Public Employee Unions want to change Prop. 13 so busness property tax goes up & up more every year. (Santa Barbara: middle-class, for rent)

[StanleysOwl]

Originally Posted by BennyPhoenix

Not always.
Not all commercial leases allow the passing of property taxes.
Not all housing authorities allow a rental increase due to an increase in property tax.

Regardless, I still am amazed at the ignorance and foolishness of those who don't understand that when businesses pay more taxes that those costs usually get passed down to them.

Benny, sooner rather than later ALL expenses get passed to customers / renters / whomever. That's the definition of business. Whats amazing is that anyone would think otherwise.

[expatCA]

And the Gov't knows this, so they in effect are increasing the taxes on ... the people of CA, without telling them they are.

[StanleysOwl]

Originally Posted by expatCA

And the Gov't knows this, so they in effect are increasing the taxes on ... the people of CA, without telling them they are.

So what? The state perceives a need for a certain amount of revenue. They seek it by spreading the sourcing from many venues which are used in varying degrees by different people. Consumers pay the freight in relation to their uses. Businesses collect for the state accordingly. When and where has this concept ever been different?

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by StanleysOwl

Passing costs of doing business on to customers is new? All costs are passed on to customers. Always have been. Thats how business works.

I keep my costs controlled and my tenants seldom receive rent increases... some have been with me since the 1980's...

I do go to market when a unit is vacant...

Good people that take care of the property will NOT see annual rent increases...

I just had a family relocate to Texas... they had a three bedroom, 2 bath SF Bay Area home and paid $1600 rent and it remained unchanged for 8 years...

The new family is paying $2600 and happy to have it.

I told them the same thing... if they take care of the property and otherwise a model tenant they will not have annual rent increases... this is possible in large part because Prop 13 makes taxes predictable.

[StanleysOwl]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I keep my costs controlled and my tenants seldom receive rent increases... some have been with me since the 1980's...

I do go to market when a unit is vacant...

Good people that take care of the property will NOT see annual rent increases...

I just had a family relocate to Texas... they had a three bedroom, 2 bath SF Bay Area home and paid $1600 rent and it remained unchanged for 8 years...

The new family is paying $2600 and happy to have it.

I told them the same thing... if they take care of the property and otherwise a model tenant they will not have annual rent increases... this is possible in large part because Prop 13 makes taxes predictable.

? No objection made here to Prop 13. Didnt say a word against it. Said costs always get passed on to consumers, necessarily. You may pass them on more slowly than some others but you still pass them on and then some as you raise to market rate. Nothing wrong or surprising with that is the point. Thats what business does to be profitable business. Simple.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Oh yes, there's no doubt California has some of the highest tax rates in the country. Still, it's not the highest when it comes to property taxes. Check out New Jersey or New Hampshire. They're terrible.

So if you are one who doesn't buy a home and only spends on purchases, it makes sense that you would want higher property taxes and lower consumption taxes. I, on the other hand, am an almost elderly single person with a mortgage who relies on keeping property taxes lower so I can stay in my home.

And that's why Prop 13 was called "The Taxpayer's Revolt."

[majoun]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

And that's why Prop 13 was called "The Taxpayer's Revolt."

The tax revolt should have been against the sales tax (which did not exist in any US state 100 years ago and which prior to 1930 only existed in Georgia) not the property tax (one of the oldest forms of taxation). California would have been better off. Of course, Jarvis wouldn't have been involved with that....

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by majoun

The tax revolt should have been against the sales tax

But few people felt a financial pinch from the sales tax back in the late 1970s.

It's doubtful that Prop 13 will ever be overturned....too many people would revolt today. The commercial loophole needs to be fixed, though.

“More people will flood out of California if they touch Prop. 13,” ....
Prop. 13 reform key to affordable housing, policy expert tells Realtors

[majoun]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

But few people felt a financial pinch from the sales tax back in the late 1970s.

It's doubtful that Prop 13 will ever be overturned....too many people would revolt today. The commercial loophole needs to be fixed, though.

“More people will flood out of California if they touch Prop. 13,” ....
Prop. 13 reform key to affordable housing, policy expert tells Realtors

It's a matter of when, not if, it will be repealed. Especially given California's mania for high taxes. California in the 1970s was a reddish purple state, rather than bluest of the blue. The only thing keeping it from being overturned is Jerry Brown. Once he goes, it will eventually be history.

With 13 gone the state could get back to a more sustainable fiscal model. Jacking up sales tax, sin tax, AND income tax while leaving property taxes low has turned the state into a major mess.

Since California has too many people already, and since high property values have put California's future in peril, those risks are worth taking.

[CaliRestoration]

I wish Democrats would try to repeal Prop 13. It would be the end of the Democrat party in California.