2017 Property Tax Valuations Were Published Today (Austin, Cedar Park: 2015, refinance, how much)

[mowilly]

Originally Posted by centralaustinite

Not only will Texas never come up with a different way to fund schools, they are increasing the burden on local taxpayers!

And yet the senate - who is ultra gung ho on gutting public eduction - likes to pretend that property tax relief is a big concern of theirs.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Are you assuming the taxing entities won't drop their rates (which they almost inevitably are forced to do)?

Yes, I suppose so. But my rough numbers were based on a tax rate of 0.022. The rate would have to drop to 0.0155 (7K/$452K) in order for the tax bill to remain the same $7K. That ain't gonna happen. No way.

I sold another property earlier this year because the $1,500 rent no longer supported owning a $300K home. I have another on the market for $250K up in Leander (tax rate there is 0.027) for similar reasons. The Rent/Value ratios no longer make sense given were are deep into this value up-cycle and I expect a letup soon (soon = 1-3 years).

But, back to the $452K value, that's also the value of many Central Austin homes that have been owner occupied for many years. Yes there is the Homestead cap, and the exemption, and the over 65 exemption, but despite that, people are getting squeezed out.

Now, arguing against myself here, maybe the high taxes are a good thing, else values would have skyrocketed even more, as they have in lower tax places like California. And of course, for those of us who elected a wealth building strategy that favors real estate over stock market exposure, the Net Worth spreadsheet has done well over the years in Austin. But still.

I'm just having a bit of a flareup. I don't want middle/lower income people to be priced out of Austin. I like my rich friends but I also like my musician friends and service worker friends, and I want my daughters in their 20s to be able to afford to stay in Austin and have families. Looks like that train is leaving the station for those without parental support or external sources of funds, like selling in an even higher market then coming here, or inheritance, etc.

Steve

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

Yes, I suppose so. But my rough numbers were based on a tax rate of 0.022. The rate would have to drop to 0.0155 (7K/$452K) in order for the tax bill to remain the same $7K. That ain't gonna happen. No way.

I sold another property earlier this year because the $1,500 rent no longer supported owning a $300K home. I have another on the market for $250K up in Leander (tax rate there is 0.027) for similar reasons. The Rent/Value ratios no longer make sense given were are deep into this value up-cycle and I expect a letup soon (soon = 1-3 years).

But, back to the $452K value, that's also the value of many Central Austin homes that have been owner occupied for many years. Yes there is the Homestead cap, and the exemption, and the over 65 exemption, but despite that, people are getting squeezed out.

Now, arguing against myself here, maybe the high taxes are a good thing, else values would have skyrocketed even more, as they have in lower tax places like California. And of course, for those of us who elected a wealth building strategy that favors real estate over stock market exposure, the Net Worth spreadsheet has done well over the years in Austin. But still.

I'm just having a bit of a flareup. I don't want middle/lower income people to be priced out of Austin. I like my rich friends but I also like my musician friends and service worker friends, and I want my daughters in their 20s to be able to afford to stay in Austin and have families. Looks like that train is leaving the station for those without parental support or external sources of funds, like selling in an even higher market then coming here, or inheritance, etc.

Steve

The answer is building more housing. Since there is no more land the only answer is multi family. People somehow dont get that if there was a glut of homes, their value would drop and so would their taxes.

[TexasHorseLady]

Ours for our house in Austin stayed the same this year, but jumped a hair over $100,000 last year - they dropped the value on the house and raised it dramatically ($161,000+) on the land to make it harder to fight. I'm with Steve - Austinites are being priced out of Austin with these tax increases.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Austin97

The answer is building more housing. Since there is no more land the only answer is multi family. People somehow dont get that if there was a glut of homes, their value would drop and so would their taxes.

So the choices are destroy Austin by handing it over to the wealthy or destroy Austin (what makes it what it is) by handing it over to urban density lovers who would love to see it turn into New York City? Seems like a lose-lose either way.

[riaelise]

Tax appraisals kinda mean diddly for everything except taxation, so the increase to me is never a good thing. FWIW Wilco seems pretty spot on with the appraisals and market value. Our value went up 41k, which is in line with the recent sales in the neighborhood. When we refinanced, the value was about the same as Wilco's. Land remained the same.

[riaelise]

We will pay over 10k in taxes now. I don't like it. That's over 1k per month in taxes alone, which will never go away unlike a mortgage note. The over 65 tax freeze exemption means jack sh*t for us when we're older because when they do freeze the value, the house will probably be over 600k at that point, given the current trend in the area. Freezing the taxes on that value will be cost prohibitive for us when we're no longer working even if the home is paid off. So, in all likelihood we will sell the house at retirement age whether we want to or not.

At the same time, however, services have to paid for some how and I do not want a state income tax. I moved from a high income tax state (NY) and it sucked to lose so much of your pay in taxes.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

Yes, I suppose so. But my rough numbers were based on a tax rate of 0.022. The rate would have to drop to 0.0155 (7K/$452K) in order for the tax bill to remain the same $7K. That ain't gonna happen. No way.

No, and it would be completely unrealistic to expect it to remain exactly the same. If nothing else, you'd expect some nominal inflation.

And then there's the homestead exemption process, which favors homeowners above renters (and by extension, landlords).

So it'll still be bad, but I'd be surprised if it ends up being a full 42% increase. Maybe only 30%

Originally Posted by austin-steve

But, back to the $452K value, that's also the value of many Central Austin homes that have been owner occupied for many years. Yes there is the Homestead cap, and the exemption, and the over 65 exemption, but despite that, people are getting squeezed out.

Some, sure. But between the homestead cap, the dropping rates, and the fact that taxes are only part (though an important part) of housing costs, for most people once you're here you're in a pretty good spot.

It's people trying to jump into the middle of the musical chairs that are really hurting (say if you want to move from renting to owning).

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

So the choices are destroy Austin by handing it over to the wealthy or destroy Austin (what makes it what it is) by handing it over to urban density lovers who would love to see it turn into New York City? Seems like a lose-lose either way.

There is a massive, massive world of difference between "any more than 1 dwelling unit in a quarter acre lot is illegal" and "New York City skyscrapers".

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

So the choices are destroy Austin by handing it over to the wealthy or destroy Austin (what makes it what it is)

Or if you want to keep "what makes" Austin "what it is", why not return to the zoning that Austin _used to have_.


The huge minimum lot sizes, noncumulative zoning, etc. are all relatively recent developments (depending on when you think Austin's "golden age" was).