Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't live there, but anytime you make taxes more advantageous for one group it must be subsidized by others. In my brief reading of the issue, I would be inclined to vote for an end to that policy. It is interesting. I thought this was more of a northeast and west coast law
I had no idea Columbus did this.
A single home's value will not always go up, but due to inflation, housing prices will over the long term as an aggregate go up, so in effect, the newest purchasers get punished.
Why would it make sense for two identical houses (assume they were built by the same builder, architect, and at the same time) to pay different taxes? If my neighbor has a house he bought for $100k in 1990 and I buy an identical house in 2016 for $200k, why do I have to pay double the tax that he pays?
That's like making new citizens of the US pay 40% income tax while old citizens pay 20%...more extreme case I know but the point remains the same - why would anyone want to immigrate to the US under that scenario?
That's why I am going to vote to "thaw" the freeze - i.e. vote YES
A single home's value will not always go up, but due to inflation, housing prices will over the long term as an aggregate go up, so in effect, the newest purchasers get punished.
Why would it make sense for two identical houses (assume they were built by the same builder, architect, and at the same time) to pay different taxes? If my neighbor has a house he bought for $100k in 1990 and I buy an identical house in 2016 for $200k, why do I have to pay double the tax that he pays?
That's like making new citizens of the US pay 40% income tax while old citizens pay 20%...more extreme case I know but the point remains the same - why would anyone want to immigrate to the US under that scenario?
That's why I am going to vote to "thaw" the freeze - i.e. vote YES
A single home's value will not always go up, but due to inflation, housing prices will over the long term as an aggregate go up, so in effect, the newest purchasers get punished.
Why would it make sense for two identical houses (assume they were built by the same builder, architect, and at the same time) to pay different taxes? If my neighbor has a house he bought for $100k in 1990 and I buy an identical house in 2016 for $200k, why do I have to pay double the tax that he pays?
That's like making new citizens of the US pay 40% income tax while old citizens pay 20%...more extreme case I know but the point remains the same - why would anyone want to immigrate to the US under that scenario?
That's why I am going to vote to "thaw" the freeze - i.e. vote YES
Here's something I don't understand... if housing prices always go up over the long-term (in an aggregate sense), then that means that without the freeze in place, everyone who homes a home is going to eventually pay more in property taxes. However, with the freeze in place, even though a new home buyer will pay more in annual property taxes than someone who purchased a similar house 20 years ago, they'll never have to worry about paying more than that amount, right?
However, if the freeze is lifted, the new home buyer would STILL have to pay just as much in annual property taxes that they'd have to pay with the freeze in place -- it's just that with the freeze lifted, they now can look forward to paying more over time. So in other words, nobody will actually pay less in annual property taxes if the freeze is lifted. Is my assessment correct?
If I have the right idea here, then it seems like the only logical reason (from a voter's perspective) to support thawing the freeze is in the name of fairness -- I.e., even though lifting the freeze means everyone who buys a house will eventually pay more in property taxes, at least we'll all be paying the additional taxes on an even playing field... ?
Here's something I don't understand... if housing prices always go up over the long-term (in an aggregate sense), then that means that without the freeze in place, everyone who homes a home is going to eventually pay more in property taxes. However, with the freeze in place, even though a new home buyer will pay more in annual property taxes than someone who purchased a similar house 20 years ago, they'll never have to worry about paying more than that amount, right?
However, if the freeze is lifted, the new home buyer would STILL have to pay just as much in annual property taxes that they'd have to pay with the freeze in place -- it's just that with the freeze lifted, they now can look forward to paying more over time. So in other words, nobody will actually pay less in annual property taxes if the freeze is lifted. Is my assessment correct?
If I have the right idea here, then it seems like the only logical reason (from a voter's perspective) to support thawing the freeze is in the name of fairness -- I.e., even though lifting the freeze means everyone who buys a house will eventually pay more in property taxes, at least we'll all be paying the additional taxes on an even playing field... ?
Only thing I'd like to add is this is about Millage rates - so right now, 2016 taxes is .04125 mils. That one of the highest in georgia - like top 3, with the other 2 counties being in Atlanta. The state average is about .026 mils. Because we are so far above the average, as more people buy new homes and come to a "market" tax mil rate, each year that number should go down - once enough people are on that end of the scale (**taxes will go up for the new home owners for the next few years as say 10,000 market rate homes is not enough to effect it).
So, as more people buy into the system (buy new homes) even if home values go up the mil rate will keep going down year over year, and should keep the tax amount similar. This isn't policy or politics, this is economics, and we need to make a progressive change to have a chance at lowering our taxes in the future.
So say I paid $100,000 for my house this year - I'm paying ($100,000 x 40%) x 0.04125 = 1,650 annually.
If in the future (10 years say), my house is "worth" $150,000, but the mils are at 0.0275 = 1,650 annually.
Now that drastic a change in taxes and value isn't likely, but you get the point. Another option is call a friend living in another city in GA and ask them what changes they've seen in taxes. My sister lives in Marietta and they lived their for 6 years - their taxes have increased about $30 annually as their neighborhood has been built and home values have increased.
Only thing I'd like to add is this is about Millage rates - so right now, 2016 taxes is .04125 mils. That one of the highest in georgia - like top 3, with the other 2 counties being in Atlanta. The state average is about .026 mils. Because we are so far above the average, as more people buy new homes and come to a "market" tax mil rate, each year that number should go down - once enough people are on that end of the scale (**taxes will go up for the new home owners for the next few years as say 10,000 market rate homes is not enough to effect it).
So, as more people buy into the system (buy new homes) even if home values go up the mil rate will keep going down year over year, and should keep the tax amount similar. This isn't policy or politics, this is economics, and we need to make a progressive change to have a chance at lowering our taxes in the future.
So say I paid $100,000 for my house this year - I'm paying ($100,000 x 40%) x 0.04125 = 1,650 annually.
If in the future (10 years say), my house is "worth" $150,000, but the mils are at 0.0275 = 1,650 annually.
Now that drastic a change in taxes and value isn't likely, but you get the point. Another option is call a friend living in another city in GA and ask them what changes they've seen in taxes. My sister lives in Marietta and they lived their for 6 years - their taxes have increased about $30 annually as their neighborhood has been built and home values have increased.
To be honest, I'm not really familiar with what a millage rate is, so that's a topic I'll have to do some research on to be able to understand it. But just to make sure I get the gist of it, are you saying that if the freeze is lifted, the millage rate is likely to go down so that even substantial increases in home values are likely to result in home owners paying the same/less in taxes?
It's an Assumption, pure speculation, that the Mil rate would go down. The Mil rate is how the county collects money for schools, police, fire, road works, libraries, all local gov workers pay, etc... that money has to come from somewhere and it doesn't Really change much without a MAJOR change in population density.
Looks like you're also wrong about how high the tax rates are in Columbus vs other pats of the state too... I live in very rural, very poor, Meriwether and that same $100k house costs $1,858 a year with the Homestead exemption (owner/occupant), else it's $1955.
Only thing I'd like to add is this is about Millage rates - so right now, 2016 taxes is .04125 mils. That one of the highest in georgia - like top 3, with the other 2 counties being in Atlanta. The state average is about .026 mils. Because we are so far above the average, as more people buy new homes and come to a "market" tax mil rate, each year that number should go down - once enough people are on that end of the scale (**taxes will go up for the new home owners for the next few years as say 10,000 market rate homes is not enough to effect it).
So, as more people buy into the system (buy new homes) even if home values go up the mil rate will keep going down year over year, and should keep the tax amount similar. This isn't policy or politics, this is economics, and we need to make a progressive change to have a chance at lowering our taxes in the future.
So say I paid $100,000 for my house this year - I'm paying ($100,000 x 40%) x 0.04125 = 1,650 annually.
If in the future (10 years say), my house is "worth" $150,000, but the mils are at 0.0275 = 1,650 annually.
Now that drastic a change in taxes and value isn't likely, but you get the point. Another option is call a friend living in another city in GA and ask them what changes they've seen in taxes. My sister lives in Marietta and they lived their for 6 years - their taxes have increased about $30 annually as their neighborhood has been built and home values have increased.
Like I said...freezingtax3s for some has to be made up by others. Property taxes primarily pay for police, fire, and other governmental services. Over time those costs increase and therefore the amount paid should be increased across the spectrum and shared by all. I would vote to end this.
It's an Assumption, pure speculation, that the Mil rate would go down. The Mil rate is how the county collects money for schools, police, fire, road works, libraries, all local gov workers pay, etc... that money has to come from somewhere and it doesn't Really change much without a MAJOR change in population density.
Looks like you're also wrong about how high the tax rates are in Columbus vs other pats of the state too... I live in very rural, very poor, Meriwether and that same $100k house costs $1,858 a year with the Homestead exemption (owner/occupant), else it's $1955.
Not sure if this was directed at me - but population density is a critical component, rural areas pay a higher Mil rate because there's less people to spread the cost of governance (albeit it should cost less in rural areas to run civic services).
As I stated in my earlier post - the taxes will NOT go down over night, it will take a good number of real estate transactions to finally tip the scales. Let's say it would take 10,000 properties to transfer and come to "Market Rate" - i.e. a slightly higher rate than we are at now. Once we hit those 10k properties, the Mil rate would plateau and not increase until we add (random number of transactions - for argument sake say 5,000) additional properties. From that point forward, we would Mil rates go down year over year until hitting a reasonable Mil rate around the GA state average. But this might take 20 years.
Just to add to the discussion, there's a reason why something like 95-98% of all Georgia cities DON'T have a freeze....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
