U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-22-2018, 04:00 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
Please cite your sources, In most cases the numbers don't make sense to do this
https://citylimits.org/2017/10/12/le...r-vacant-land/

Cities Now Use Taxes to Fight Blight. Is It Working?

Can Extra Taxes on Vacant Land Cure City Blight? | The Pew Charitable Trusts
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2018, 04:02 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,027,668 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
Sure, who is going to buy it?
No one else wanted it otherwise the city would have used the penalties to create a lien and sell them at a tax auction.
Do you have any understanding of how real estate investing works???
Anybody can buy it if price was right, and if the investor isnt over inflating the price. Cost city alot more then some property worth to level due to court and other red tape process. Problem is the seller wants too much or banks being too choosy on who they want to sell too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2018, 04:14 PM
 
844 posts, read 359,406 times
Reputation: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
Realistically changing the basis to what the land is worth would probably lower he taxes. The city fined him? Well the property must have been so worthless they didn't want it either since they made no attempt to collect or take the property.
I once owned a lot with no improvements on it and the property tax was $5 a year.
no, if you change the basis of taxation to the land the lot that has a dilapidated old building on it would be paying the same tax as one with brand new class A office space.

taking a property is easier said then done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2018, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
4,111 posts, read 3,402,459 times
Reputation: 5638
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
no, if you change the basis of taxation to the land the lot that has a dilapidated old building on it would be paying the same tax as one with brand new class A office space.

taking a property is easier said then done.
What about the value of the building on it? You're saying a dilapidated 1000 sq ft falling over building and a 5 million dollar office building will be paying the same property tax amount.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2018, 07:48 PM
 
844 posts, read 359,406 times
Reputation: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
What about the value of the building on it? You're saying a dilapidated 1000 sq ft falling over building and a 5 million dollar office building will be paying the same property tax amount.
That was the idea in order to motivate the owner to make productive use of the land. It never passed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2018, 07:17 AM
 
5,749 posts, read 1,288,224 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
So with all the buying and selling, what happens when you limit the take on assets. I know after more reading and post, people buy houses in hopes to get a return in their money. What if they implement that you can only buy so much or actually use it. If you buy 10 houses and your not renting them, then force you to sell back to the market, but if your leasing them out then get a tax break or something in return for helping the housing market. Think this would help the housing market or kill it? When i say market, i mean places for folks to live, not for somebody to over inflate it for quick buck.

Just throwing some ideas out, and like to know why so many buy houses, and not do anything with them for years, when it can help those that need it the most.

I remember before the 2008 housing crash I knew people who leveraged everything to buy more and more houses. After the crash they lost everything. I know one person who sold his $1M home in San Jose and moved to Arizona to flip houses. Today he is living a trailer park living off his Social Security.



Let the free maket be. If things get too out of whack people will flock to lower costs areas and it will even out. I think if you buy an asset you have the right to do with it what you wish as long as you are not causing harm. Eventually if it gets too overheated like before the market will crash and things will shake out like before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2018, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Boston
5,097 posts, read 1,455,542 times
Reputation: 3734
I guess the thinking is you really don't own the land. The government can tell you that your vacant lot which you pay for is their's, not yours. Bizarro world...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2018, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
4,111 posts, read 3,402,459 times
Reputation: 5638
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
That was the idea in order to motivate the owner to make productive use of the land. It never passed.
So instead of valuing property taxes on the building as they do now, they would shift all the value to the land meaning the lot could also have nothing on it and still be the same?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2018, 12:39 PM
 
844 posts, read 359,406 times
Reputation: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
So instead of valuing property taxes on the building as they do now, they would shift all the value to the land meaning the lot could also have nothing on it and still be the same?
yes, that was the concept. In a way it makes sense, it doesn't penalize someone for improving their property and making the community better, the way current real estate taxation works.

But again, it never passed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2018, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
11,047 posts, read 11,455,634 times
Reputation: 17205
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
So with all the buying and selling, what happens when you limit the take on assets. I know after more reading and post, people buy houses in hopes to get a return in their money. What if they implement that you can only buy so much or actually use it. If you buy 10 houses and your not renting them, then force you to sell back to the market, but if your leasing them out then get a tax break or something in return for helping the housing market. Think this would help the housing market or kill it? When i say market, i mean places for folks to live, not for somebody to over inflate it for quick buck.


Just throwing some ideas out, and like to know why so many buy houses, and not do anything with them for years, when it can help those that need it the most.
I wouldn't worry about it. Vacant houses are subject to break-ins, squatters, and vandalism. Even a house with no heat will deteriorate from warped doors, mildew, warped cabinets, and peeling finishes. Letting a house sit vacant for any length of time is very expensive.

Vacant houses are usually due to foreclosure. Even after foreclosure, the owner has a 1 year right of recision, so whoever ended up with the property (usually the mortgager) has to wait a year before they can offer a clear title.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top