Public Employee Unions want to change Prop. 13 so busness property tax goes up & up more every year. (Fresno: store, assessments)

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

My brother lives 10 minutes away in Castro Valley in a nice home with nice neighbors... Mom's effective property tax rate in Oakland is about 50% higher than his... the difference between city and county...

It's just nuts how tax amounts can fluctuate from city to city due to special assessments and bonds for that area. Some don't bother to read their tax statements, others don't realize how voting "yes" on a particular measure will affect their property tax bill.

I used to think everyone paid attention but learned over the years some don't bother. They just write the check and are done ... until they find out they don't like it but it's too late to do anything about it. They voted for it and now have to live with it. OR, they get mad and take it to court - which some have done and are defeated. It's nothing new. A good number of voters have been deaf, dumb and blind to what goes on right under their nose. Makes me chuckle when I see the number of people so gullible. I usually vote no (unless they are truly warranted) on them but they pass anyway. Then I hear people squawking about it later.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Some don't bother to read their tax statements, others don't realize how voting "yes" on a particular measure will affect their property tax bill.

You are giving too much credit to typical voters. For example, half of all voters are below average intelligence! (That's simple statistics.) And then there's the voting faction who do don't own property, why should they care if property taxes go up, especially if they get some kind of benefit. (If they are renters they don't realize that their landlord's business factors property taxes into their rent.) And then there's unions and government employees who would vote to repeal Prop 13 because they would benefit from the repeal.

When you look at voters you have to take into account that voters have different agenda even if they are smart enough to understand what they are voting for or against. And worse, the voters who don't understand but vote on it anyway--the loose cannons on deck in voting, a random factor, one easily tricked into voting one way or another by political advertising.

Actually I really would like to split up the state into 2-3 pieces, if for no other reason than to divide and conquer. With my luck I'd end up on the side that repeals Prop 13. Oh well... Hello Arizona.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

You are giving too much credit to typical voters. For example, half of all voters are below average intelligence! (That's simple statistics.) And then there's the voting faction who do don't own property, why should they care if property taxes go up, especially if they get some kind of benefit. (If they are renters they don't realize that their landlord's business factors property taxes into their rent.) And then there's unions and government employees who would vote to repeal Prop 13 because they would benefit from the repeal.

When you look at voters you have to take into account that voters have different agenda even if they are smart enough to understand what they are voting for or against. And worse, the voters who don't understand but vote on it anyway--the loose cannons on deck in voting, a random factor, one easily tricked into voting one way or another by political advertising.

Actually I really would like to split up the state into 2-3 pieces, if for no other reason than to divide and conquer. With my luck I'd end up on the side that repeals Prop 13. Oh well... Hello Arizona.

I don't really think that's true, Lovehound. I think most Californians are intelligent. I simply believe they get caught up in their lives and are so busy, they don't take the time to follow politics ... not like a select few around city-data.

However, I think it's the older generation that are a little more observant, only because they've seen what happens when you don't pay attention. With time, you'll see these young people become more observant as the same things that plagued my generation and the ones before will happen to them. Really. It will be the same argument about the previous generation ruining everything for the present generation. And when the next generation comes along, they'll blame the same ones we see today blaming us for their problems. Confused yet? Me, too.

[Lovehound]

Mars, it's a simple fact. You take all the people on your block, in your city, in your state, in any sample population, and there's one person right in the middle, the 50th percentile, who is your person of average intelligence. Then half of those who are left are smarter than average Joe here, and the other half are dumber than our average person. That is simple statistics.

To what degree intelligence determines who decides to register to vote and then actually votes is a confounding factor, and I have no way of knowing that. It's bound to skew my statistics but I know not which way.

I may be mistaken but it is my understanding that voter participation increases with age. In other words older people are disproportionately more represented at the polls.

We may be of a similar generation. I'm seeing the same things that my parents' generation disapproved of my generation in today's young people. To be fair today's young people (20s?) got handed a plate of grief with a bad economy, college graduates still living with parents and unable to find employment for lack of jobs. I'm sympathetic to their plight. Back when I graduated college I went straight into my first engineering job! I didn't bother with the formality of attending my graduation ceremony and the facts are a little vague in my memory but I recall it was mere weeks between completing my studies and starting my first job--and a good salary at the time.

I sympathize with the plight that young people face. I'd like to think that they too could sympathize with the plight that senior citizens face. We boomers got problems of our own--and I hate to say but the underlying theme is always the same: money sucking government.

And the solution is still the same: we have got to get our tax-and-spend government under control, and we have to reduce the size of this huge monster.

No I'm not confused. I'm disturbed. We don't need a generational war on top of all the other grief we have to handle. We are the people! We have to accommodate all of us. I just don't see any workable solution that doesn't involve reining in the size and cost of government and the taxes it consumes.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

"Prop 13...has protected homeowners and renters. But it’s also given a quiet windfall to entrenched corporate owners of commercial property.

Corporations don’t need this protection. They’re in the real economy. They’re supposed to compete on a level playing field with new companies whose property taxes are based on current market prices.

This corporate windfall has caused three big problems.

First, it’s shifted more of the property tax to California homeowners. Back in 1978, corporations paid 44 percent of all property taxes and homeowners paid 56 percent. Now, after exploiting this loophole for years, corporations pay only 28 percent of property taxes, while homeowners pick up 72 percent of the tab.

Second, it’s robbed California of billions of dollars to support schools and local services. If all corporations were paying the property taxes they should be paying, schools and local services would have $9 billion more in revenues this year.

Third, it penalizes new and expanding businesses that don’t get this windfall because their commercial property is assessed at the current market price—but they compete for customers with companies whose property is assessed at the price they purchased it years ago. That’s unfair, and it’s bad for the economy because California needs new and expanding businesses."

This California Property Tax Loophole Must Be Fixed

"There's something grating about commercial real estate buyers being able to avoid reassessments that a typical home-buyer can't. That strikes at least some lawmakers as unfair."

Michael Dell: Poster boy for a Proposition 13 tweak? - LA Times

Again, it isn't a loophole. What some people mistakenly call a loophole is actually a magnet -- an incentive for businesses to stay.

Interestingly, many people who mistakenly call it a loophole also think "corporation" is a 4 letter word.

In the real world, ALL tax policies have consequences. Some people benefit, others don't.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

My own opinion is that big CA government simply spends too much money.

When tax policy comes up, most people point to someone else "not paying their fair share." In reality, the root cause is that Government costs too damn much.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Again, it isn't a loophole. What some people mistakenly call a loophole is actually a magnet -- an incentive for businesses to stay.

Interestingly, many people who mistakenly call it a loophole also think "corporation" is a 4 letter word.

In the real world, ALL tax policies have consequences. Some people benefit, others don't.

Truth. And even people who think they are taken advantage of may be mistaken in that. For example, the homeowner employees of a corporation that didn't move out of state because of a tax incentive, and ended up keeping their jobs.

That is why other states try to entice CA businesses to relocate by using tax incentives. The destination state knows that perhaps 10 years down the road the business will become entrenched, but they also know that the business will cause an immediate demand for new employees, and employees are consumers who contribute to the local economy and benefit other businesses that are already there.

The losers are the state the business moved away from (no more taxes on a gone business) and the loss to the economy by job loss and the money the employees used to spend.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

And if you lived in Oakland as I do the property tax with all the assessments could very well be $3500

Mom owns the land that is her backyard... it is a couple of steep acres in Oakland with an assessed value of 25k... yes 25k because it is not buildable... but it is a nice buffer... the property tax on this jumped from 3k to 4k in one year due to a number of Special Assessments often calculated on lot size...

<sigh.> If you lived in this house in Park City UT, your property tax would be $94,000 per year (not a typo).

9806 N Summit View Dr, Deer Valley, UT 84060 - realtor.com®

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Again, it isn't a loophole. What some people mistakenly call a loophole is actually a magnet -- an incentive for businesses to stay.
Interestingly, many people who mistakenly call it a loophole also think "corporation" is a 4 letter word.
In the real world, ALL tax policies have consequences. Some people benefit, others don't.

That's an odd thing for a free market advocate to say. Businesses currently benefiting from prop 13 are artificially enjoying a huge advantage over new businesses, how can that possibly be ok with you?

[davidt1]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

That's an odd thing for a free market advocate to say. Businesses currently benefiting from prop 13 are artificially enjoying a huge advantage over new businesses, how can that possibly be ok with you?

What I find odd is person who is not a business suddenly defending new businesses. But then again it is not all that odd considering that you are a retired government worker collecting from a taxpayer supported pension. You also have a son who is working for the government whose salary and benefit come from tax money.

It makes sense for you fight for the tax system that you benefit from. Good for you! But please do you really expect anyone to believe that you care about new businesses being hurt by Prop 13?