer be charged the tax either...