U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Florida
 [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 09-05-2007, 06:59 AM
 
2,313 posts, read 2,393,245 times
Reputation: 471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee2e View Post
My concern is not getting a straight answer from those claiming to be "in the know". For me, voting for the unknown is just not going to cut it. And for what I do know, the calculators tell me that unless you are selling every two or three years and will homestead the property this is a bad move. I am not in that category. I bought the home I plan on retiring in back in 1991. I'm not going anywhere. For me, the calculators tell me that it would not be in my best interest to give up SOH. I used the calculator in our local paper and ran the numbers for the next 25 years. I most likely won't live longer than that. They tell me that if appreciation is very very low, below the National historical average, that dropping would be good for me. However, it that is not true my taxes will rise drastically. However, everyone must vote as they feel it suits them.

As I previously said, the unknown costs and cutting of county and city services is the biggest factor in how I will vote. I can't vote based on what is unknown.

I don't think your comments on dropping SOH all together amount to anything but your opinion, as are my comments my opinion.

Of course, we are all entitled to our own opinions. Every voter will decide from themselves how they will vote, as it should be.

My opinions are my own, I am not being spoon fed by anyone.
Dropping SOH has been discussed and is a real future possibility. Plus you don't, as it is, have to take the deduction you can keep your SOH so what is the actual problem?

SOH is not some birth right, it can go out the window very quick depending which way the wind blows. I would say the period of time you plan to own your home you will see it go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2007, 07:59 AM
bfa bfa started this thread
 
Location: Tampa, Florida
80 posts, read 433,222 times
Reputation: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by riveree View Post
Exactly! I think it will bring home prices up too and that in turn will bring up the values of ALL homes in Florida and therefore the property taxes will go up, up, up because there will be no 3% cap!

There's a REASON the Realtors Association is pushing for this amendment to go through, because they know this amendment will artificially inflate the market again and they can clean up - they're seeing dollar signs just as the politicians are.

BFA, it may be good news for you if you're a realtor now, but what if you're not a realtor in 10 years? Will you still think it's a good idea then?
riveree, I assure you, I will vote for the amendment, not as a Realtor, but as a homeowner that could use some relief. Will the market pick up if it passes? Of course it will. And you are right, the Association is pushing this amendment.

By the way, if it were my choice, I'd work real estate without being a member of the Association. It's usually a bunch of crock.

Like someone already mentioned, this may be the only chance we get. The offer is on the table. Is it a perfect solution? No. But it's a good start.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 09:04 AM
 
596 posts, read 1,113,576 times
Reputation: 490
We will be voting NO on this. I've been in my home for 17 years. I built it for 192K- its 300ft from the ocean in a gated community and has gone up in value to 600K. My taxes have ranged from $2900 to $3150 over this time period. Why would I vote for this. House has tripled-taxes have remained essentially unchanged. If you lose the SOH, the local governments will simply raise the millage rate at which they tax you. {Hypothetical}If your house is tax assessor valued at 100k with exemptions under SOH and they tax you at $1.00 per $1000 of value- you pay $100 in taxes. If you lose SOH and they value it with the new super exemption, the assessor will simply raise the millage to $2.00 per $1000 or $3.00 per thousand until they get back to $100 in taxes. The county governments are not going to accept tax revenue at 50,60,70 etc percent of what is is now. The government will raise your millage to get a neutral net revenue from the citizens.
I would vote for a sales tax{consumption} that would replace all property tax- this is the only way I see to make it fair for all. This was part of the discussion in the state legislature when super exemption became the proposal. It was voted down by our illustrious leaders. Make them go back to the table and present us with an abolishment of property tax replaced with sales tax-It would pass overwhelmingly IMHO
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 09:52 AM
 
2,313 posts, read 2,393,245 times
Reputation: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jareb View Post
We will be voting NO on this. I've been in my home for 17 years. I built it for 192K- its 300ft from the ocean in a gated community and has gone up in value to 600K. My taxes have ranged from $2900 to $3150 over this time period. Why would I vote for this. House has tripled-taxes have remained essentially unchanged. If you lose the SOH, the local governments will simply raise the millage rate at which they tax you. {Hypothetical}If your house is tax assessor valued at 100k with exemptions under SOH and they tax you at $1.00 per $1000 of value- you pay $100 in taxes. If you lose SOH and they value it with the new super exemption, the assessor will simply raise the millage to $2.00 per $1000 or $3.00 per thousand until they get back to $100 in taxes. The county governments are not going to accept tax revenue at 50,60,70 etc percent of what is is now. The government will raise your millage to get a neutral net revenue from the citizens.
I would vote for a sales tax{consumption} that would replace all property tax- this is the only way I see to make it fair for all. This was part of the discussion in the state legislature when super exemption became the proposal. It was voted down by our illustrious leaders. Make them go back to the table and present us with an abolishment of property tax replaced with sales tax-It would pass overwhelmingly IMHO
Because, you can "KEEP" your SOH. It is the best of both worlds. My house is worth a hell of a lot more then yours and I will vote yes but use the SOH option if it passes. It is a win win. There will be no more going back, this it. Forget about sales taxes and all that is over, you need to pay attention to the real world taking place now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 10:09 AM
 
596 posts, read 1,113,576 times
Reputation: 490
"you need to pay attention to the real world taking place now".
I have been in charge of an interventional cardiac catheterization lab for 32 years-trust me MACGUY- I am in touch with the real world-no need for insults here-I was merely expressing my opinion. Good day to you Sir.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 11:14 AM
 
2,313 posts, read 2,393,245 times
Reputation: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jareb View Post
"you need to pay attention to the real world taking place now".
I have been in charge of an interventional cardiac catheterization lab for 32 years-trust me MACGUY- I am in touch with the real world-no need for insults here-I was merely expressing my opinion. Good day to you Sir.
The point is, talking about things that are never going to happen and no longer on the table is a waste of time. Examine what is on the table, Now, and decide. These other options while interesting are not in front of us, this is. It is a good deal even for you, but that is for you to decide. Your vote also effects a lot of other people. I apologize for a poor use of words.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 11:27 AM
 
22 posts, read 103,591 times
Reputation: 19
Taxes are always going to be a sore area. There will be much anger and strife as they deal direct with the pocket book of the person.
Let me share my experiences in Indiana that brought me to Florida.
Indiana had a long term history of low taxes. As the city grew expenses grew with it. Wasnt long before there was a shortfall. Alot in part due to the fact that Indiana is always trying to attract business. The inventory tax was done away with for business hoping that the extra funds would be put back into the economy by increasing pay and jobs. It did not happen. What happened was the companies got bigger and expanded their business into other states sending that money and jobs to other areas.
With an increasing debt load Indiana had to do something so overnight (over the year) it was decided that the only way to increase revenue was to re vamp the tax structure. All of the numbers for taxation were based upon the value of homes in 2005 when the market was hot.
The week that the new taxation rates hit, figured as Florida now does it, many found their taxes going up 100 to 1200 percent even though their property values had actually decreased.
I had a condo that the tax payment was actually more than the mortgage.
The voters began to revolt. Many pushed for removal of the legislature members.
Once the legislature finally understood that they were not going to be re elected, and saw the mass exedus from Indiana, myself one of them, a review was conducted. Turns out that businesses were overlooked, by accident they said, on the new tax structures. Several homeowners were paying more for their property taxes than the local super grocery store a few blocks away.
The legislature advised that it was a mistake and they would look into it.
At that time nothing happened.
Finally a citizens group was formed "Stop Indiana" and legal action was filed against the State of Indiana.
Home Here is a link for some intresting reading.
Once the legal action hit the new tax law was put on hold.
There are many thoughts on how to reform the taxes to be fair, and keep business as well as homeowners, but its hard to say what will happen once the election is over.
I would support the 2% assumption tax. Its a viable solution and spreads out the burden to everyone. This would be a great option for Florida as there are so many tourist. It would help to correct the decreasing propery values, it would increase the amount of businesses that locate in Florida, and it would increase the amount of spending power of the homeowner.
Still as for as the Super Exemption is concerned. I support it. I can almost guarantee you it will be short lived once someone else comes up with another idea.
What Florida needs is a powerful legal action group willing to take on this issue. If everyone can speak as a group and put pressure on the legislatures then they will listen. Threaten to take away their bread and butter and have them come back into the private sector as a homeowner and I am sure the Govener and Mayors and reps will have some serious thoughts on the issues.
Just my 2 bits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Central Florida
800 posts, read 2,806,985 times
Reputation: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by macguy View Post
......... Your vote also effects a lot of other people. ...........
The great thing is that all residents of voting age can vote and the majority will rule, as it should be.

Every vote counts! Register and vote! Some will vote for the tax, some will vote against it. Floridians will determine what they feel is best for them.

Macguy, Floridians are not stupid and they can make up their own mind. Name calling is just inapproapriate at any time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 12:49 PM
 
1,572 posts, read 3,678,920 times
Reputation: 512
I will vote "no". Save Our Homes was a bad plan, so are more tax exemptions. It is also a pro-growth policy and I am anti-growth. Florida is overpopulated, any proposed law that is supported by developers is a bad law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2007, 01:19 PM
 
15,115 posts, read 31,011,075 times
Reputation: 18214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnulus View Post
I will vote "no". Save Our Homes was a bad plan, so are more tax exemptions. It is also a pro-growth policy and I am anti-growth. Florida is overpopulated, any proposed law that is supported by developers is a bad law.
I agree with this! ^
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > U.S. Forums > Florida
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:00 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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