Austin to challenge commercial property appraisals (fit in, sales, 2015)

[Novacek]

Austin to challenge Travis commercial property appraisals - Austin Business Journal

[Austin97]

finally this is a huge deal. I think the government should have full access to actual sales prices to set the rates. Right now it is a game of who can hire the best lawyers to pay as little as possible.

[A-Tex]

About flipping time.

[verybadgnome]

Yes about time is right. This probably would not be necessary if Texas was a non-disclosure state, but you have certain groups who benefit from the lack of data (and will fight to keep CADs ignorant) that makes this necessary.

[scm53]

The idea that changing the non-disclosure laws will only effect commercial property owners is simplistic at best, populist drivel at the worst.

After the year of sale, valuations still be set based on the same factors as today. And the same large potential dollar amount reductions on commercial property will incentivize the same methods used today. Enjoy your pitchfork moment.

That said, I am glad council is doing this.

[Aquitaine]

This doesn't really seem to be about disclosure versus non-disclosure so much as just applying the same set of rules, however imperfect, to everybody.

I agree that requiring disclosure doesn't really fix anything.

I heard on the radio last week that this could cause tax collection to be pushed into 2016 rather than December 2015/January 2016 because of how the laws work with respect to budgeting and collecting this money.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

Yes about time is right. This probably would not be necessary if Texas was a non-disclosure state, but you have certain groups who benefit from the lack of data (and will fight to keep CADs ignorant) that makes this necessary.

Texas IS a non-disclosure state. Meaning that we protect our privacy even if someone else thinks they should have full access to our personal information. Want to hand your checking account records over to me to publish because I think I stand to benefit in some way from having them? No? Then keep your fingers off of my personal financial information just because you think you stand to benefit from having it made public.

Originally Posted by scm53

The idea that changing the non-disclosure laws will only effect commercial property owners is simplistic at best, populist drivel at the worst.

After the year of sale, valuations still be set based on the same factors as today. And the same large potential dollar amount reductions on commercial property will incentivize the same methods used today. Enjoy your pitchfork moment.

That said, I am glad council is doing this.

Yep, people are being fed drivel in the confidence that they will eagerly swallow it and move to turn over their private information to everyone for someone else's benefit. "There's one born every minute," whoever said it, is just as true today.

Now, I would have no problem with the tax office having the information on businesses under the same privacy restrictions of not being able to publish it to the general public. Though I'm not sure I trust the government not to slip up on that.

[Aquitaine]

Want to hand your checking account records over to me to publish because I think I stand to benefit in some way from having them? No? Then keep your fingers off of my personal financial information just because you think you stand to benefit from having it made public.

I don't especially care for the government having access to property sales, but this is a ridiculous analogy. The federal government has a legal right to know your income because that is the basis of their taxing mechanism. It's a pretty simple legal argument that the State of Texas could have the same. That's not 'me' having access to the sale price - not any more than 'I' have access to your adjusted gross income. They needen't be required to PUBLISH the price of the home as they publish the assessed values.

If it were up to me they wouldn't have the authority to demand this, but it's easy enough to argue that they shouldn't without FUD like this. We pay our 'private' income as taxes for 'somebody else's benefit.' We may disagree on how that should work but this whole business is about doing things for other people's benefit.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by Aquitaine

This doesn't really seem to be about disclosure versus non-disclosure so much as just applying the same set of rules, however imperfect, to everybody.
...

Agreed. It's sort of like the legal system. Those with money get better outcomes. Big commercial property owners fight hard for lower values and have the resources to do so. Meanwhile, us small guys roll the dice with the protest crap shoot, where the outcome is based on the personality of the idiot listening to you, or the composition of the 80-something year old panelists who know jack squat about anything. I've taken the exact same argument for the exact same house to protest two years in a row. Year one the panel agreed. Next year, 100% disagreed. Different panelists and different TCAD rep.

I wish we'd ditch the property tax and have a higher sales tax plus an income tax.

Steve

[tom331]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

Agreed. It's sort of like the legal system. Those with money get better outcomes. Big commercial property owners fight hard for lower values and have the resources to do so. Meanwhile, us small guys roll the dice with the protest crap shoot, where the outcome is based on the personality of the idiot listening to you, or the composition of the 80-something year old panelists who know jack squat about anything. I've taken the exact same argument for the exact same house to protest two years in a row. Year one the panel agreed. Next year, 100% disagreed. Different panelists and different TCAD rep.

I wish we'd ditch the property tax and have a higher sales tax plus an income tax.

Steve

Flat tax!