New set back in balancing CA budget crisis (Sacramento: assessors, day care)

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I don't want to speak for the other poster... my best guess is appraised value instead of assessed value

yes, i meant appraised value(as in the tax isnt based off the appraised value of your home, its based of the tax assessed value, which is restricted year over year to the aforementioned 2% gain per year.. the original base is the purchase price rather than a tax assessment unlike some states).

[BennyPhoenix]

To all those who dont like prop 13. Do not move to california.
The groups who are trying to repeal prop 13 have a hidden agenda, they can go to hell.
The reality is if someone buys a home in 1998 for $200,000, and over the next 5 years people around him start selling their homes for a hyperinflated $600,000, why is that his problem? Why should he have to pay triple the property tax? Few people could afford a tripling of their property tax.
2% raises are reasonable.
If all of a sudden tomorrow there was no prop 13 the govt would still not have enough money.
People dont get it; the state collects enough revenue, their problem is their spending.

[cobmw]

And a +1000 to everything you said.

[EscapeCalifornia]

The net effect of Prop13 is that the government just finds other ways to tax you. Mello Roos is exhibit #1. Its a direct result of Prop 13. Yes, I know is a bond, but it didn't exist before Prop 13 and you pay it on your property tax so its a de facto tax.

Now we have a situation where neighbor #1 is paying $2000/yr in property tax while neighbor #2 is paying $8000/yr. Remember when sales tax was 6%? Now its 7.5-9%. Income tax is 7-9% before you know it. Cars cost $400 to register. Everything is taxed, taxed, and taxed again with a surcharge and a fee added on for good measure. And everyone gets to pay those higher taxes, including the guy who's shelling out $8000/yr on property tax.

I'm not saying to repeal Prop13 but there's a problem when two houses are taxed wildly different amounts just based on how long its been since an ownership change. Changing the rate of increase to match inflation would even it out a lot.

One thing people don't talk about a lot is how the incredibly low tax you pay after owning for a long time takes houses out of the market. I see it all the time: Older couple owns huge house and all the kids are gone. They'd like to downsize but look at what their taxes would be if they bought another house. So they stay put. Now that house isn't on the market for a young couple with kids who could really use the space. That drives up the price of the houses that are available and pushes young families into commuting to far off but more affordable areas.

[BennyPhoenix]

One thing people don't talk about a lot is how the incredibly low tax you pay after owning for a long time takes houses out of the market. I see it all the time: Older couple owns huge house and all the kids are gone. They'd like to downsize but look at what their taxes would be if they bought another house. So they stay put. Now that house isn't on the market for a young couple with kids who could really use the space. That drives up the price of the houses that are available and pushes young families into commuting to far off but more affordable areas.[/quote]

In most counties in CA when you reach the age of 55 you can move and take your property taxes with you; so that is not an issue.
My in laws downsized 2 years ago and bought a house about $200,000 cheaper than their old house, prop taxes stayed about the same.


And let me repeat: It is not revenue that is a problem, it the govt spending that is a problem. Especially in california. There are plenty of states that do more with a lot less.

[momojojo]

It is frustrating for Californians. I think Governor Schwartzenegger is trying to run the state like a business, and like any business needs to watch its spending. When times are tight, you cut back. There is a hearing on 1/29 on whether his edicts are legal. I wouldn't mind 2 days off a month. Maybe they should start with volunteers first.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

The net effect of Prop13 is that the government just finds other ways to tax you. Mello Roos is exhibit #1. Its a direct result of Prop 13. Yes, I know is a bond, but it didn't exist before Prop 13 and you pay it on your property tax so its a de facto tax.

Now we have a situation where neighbor #1 is paying $2000/yr in property tax while neighbor #2 is paying $8000/yr. Remember when sales tax was 6%? Now its 7.5-9%. Income tax is 7-9% before you know it. Cars cost $400 to register. Everything is taxed, taxed, and taxed again with a surcharge and a fee added on for good measure. And everyone gets to pay those higher taxes, including the guy who's shelling out $8000/yr on property tax.

I'm not saying to repeal Prop13 but there's a problem when two houses are taxed wildly different amounts just based on how long its been since an ownership change. Changing the rate of increase to match inflation would even it out a lot.

One thing people don't talk about a lot is how the incredibly low tax you pay after owning for a long time takes houses out of the market. I see it all the time: Older couple owns huge house and all the kids are gone. They'd like to downsize but look at what their taxes would be if they bought another house. So they stay put. Now that house isn't on the market for a young couple with kids who could really use the space. That drives up the price of the houses that are available and pushes young families into commuting to far off but more affordable areas.

the problem is that if it is repealed without a 100% total rehaul of every state tax, fee, surcharge, etc, we will not benefit from it because we'll just end up paying more in taxes because the old taxes put in place to cover lower property tax wont go away

[BennyPhoenix]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

the problem is that if it is repealed without a 100% total rehaul of every state tax, fee, surcharge, etc, we will not benefit from it because we'll just end up paying more in taxes because the old taxes put in place to cover lower property tax wont go away

Exactly.
And the govt would spend every dollar and nothing in the state would improve anyway. They would spend the money on nonsense like raising salaries or it's already overpaid legislators and employees.
And they'd still be screaming that they dont have enough money.

[Ultrarunner]

Prop 13, or should I say the fear of Prop 13 is the only thing keeping property taxes in check...

The State had many opportunities to address people taxed from their homes... The legislature passively decided to let the people decide and they overwhelmingly did...

The important thing to remember is PROP 13 can easily be over-ridden as is the case in my City of Oakland CA... Voters routinely vote property tax increases for Schools, Parks, Police, Fire and Public Transit Districts to name a few... the voters even approved raising property taxes to build and remodel our Sports Stadiums...

So what is inherently wrong with going to the voters and asking their permission?

As to the issue of homes on the same street paying different taxes... this isn't true... each parcel pays the identical tax rate in the taxing district... except for goverment, charitable and religious exceptions...

It's no different then buying a car... the tax paid is based from the purchase price and identical cars and sell for different prices... even in the same month.

Unlike car taxes, which decrease with time, property taxes have a built in 2% yearly increase mechanism...

I worked over seas in Europe which is know for high taxes... Property tax is a mere fraction of what it is in the states... European policy is that it does no good to tax people from their homes... instead, Europe has a very high tax on consumption... kind of a pay as you spend policy.

[mading6]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I don't want to speak for the other poster... my best guess is appraised value instead of assessed value

Prop 13 continues to be a savior for many and a devil for others...

State revenue has increased dramatically since Prop 13 was adopted into law and so has spending...

I knew I would be paying 8 x more in taxes when I choose to buy... I don't begrudge the elderly couple at all... they've paid taxes and special assessments on the home for over 50 years and now it's my turn to step up to the plate and pay my share...

It seems to me there will never be enough money to satisfy the State... right now California has just about every tax under the sun and it's still not enough...

Neighboring States operate without Income Tax or a Sales Tax as in Oregon... Repelling Prop 13 will result in total turmoil and financial meltdown because the stability provided homeowners will cease to exist... many other states have enacted similar Prop 13 protections since it's inception.

The problem is SPENDING more than we have... not a simple concept to understand... yet it is a problem for those in Sacramento....

Civil Service has some of the BEST pensions in the State and it it starting to tick me off that they, as a group, are unwilling to help out with shorter hours or work furloughs... it happens in private industry and back in my Grandparents day, he and the rest of the employees working at the plant voluntarily worked less hours so that no one would loose going without a pay check in hard times...

Totally agree. Prop 13 savior, your right.

Civil Service needs to step up to the plate like you stated.