Public Employee Unions want to change Prop. 13 so busness property tax goes up & up more every year. (Santa Monica: to rent, calculation)

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

I don't know what you call it, but it looks like a commercial property loophole to me.

Legislators take aim at Proposition 13 loophole - SFGate

Corporations get big edge in Prop. 13 quirk - latimes

This California Property Tax Loophole Must Be Fixed

It's a spin that is meant to chip away at Prop 13...

The California Constitution prohibits a split property tax roll...

Chipping away at "Commercial" is the best way to eventually change Prop 13 for all...

[Lovehound]

Where is the end of it? We keep increasing taxes, property taxes, tobacco taxes, sales taxes, every kind of tax. What affect will that have on everybody's lives?

Where is the straw that breaks the camel's back? And if that happens, what does it mean for the state's economy?

There has to be some kind of tipping point where taxes upset the apple cart and fiscal disaster follows.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Chipping away at "Commercial" is the best way to eventually change Prop 13 for all...

If we are talking about the same thing, at least there's the fact that increased costs of doing business will always be passed on to the customers, in effect making the people who use those services or buy those products ultimately pay for the increased commercial property taxes.

Consumers always have the choice of just not buying. The rest who do share the increased costs according to the amount of money they have to spend. That sounds very fair to me.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Where is the end of it? We keep increasing taxes, property taxes, tobacco taxes, sales taxes, every kind of tax. What affect will that have on everybody's lives?

Where is the straw that breaks the camel's back? And if that happens, what does it mean for the state's economy?

There has to be some kind of tipping point where taxes upset the apple cart and fiscal disaster follows.

But you don't mind raising income taxes, tobacco taxes, sales tax, and every other tax except for your sacred property tax.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by expatCA

FL has a higher property tax and prices are rising.

As to TX:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tx+h...utf-8&oe=utf-8

The median home value in Texas is $163,500. Texas home values have gone up 5.9% over the past year and Zillow predicts they will rise 3.1% within the next year.

Ontario in the 70's was not a desirable location.

NJ is not as popular as CA so no valid comparison. The most popular States have higher property taxes than CA and ... the prices keep rising. If you can't afford CA, move to where you can or increase your income. Simple and hurts no one who is on a fixed income and higher property taxes would hurt them. Hurting one older person to help another, and younger to boot, is disgusting.

The Unions want more money, they don't care about you or anyone else at all.

Prices aren't rising as fast as they are in California.

If NJ passed its own Prop 13 property values would skyrocket and more people would move there.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by majoun

But you don't mind raising income taxes, tobacco taxes, sales tax, and every other tax except for your sacred property tax.

I'm too poor to owe income taxes, or will be when my investment properties are soon liquidated. I don't have a dog in that fight.

I can see some sense in taxes on goods or services that people can buy/use or not. Housing is not one of those things. I see no sense in taxing old people out of their homes they've scrimped and saved their whole lives to earn. You get that word? EARN! Those people paid for their properties, they retired and unless they have cushy government pensions their income dropped by maybe 90% when they went to Social Security.

And now you want to send the old people packing, so that young people can buy their properties on the cheap!

The big flaw in your argument is the properties won't be bought by people of low means. They will just be bought up by rich people.

There are NO houses for poor people. They call those apartments. They call those freeway overpasses.

You are not going to get your house on the cheap just by eliminating Prop 13. In fact I predict you will never own a house. You'll never be able to afford it, Prop 13 or no.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

I'm too poor to owe income taxes, or will be when my investment properties are soon liquidated. I don't have a dog in that fight.

I can see some sense in taxes on goods or services that people can buy/use or not. Housing is not one of those things. I see no sense in taxing old people out of their homes they've scrimped and saved their whole lives to earn. You get that word? EARN! Those people paid for their properties, they retired and unless they have cushy government pensions their income dropped by maybe 90% when they went to Social Security.

And now you want to send the old people packing, so that young people can buy their properties on the cheap!

The big flaw in your argument is the properties won't be bought by people of low means. They will just be bought up by rich people.

There are NO houses for poor people. They call those apartments. They call those freeway overpasses.

You are not going to get your house on the cheap just by eliminating Prop 13. In fact I predict you will never own a house. You'll never be able to afford it, Prop 13 or no.

But you're not for getting rid of zoning, especially R-1 zoning, so more condos and apartments can be built. You're in favor of condemning people to freeway overpasses.

I'd believe your "free market" appeals more if you were in favor of getting rid of zoning or at least greatly weakening it. But your ideal isn't Houston. It's strictly regulated and master-planned Irvine.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by Des-Lab

What, exactly, constitutes a "fair share"?

There's an old saying: "Don't tax me; don't tax thee. Tax that fellow behind the tree."

Originally Posted by Des-Lab

Last I checked, property taxes were much more REgressive than PROgressive.

You say that as if it were a bad thing.

Originally Posted by Des-Lab

California-as liberal as it is-WILL eventually reach its "enough is enough" point. And believe me. Thirty-seven million taxpayers will not stand to see their taxes double or tripled yet again just to bail out a bloated, oversold pension for the States bureaucratic largesse.

However, most of those thirty-seven million taxpayers are products of the California public school system, which is to say that they can't do the math on what their taxes might be in the future.

I still remember "The New Math" I learned in LA in the 1960s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math

"If Johnny has 3 bananas, and Suzie has 2 apples, how does Billy feel about the War in Vietnam?"

[NoNansea]

Originally Posted by USDefault

This is incorrect. The way the vast majority of property tax assessors across the U.S. determine taxable value: they assess the property. The assessment generally includes any recent transactions in the subject property, transactions in comparable properties, and general market/transaction data for each town or city.

An assessed value is determined. A uniform tax rate is then applied to that assessed value. Homeowner can appeal the assessed value. But once the assessment process runs its course, the town/city/county property tax rate applies to the property's assessed value, and that is the amount of property tax owed.

California's Prop. 13 is markedly different, as it imposes a stringent cap on increases. So the prior poster is correct: people with comparable properties are paying vastly different amounts of tax -- on similarly valued properties. In California, the key variable in the equation is the original tax basis, which really is a function of how long ago did you purchase the property. Again, this is way different from the vast majority of states, where the key variable is a property's value.

I understand why Prop. 13 was passed, and it's a great check on out-of-control California politicians. But it's also grossly unfair to new home purchasers. Recent buyers could easily be paying triple, quadruple, even quintuple the taxes on nearly identical properties versus their neighbor, who happens to have a foot in the grave and bought their house thirty-five years ago. This arrangement favors old zombie owners versus those who are just starting out. And this is another key reason California, from a financial point-of-view, is beyond terrible for young adults and young families, who get absolutely screwed by taxes and fees in California.

I don't think you completely understand why Prop. 13 was passed. I had owned my home for 3 to 4 years when my property taxes went from $450 a year to $1200 a year overnight. This was in the mid 1970's. I was a young & new homeowner who would have lost my home if not for Prop. 13. I purchased that house in 1974 for $34,700. Because a house down the street sold for $119,000, the gov't decided my house was worth the same & so raised my property taxes. Great! I allegedly had quite a bit of equity in my house. But if I couldn't afford food for my kids due to suddenly greatly increased property taxes, equity did nothing for me. There was no guarantee my house would have sold for that same amount.

The government should not be able to increase your costs when you've had no way to plan for those increases, especially when those costs are so high. Prop. 13 allows for that planning. That California legislature overspends, is wasteful & irresponsible should not directly impact each & every homeowner to the point they have to sell their home. Not all voters are homeowners, yet Prop. 13 passed by a wide margin. Gov't actions pre-Prop. 13 were definitely an attempt for a money-grab.

As a side note, then Governor Jerry (moonbeam) Brown was against Prop. 13 prior to it's passing but did an about-face after it was passed.

Now, according to you I am an old zombie owner with one foot in the grave. Thank you for that. I have moved two times since I owned that house & you'll be happy to know my current property taxes are $10,000 per year & of course will continue to rise. There is so much turnover in Southern California and so much new home building, I really see no reason for the government to think they're losing out when it comes to property taxes.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by majoun

But you're not for getting rid of zoning, especially R-1 zoning, so more condos and apartments can be built. You're in favor of condemning people to freeway overpasses.

I'd believe your "free market" appeals more if you were in favor of getting rid of zoning or at least greatly weakening it. But your ideal isn't Houston. It's strictly regulated and master-planned Irvine.

I'm not involved in any of these processes. I own my own home. It's already zoned and it's zoned R-1. I could care less about whatever zoning other areas have. Not my problem. Not my business. I could care less.

People who live in freeway underpasses condemned themselves. I had nothing to do with it except not tossing them my spare change at the freeway off ramps and supermarket parking lots. Anyway most of them suffer mental illness and that's why they live the way they do.

Repeat, again, since you've already asked me before:

I AM NOT INTO ZONING AND I AM NOT INTO NOT ZONING! I HAVE NO DOG IN THIS FIGHT!

Zone away. Be my guest. My home is in a large area of R-1 and nothing is going to change that, not now, not 20 years from now, not in my lifetime.


The only thing I mean to imply by "free market" is that it is what governs what houses are bought and sold at. A free buyer who can offer whatever the house is worth to them, buying from a free seller who can accept or reject the sale price.

And your Prop 13 obsession will not affect property sales statistics including prices in any meaningful way. If you can't afford a house now you will not be able to afford a house even if Prop 13 is eliminated. -- But if you ever do manage to buy a house and Prop 13 is eliminated, I'll be amused watching you post from the other side when your shoe is on your other foot!

Enjoy your apartment! If they lift Prop 13 for commercial only, enjoy your new increased rent!