Really Torn About Moving to Austin (West, Nevada: rent, unemployment, schools)

[Ariel_Austin]

Property taxes in Texas are high because there isn't a personal income tax.

Someone making $100k taxable income in California would be taxed at 9.3% plus 1% for property taxes on say, a $500k home. Total taxes paid is $9,300 + $5,000 = $14,300.

The same taxable income and house value in Texas would see property taxed at 2.5% (some places higher, most lower) for a total taxes paid of $12,500 ($800 less than California in this example) but the house in Texas is going to, in general, be much more than the house in California.

For ease of comparison the scenarios above do not consider various exemptions for both states nor do they consider Mello-Roos that many pay in California or MUDs that are common in some areas in Austin (they are similar infrastructure and amenity funding vehicles).

Change the taxable income to $200k and the total taxes paid jumps to $23,600 while in Texas they stayed at $12,500 (Texans would pay just less than half the taxes compared to Californians under this simplified scenario).

Obviously the tax scheme in Texas favors those who earn more but spend moderately in proportion to their income. Even so, assuming the Texas earner making $200,000 taxable income has a $1,000,000 taxable value home, their property taxes would be $25,000 for $1,400 more in total taxes for much, much, much more home.

Your mileage may vary.

[Zzyzx]

Originally Posted by Ariel_Austin

Property taxes in Texas are high because there isn't a personal income tax.

Nevada does not have a state income tax. My property tax was around $1600.00 a year on a $250k home.

[capcat]

Originally Posted by Zzyzx

Nevada does not have a state income tax. My property tax was around $1600.00 a year on a $250k home.

Isn't that due in large part to revenue from the gaming industry?

[Ariel_Austin]

Originally Posted by Zzyzx

Nevada does not have a state income tax. My property tax was around $1600.00 a year on a $250k home.

Nevada is highly subsidized by gaming income to the state. Additionally, Nevada, outside of the their part of Lake Tahoe, leaves much, much to be desired.

[DCtoTejas]

And even with that subsidy they are struggling as California puts more and more Indian casinos right on the major highways into Nevada and other states relax gambling laws. Reno / tahoe is trying to re-invent itself as an outdoor paradise but it remains to be seen whether that offsets the gambling losses.

I think Florida is a slightly better comparison state but the heavy tourism and hotel tax subsidizes quite a bit there.

[10scoachrick]

For the 99% of the folks discussing the pluses and minuses of residential property tax vs income tax, the 'other' sources of revenue to the state are of little consequence. Dollars are dollars.

With the lousy natural gas market of the past few years, our income(as retired folks, we thought) has been in the tank. However, the $11K in property tax we would have paid last year seems a bit out of step with the $5K we paid after moving just down the street...in the same neighborhood. Same roads, schools, police, fire, etc, etc. The tax burden here is not a function of income or cost to service; but of the vagaries of the real estate market. Contribute to the local economy by building or re-hab'ing a home and one is rewarded by a large and increasing tax bill forever.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Ariel_Austin

Property taxes in Texas are high because there isn't a personal income tax.

Someone making $100k taxable income in California would be taxed at 9.3% plus 1% for property taxes on say, a $500k home. Total taxes paid is $9,300 + $5,000 = $14,300.

The same taxable income and house value in Texas would see property taxed at 2.5% (some places higher, most lower) for a total taxes paid of $12,500 ($800 less than California in this example) but the house in Texas is going to, in general, be much more than the house in California.

For ease of comparison the scenarios above do not consider various exemptions for both states nor do they consider Mello-Roos that many pay in California or MUDs that are common in some areas in Austin (they are similar infrastructure and amenity funding vehicles).

Change the taxable income to $200k and the total taxes paid jumps to $23,600 while in Texas they stayed at $12,500 (Texans would pay just less than half the taxes compared to Californians under this simplified scenario).

Obviously the tax scheme in Texas favors those who earn more but spend moderately in proportion to their income. Even so, assuming the Texas earner making $200,000 taxable income has a $1,000,000 taxable value home, their property taxes would be $25,000 for $1,400 more in total taxes for much, much, much more home.

Your mileage may vary.

also the 500K house in california would be 200k in texas..

My in laws live in a 1500 sq ft house in a decent school chain worth about 700k. I live in a 2800 sq ft house in one of the best school chains for 700k

My cousins live in houses that are about 2000 sq ft worth 2-3 million, not on a beach but in one of the best public school disctricts.

[spchtx]

Originally Posted by Austin97

also the 500K house in california would be 200k in texas..

My in laws live in a 1500 sq ft house in a decent school chain worth about 700k. I live in a 2800 sq ft house in one of the best school chains for 700k

My cousins live in houses that are about 2000 sq ft worth 2-3 million, not on a beach but in one of the best public school disctricts.

That completely depends on where you are in Ca. Sold our 13 yo 1500 sq ft house in suburb of Sacramento for $312,000. Highly desired neighborhood and school district. Not all areas of California have those insane home values.

Now had we sold our Ca house when first wanted to move here in 2004, we could have made close to $400,000 on our Ca house, and the house we were looking at here was 2300 Sq ft for about $190,000. That would have been a sweet deal, but life had a different plan for us.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by spchtx

That completely depends on where you are in Ca. Sold our 13 yo 1500 sq ft house in suburb of Sacramento for $312,000. Highly desired neighborhood and school district. Not all areas of California have those insane home values.

Now had we sold our Ca house when first wanted to move here in 2004, we could have made close to $400,000 on our Ca house, and the house we were looking at here was 2300 Sq ft for about $190,000. That would have been a sweet deal, but life had a different plan for us.

i was trying to compare equivalent areas. For example if you live in the middle of nowhere in cali you might pay 250K for a tract home. but if you live in the middle of nowhere in texas 250K will get you 20 acres and a decent house.

If you live in a great school chain in austin, it might be 500-700k. If you live in a great school district (san marino/pasadena) then the houses will be 2 million

[spchtx]

Originally Posted by Austin97

i was trying to compare equivalent areas. For example if you live in the middle of nowhere in cali you might pay 250K for a tract home. but if you live in the middle of nowhere in texas 250K will get you 20 acres and a decent house.

If you live in a great school chain in austin, it might be 500-700k. If you live in a great school district (san marino/pasadena) then the houses will be 2 million

I get it, but I would pretty much compare Suburbs of Austin to to Suburbs of Sacramento.