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.
Doing an ad hominem attack on the source is not Shades the validity of the information presented. Everything is cited correctly. If you have a problem with actual empirical data and judgment that's your own call. Connecticut is one of the few states that does not have a limitation in any form of property taxes that's a fact. I could also say Jay as a moderator on a message board you're not supposed to actually interact with the posts because otherwise that shows a bias. If you are a moderator out of debate this would clearly stand out.
"Pretty much every state has a regressive tax structure. People with more money pay a higher percentage in taxes. Nothing wrong with that. Jay"
That's not Progressive. You do not know what regressive taxation is. If people pay a higher percentage that's progressive taxation!! You obviously do not know the terms of which that you're speaking about. Let Me Explain regressive taxation means that the ability to pay does not become a factor. That the amount the average person is consuming does not become a factor either. Let's look at say bottle deposits the average person does not pay more on a bottle deposit versus somebody that is consuming more or less it stays the same per can. The same with alcohol taxes and tobacco taxes. A proportional tax would be save 5% or 10%. A progressive tax means you actually go up when another factor is introduced. The United States has a progressive federal income tax and you can get in and out of tax brackets and there are countless strategies to minimize this.
A property tax can be considered a regressive tax if there's no ways on mitigating it. If there are no tax abatements offered by the municipality or if there are no ways of making an appeal to stop like there is Massachusetts and other states to prevent taxes from going up or the assessment from going up.
This is also where there tends to be a bit of hypocrisy within policies. For example if we are to argue that the state of Connecticut has he's wonderful well-run towns but yet when they go to actually spend the taxes they can't do it on their own and I have to go to Regional authorities in order to do so. There is a fiduciary duty to obtain the best and high-quality Services with price being a facto. Prudent man law was established as Harvard vs Armory.
You have to have some rules that limit Taxation and some rules that control spending. I don't care where you are or where work but you have to have some limit otherwise there's going to be some form of abuse. We also do this another forms as well. If you want to work with children you have to pass a criminal background check. If you work with money they might ask you to have a better credit rating and if they want you to work in a capacity of anything physical that could compromise health and Public Safety they might want you to have a drug test.
Having Blind Faith in anything is not a good idea.
A property tax can be considered a regressive tax if there's no ways on mitigating it. If there are no tax abatements offered by the municipality or if there are no ways of making an appeal to stop like there is Massachusetts and other states to prevent taxes from going up or the assessment from going up.
This is also where there tends to be a bit of hypocrisy within policies. For example if we are to argue that the state of Connecticut has he's wonderful well-run towns but yet when they go to actually spend the taxes they can't do it on their own and I have to go to Regional authorities in order to do so. There is a fiduciary duty to obtain the best and high-quality Services with price being a facto. Prudent man law was established as Harvard vs Armory.
You have to have some rules that limit Taxation and some rules that control spending. I don't care where you are or where work but you have to have some limit otherwise there's going to be some form of abuse. We also do this another forms as well. If you want to work with children you have to pass a criminal background check. If you work with money they might ask you to have a better credit rating and if they want you to work in a capacity of anything physical that could compromise health and Public Safety they might want you to have a drug test.
Having Blind Faith in anything is not a good idea.
Regarding regional authorities in Connecticut - just how many are there? I heard of them but I had no idea they were widespread.
Regarding "rules that limit Taxation", something like 40+ states have some kind of tax cap. I do not know about Massachusetts but New York's 2% tax cap has helped to slow the rate of increase for the last ten years. You can see the results with the charts on the previous page. Honestly, I think some kind of tax cap is a good thing and even a limited one could help Connecticut.
Depends on the source but it seems in general Connecticut has a higher property tax rate, somewhere in the 2% range. New Jersey is even higher, highest in the nation.
States with the highest property taxes
1. New Jersey: $8,362 (2.49%)
2. Illinois: $4,419 (2.27%)
3. New Hampshire: $5,701 ( 2.18%)
4. Connecticut: $5,898 (2.14%)
5. Vermont: $4,329 (1.90%)
6. Wisconsin: $3,344 (1.85%)
7. Texas: $3,099 (1.80%)
8. Nebraska: $2,689 (1.73%)
9. New York: $5,407 (1.72%)
10. Rhode Island: $4,272 (1.63%)
I do not know about Connecticut but New York about 10 years ago instituted a 2%property tax cap which has helped somewhat to slow tax increases, if nothing else because it brings media coverage when local governments try to breech it. Sometimes voters have been voting down the additional tax increases.
This is very interesting because it shows that there are states that many consider low taxed but they aren’t necessarily so. Texas is a surprise given it’s sucj a large state and it has a lot of unincorporated areas where taxes are commonly very low. Then there’s New York which should really be divided in two. The southern part of the state, metropolitan New York City would certainly top the list by far. Taxes in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester and New York City are insane. That insanity drops as you head further upstate. Jay
This is very interesting because it shows that there are states that many consider low taxed but they aren’t necessarily so. Texas is a surprise given it’s sucj a large state and it has a lot of unincorporated areas where taxes are commonly very low.
Texas has no state income tax. I just used an online calculator to see what Ct's is, for a single person, 80k income, and it is $3,950.
Our total tax burden is 2.25% higher than theirs. A 2 family, 160k household income would likely be > 2.25% in gap, but 2.25% alone = $3,600 more in annual taxes, all forms to Ct state and local government, with more than $16,700 paid annually.
The total % of income paid as Ct income tax = 3.56%. Texas is 0%. All 8 income tax free states have low total tax burdens, just as we did as late as the late 80s. We lured many NY businesses then, far more than even the last few months, advertising that lack of income tax on trains going/coming from NYC. The lure worked well.
Doing an ad hominem attack on the source is not Shades the validity of the information presented. Everything is cited correctly. If you have a problem with actual empirical data and judgment that's your own call. Connecticut is one of the few states that does not have a limitation in any form of property taxes that's a fact. I could also say Jay as a moderator on a message board you're not supposed to actually interact with the posts because otherwise that shows a bias. If you are a moderator out of debate this would clearly stand out.
"Pretty much every state has a regressive tax structure. People with more money pay a higher percentage in taxes. Nothing wrong with that. Jay"
That's not Progressive. You do not know what regressive taxation is. If people pay a higher percentage that's progressive taxation!! You obviously do not know the terms of which that you're speaking about. Let Me Explain regressive taxation means that the ability to pay does not become a factor. That the amount the average person is consuming does not become a factor either. Let's look at say bottle deposits the average person does not pay more on a bottle deposit versus somebody that is consuming more or less it stays the same per can. The same with alcohol taxes and tobacco taxes. A proportional tax would be save 5% or 10%. A progressive tax means you actually go up when another factor is introduced. The United States has a progressive federal income tax and you can get in and out of tax brackets and there are countless strategies to minimize this.
A property tax can be considered a regressive tax if there's no ways on mitigating it. If there are no tax abatements offered by the municipality or if there are no ways of making an appeal to stop like there is Massachusetts and other states to prevent taxes from going up or the assessment from going up.
This is also where there tends to be a bit of hypocrisy within policies. For example if we are to argue that the state of Connecticut has he's wonderful well-run towns but yet when they go to actually spend the taxes they can't do it on their own and I have to go to Regional authorities in order to do so. There is a fiduciary duty to obtain the best and high-quality Services with price being a facto. Prudent man law was established as Harvard vs Armory.
You have to have some rules that limit Taxation and some rules that control spending. I don't care where you are or where work but you have to have some limit otherwise there's going to be some form of abuse. We also do this another forms as well. If you want to work with children you have to pass a criminal background check. If you work with money they might ask you to have a better credit rating and if they want you to work in a capacity of anything physical that could compromise health and Public Safety they might want you to have a drug test.
Having Blind Faith in anything is not a good idea.
You are right that the proper term is Progressive, not Regressive. It was late and I was tired so I typed the wrong term. But isn’t what you typed in bold above incorrect too? It is Progressive.
You do not have to lecture me on taxes. I know them well, probably better than you but that’s not important. Nor is anything you wrote. It doesn’t change what I said so don’t even try to change it. Check out my other comment above.
Regional authorities have their place but should not be seen as the answer to everything. They tend to lack accountability.
You keep pointing to Massachusetts but they have not done away with local municipalities. They have also issued literally thousands of exemptions to Proposition 2 1/2 over the years. There’s nothing different between a town voting to override Proposition 2 1/2 and voting in a referendum for major expenditures like we do here.
Again you may not like the way things are run here but that is YOUR opinion. If enough other state residents felt the same, there would be a change but so far that hasn’t happened. If you don’t like that, either run for political office or move back a few miles north to Massachusetts. That’s what’s great about our country, you have choice. Make it already. Jay
Texas has no state income tax. I just used an online calculator to see what Ct's is, for a single person, 80k income, and it is $3,950.
Our total tax burden is 2.25% higher than theirs. A 2 family, 160k household income would likely be > 2.25% in gap, but 2.25% alone = $3,600 more in annual taxes, all forms to Ct state and local government, with more than $16,700 paid annually.
The total % of income paid as Ct income tax = 3.56%. Texas is 0%. All 8 income tax free states have low total tax burdens, just as we did as late as the late 80s. We lured many NY businesses then, far more than even the last few months, advertising that lack of income tax on trains going/coming from NYC. The lure worked well.
Since you bring up total taxes, let’s look at what Connecticut residents actually pay. Connecticut is No. 1 in Personal Income so of course on average our residents pay more. But a while back CTartist posted an analysis of what a family with an income actually pays in taxes and how it compares to other states. The results were surprising. I’m not sure if this is the same analysis but this one shows that a family making $100,000 a year pays the 19th highest in taxes. That is SIGNIFICANTLY different than other rankings.
So you don’t have to go through and figure out which states are higher, here is a list of what this analysis found.
State - Income After Taxes
CT - $70872
AK - $70314
CA - $68332
DE - $70837
DC - $69548
GA - $70586
HI - $69587
ID - $70546
IA - $70320
ME - $70042
MN - $69876
MT - $70632
NE - $70384
NY - $70,467
OR - $68308
SC - $69806
VA - $70829
WV - $70826
WI - $70142
Pretty interesting. Shreds a new light on how high our taxes really aren’t here. Jay
This is very interesting because it shows that there are states that many consider low taxed but they aren’t necessarily so. Texas is a surprise given it’s sucj a large state and it has a lot of unincorporated areas where taxes are commonly very low. Then there’s New York which should really be divided in two. The southern part of the state, metropolitan New York City would certainly top the list by far. Taxes in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester and New York City are insane. That insanity drops as you head further upstate. Jay
While TX has a high tax *rate*, it’s important to note their median home price is 274k, well below Connecticut’s, meaning the dollar amount paid is actually quite low.
I will say, where I am now, property taxes are equivalent to where I lived in mid Fairfield County. To top it off, homeowners insurance is more than double, and groceries are much higher. I know this isn’t an overall cost of living thread, but I do stand with Jay’s point that cost of living in Connecticut can be quite a bargain compared to other major metro areas.
I think the tax foundation methodology is the best, as it is done every year. I also abhor even being amongst the top 40% of taxed states.
We are a very high tax state at ALL wage levels. At $40k gross, $19.23/hour, a single person pays $1,550/year in state income tax, $30/wk. (source via link below) That is absurdly high. They will also pay automobile property taxes, gas taxes, and sales taxes. Plus all federal taxes. I have no idea how the folks making that get by in Ct. Yet it is less than 1.5 times our new minimum wage, and they pay what amounts to around 3 weeks of net pay to Ct due to Weicker and those who followed him.
We also need to stop rationalizing our high taxes by comparing ourselves just to NY and NJ, which are seeing large amounts of the wealthy flee, as to think if we are a smidge lower than just those two makes all well is absurd. We must become competitive against all states in controlling our cost structure. Just as companies think-not regionally, but as needing to be better than all in their field. Comparing Ct to just NY & NJ is like saying a 4th place baseball team is fine, as there is one team lower in the standings. I'd like to see us compare ourselves to our regions most successful state economically the last decade-Massachusetts.
While TX has a high tax *rate*, it’s important to note their median home price is 274k, well below Connecticut’s, meaning the dollar amount paid is actually quite low.
I will say, where I am now, property taxes are equivalent to where I lived in mid Fairfield County. To top it off, homeowners insurance is more than double, and groceries are much higher. I know this isn’t an overall cost of living thread, but I do stand with Jay’s point that cost of living in Connecticut can be quite a bargain compared to other major metro areas.
Your area does have a high COL, also. Most coastal metros are disproportionately high. That is not a strength, btw.
The other thing to be frank is that how exactly is income being defined. Taxes on income that is from labor that is you have an employer issue you a check is much higher than that of capital gains (even with the trump tax cut). The tax advantages to investing and owning a house are huge nationwide. So if someone says they are high income eventually I have to assume that the income is from investments rather than labor. I'm not rich by any means but if you invest for years eventually you'll start to make more on a given day, than week and maybe even month and year in investments.
I'm not against taxes but there has to be some exemptions to a given point. For example sales taxes on groceries and general food make no sense to me. CT doesn't do this but there's a few for some reason that do. Personally I don't think we should have taxes on used goods because if it was already paid and there's depreciation (it's used after all) why pay it again.
Competition for everything is pretty high now. The idea that there's walls up and restrictions and limits just doesn't work. We are more in a service based economy and not product based. Now naturally there's some areas where you can't really compete. Kansas doesn't really compete in ocean front property. You aren't going to find the same height of mountains out east etc. Remember the video of Cleveland..."WE'RE NOT DETROIT". Same thing here. If you constantly compare yourself to a small group and then that group doesn't matter then what? Remember when FiOS came out? People thought it was great as it had all these channels and priced a tad lower than cable. Then what..streaming. Now no one cares about FiOS and cable packages you can just bypass them. Remember when text messaging cost money? Then instant messages came out online and telco's had to switch. Companies changed to own content.
Sometimes places have to compete in different ways. Say with restaurants. How many restaurants in CT have a rooftop deck (I've been to one..pretty nice) how about rooftop pool? I know of a few in Boston. As things become more of a commodity you have to be more accepting and sell more. The reason why I say growth is important is because businesses generally anticipate inflation. In order to fight that you either sell more or raise the price. It's harder to sell more if a population is going down or flat. A cost benefit analysis becomes harder to do when there's less people. Even on a local level this is true. In the Berkshires in Mass there is a plan to make the county under one school district. The area has nearly the same population as hartford but nearly the same land mass as RI. You have to have a population to justify administration. Like CT there's a fair amount of affluent NY'ers that live there but it's often part time and they aren't having kids let alone sending kids to the districts. Eventually what happens is if there's no generation to pass the baton to there's less of a market. Abandoned playgrounds, closing day cares, civic groups for youths (boys and girls club, boys and girl scouts, etc read Bowling Alone). Then it gets into more of actual employees. Labor market shrinks and more automation. Not everyone wants to inherit grandmas furniture so what makes us think they'll want grandmas house?
One of the basic signs of development is positive population growth. A mix of new births, immigration and domestic migration. Otherwise it becomes a homogeneous group of elderly people (usually nimby). I know I know the response is going to be on income levels and people think things are fine. But the fact it is it is not fine. Concentrating the majority of economic growth based on a small group of highly affluent people doesn't help. I'm not to the left at all and I'd actually be for lowering taxes but there has to be some other forms of development in CT, especially eastern CT. Community Preservation Act in mass is one idea. You have a property tax surcharge which is matched with the state. Projects and rates are decided locally. It supports historical buildings, open space, housing and recreation.
We should be asking the chambers of commerce to ask their members what is preventing their members from expanding sales, hiring people, more capital expenditures etc What's preventing growth? More construction permits? More housing permits? Adding ADU"s? Subsidized childcare etc General development can mean sidewalks and more lighting. I've actually seen debates on these things. If grandma can't walk down the street and it's dark that's going to be a worry to her kids etc.
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.
