Property Tax Reform (York, Wall, Penn: credit, high school, taxi)

[WhoIsStanwix?]

District of Columbia: Office of the Chief Financial Officer (http://cfo.dc.gov/cfo/frames.asp?doc=/cfo/lib/cfo/10STUDY.pdf - broken link)

Start on page 15 of the PDF, labeled at the bottom as page 7.

An interesting look at tax burdens by State. The methodolgy looks at various income levels and estimates the tax burden as a % of that income level. Looks like they've picked a major city in each state to use as the basis for comparison.

Interesting to me is that I've lived in three of the most taxed places over the last 5 years, maybe that's why my perspective is so weird. I've lived/earned income in Hartford, CT, Louisville, KY and now Pittsburgh, PA. When I moved to KY I was under the assumption "oh this is a sort of rural state, there must be low taxes". WRONG. My personal tax burden in Pittsburgh is actually a little lower than it was when I lived in Kentucky, though that may or may not be the case for a specific scenario (do you own a car? do you own a home? how many kids do you have? etc.)

While I normally wouldn't like to say this, looks like h_curtis has some very valid arguments in terms of his taxation issues with the State of PA (or is it Commonwealth of PA?). In terms of total tax burden, we are very near the top! I know Philly isn't the the same as Pittsburgh, but I still think Pittsburgh wouldn't be so different as to change the ranking much.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by WhoIsStanwix?

I know Philly isn't the the same as Pittsburgh, but I still think Pittsburgh wouldn't be so different as to change the ranking much.

I definitely do not think you can assume the City of Pittsburgh would have the same ranking as Philadelphia, which is very likely taxed at a higher rate. Note that these rankings are pretty sensitive to small differences in rates (a product of the fact that many areas end up with a similar overall tax burden once you add it all up).

Also, I think it is worth emphasizing they were looking here at cities, not metro areas (neither h_curtis or I, for example, live in the City of Pittsburgh).

That said, I think you can draw two important observations from Philadelphia's rankings in this study. First, the overall system of taxation in Pennsylvania is quite regressive, which goes in part to how our state constitution has been interpreted.

Second, the way we tax combined with how we divide up municipalities and government functions is unusually punitive of Philadelphia, and likely the City of Pittsburgh, and perhaps some other larger and/or older cities.

[gg]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

I don't see why you're so upset, Curt. You get what you pay for. Those states with low tax burdens tend to have awful school districts. Whatever you pay in property taxes probably pales in comparison to the private school tuition you'd otherwise have to shell out.

The main reason FC school district is good is because the parents, not the teachers. Go to a meeting at the FC school for anything and it is packed and standing room only. Parents deeply care about what goes on there. Yes we have the funding, but education starts at home. I would rather pay my property tax only than pay another tax on top of that property tax. I think no change is a better option than smacking me with yet another new tax to live around here.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

The main reason FC school district is good is because the parents, not the teachers. Go to a meeting at the FC school for anything and it is packed and standing room only. Parents deeply care about what goes on there. Yes we have the funding, but education starts at home. I would rather pay my property tax only than pay another tax on top of that property tax. I think no change is a better option than smacking me with yet another new tax to live around here.

I understand that money is not the end-all, be-all when it comes to education (and there definitely are some well-funded districts that perform well below par). But you're kidding yourself if you don't think Fox Chapel's well-funded coffers are primarily responsible for all the fancy advanced classes, extracurricular activities, top-notch facilities, etc (on top of the specially-trained faculty a lot of those courses require).

Money may not be sufficient, but it most definitely is necessary.

[gg]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

I understand that money is not the end-all, be-all when it comes to education (and there definitely are some well-funded districts that perform well below par). But you're kidding yourself if you don't think Fox Chapel's well-funded coffers are primarily responsible for all the fancy advanced classes, extracurricular activities, top-notch facilities, etc (on top of the specially-trained faculty a lot of those courses require).

Money may not be sufficient, but it most definitely is necessary.

Yes, there is truth to that, but never forget education starts at home and the parents demand those classes. You can live in Sharpsburg and enjoy those amenities, but if you look at test scores and how well Sharpsburg does in comparison to the rest of the district, it is quite evident that parenting plays a very big role in all of this. It is no doubt the most important role.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Yes, there is truth to that, but never forget education starts at home and the parents demand those classes. You can live in Sharpsburg and enjoy those amenities, but if you look at test scores and how well Sharpsburg does in comparison to the rest of the district, it is quite evident that parenting plays a very big role in all of this. It is no doubt the most important role.

That's why I said "necessary" and not "sufficient." But because of the opportunities their school provides them, the Sharpsburg kids still do very well relative to their socioeconomic peers.

[trackstar13]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

I don't see why you're so upset, Curt. You get what you pay for. Those states with low tax burdens tend to have awful school districts. Whatever you pay in property taxes probably pales in comparison to the private school tuition you'd otherwise have to shell out.

Indianapolis has among the lowest property taxes in the country and the most blue ribbon schools in both 2009 and 2010 I believe. It is too simplified to say high taxes = higher educational quality and while this is true in some cases, that does not mean it is always true or that it is the right way. If Indianapolis can compete with places like Boston with less tax dollars, we need to figure out what Indianapolis and similar cities are doing so we can replicate this in Western PA.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by track2514

Indianapolis has among the lowest property taxes in the country and the most blue ribbon schools in both 2009 and 2010 I believe. It is too simplified to say high taxes = higher educational quality and while this is true in some cases, that does not mean it is always true or that it is the right way. If Indianapolis can compete with places like Boston with less tax dollars, we need to figure out what Indianapolis and similar cities are doing so we can replicate this in Western PA.

But what's Indiana's overall tax burden? If not property taxes, the money is still coming from somewhere.

There is definitely a lot of fat that can be chewed off here though, particularly because there are so many tiny, redundant school districts.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

But what's Indiana's overall tax burden? If not property taxes, the money is still coming from somewhere.

Pretty middle of the road, actually. It's definitely not all tax dollars. One thing I know about Indiana in general, is that people who worked in Louisville many times lived across the border in Indiana due to 1. VASTLY Superior Public School System, and 2. Much Lower Overall Tax Burden.

Indiana has Far Lower Income Tax, about 2-3% total vs. 6-7% total in Louisville when you included local. About equivalent property tax. No annual tax on motor vehicles in Indiana. Sales tax was the same at 6%.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

But what's Indiana's overall tax burden? If not property taxes, the money is still coming from somewhere.

And if you don't believe me, please consult the link I referenced above to the Washington, D.C. study on tax burdens.