alternatives to property taxation (buy, interest, corporation, profit)

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

Excepting the early New England colonies, the earliest tax funded schools were set up around the 1830's, Horace Mann being influential, in MA. That's where we start seeing property taxes for the purpose of supporting education. Regardless, even long afterwards, many areas did not do this and instead parents got together to fund schools.

There are a few academies that were setup in the colonies.

For example in our last city, they formed a private academy. Funded by the parents. Today the Norwich Academy in Norwich Ct, is still a private high school that charges the city a tuition for each student.

I do not know how many of them were actually funded by tax dollars before 1935 though.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by forest beekeeper

???

I own rentals, I have never heard of such a thing.

I have owned apartments in three different states.

I pay property tax based on the assessed value of each building and the mil rate.

The assessed value of rental property is lower than a single family home would be for the same exact square footage. If I converted a 5-plex building into a single family dwelling, it's assessed value would rise, and it's taxes would go up.

Rental dwellings market for less money, they are assessed for lower values and they pay less taxes.

Yes but you are not counting the homestead exemption that you get for a single family home which cuts you taxes by quite alot.

[StealthRabbit]

I don't get any homestead exemption ... WA state taxes on 100% Fair Market Value (our Levy is ~ $.015)

I often don't pass my increases on to renters, as they are usually strapped enough. I try to use the appreciation of property value to cover increased property taxes. When I have a change in tenants I usually recalculate, but there is no way my renters can afford the taxes on one of my places, as the dirt is worth $300k and the trashed mobile home is a liability rather than an asset. I wouldn't find a renter to pay my expenses for me to break even on that joint.

Taxes, energy, and supply increases are a bad deal, I feel the squeeze too (unemployed for 3 yrs), but at least I'm eating (just not corn or rice ). There are plenty who won't be eating much next year at this time. IMHO I hope I'm wrong!

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by KevK

Yes but you are not counting the homestead exemption that you get for a single family home which cuts you taxes by quite alot.

We have filed for it.

Though we have never qualified.

Not everyone can get a 'homestead' exemption, even owning a family homestead.

[arctichomesteader]

Many "homestead exemptions" are a joke too, no real savings.

[cdelena]

A Homestead exemption is normally restricted to homeowners living in the ‘homestead’ and does not apply to landlords. It usually exempts a small value from taxation (the first 10,000 or so) so the tax savings is small.

Some taxing authorities allow property taxes on apartment units to be assessed based upon a valuation calculation rather than a market estimate. (“...This method involves capitalizing the stabilized net operating income (NOI) by an appropriate capitalization rate (Ro) in order to estimate the stabilized value of the project”). These properties usually pay much less per resident with the overall effect of homeowners subsidizing apartment residents.

IMO property taxes are not a good way to fund government.

[Lionhearted]

I belive there are some, not many, legitimate costs of government. Ad Valorum property taxation was the first and believe is still the best form of taxation since you are not confiscating money from people who can't afford to pay for things they don't benefit from. i.e. Iraq As far as not paying for schools because you don't think you are benefiting from them, would you rather have the uneducated masses robbing or shooting you, so we have to spend more money on prisons and police.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by rmarski

I belive there are some, not many, legitimate costs of government. Ad Valorum property taxation was the first and believe is still the best form of taxation since you are not confiscating money from people who can't afford to pay for things they don't benefit from. i.e. Iraq As far as not paying for schools because you don't think you are benefiting from them, would you rather have the uneducated masses robbing or shooting you, so we have to spend more money on prisons and police.

Land taxes based on market value of the land was the 'first' form of taxation?

[60-minutes-II]

My opinion is that if if you own the property. Meaning you bought the property and you don't need to pay money off to the bank. Then you don't need to pay property tax because you own the property. We should acknowledge that you payed off the property using the money you earned from work. So there would be no reason to tax something you own. The only reason to tax something would be if you are making money of it or if you don't own the property. And when you making money of it you should pay a maximum of 3% of it to the gov. I know this sounds bad but if you don't own something then you should be ready to pay a bigger tax for not owning it.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by rmarski

I belive there are some, not many, legitimate costs of government. Ad Valorum property taxation was the first and believe is still the best form of taxation since you are not confiscating money from people who can't afford to pay for things they don't benefit from. i.e. Iraq As far as not paying for schools because you don't think you are benefiting from them, would you rather have the uneducated masses robbing or shooting you, so we have to spend more money on prisons and police.

Huh? Property taxes are a regressive tax, many property owners struggle to pay taxes. It's far from fair. Fair would be having those who use a service pay for it. Next step down from that, being unfair but not quite as unfair as the current system, would be a progressive income tax, but one which taxes everyone proportionate to their income, so that no one is getting a free ride through exceptions.

Not everyone can afford to pay the currently high property taxes on something that was affordable years ago, and it doesn't mean their property is valuable and they could sell and relocate. In my home-town in VT property values compared to places like NY or MA or such are "low" (actually not low given the employment situation there but nonetheless...) but the tax rate is extremely high like those other states, and houses aren't exactly selling quickly these days if someone were to try to get out. Property taxes by their nature are confiscatory, since by virtue of the tax existing you don't actually own the property. The corporation (you realize what an incorporated government is don't you?) owns them and rents (property tax) them to you.

FWIW: the idea that before public schools everyone was running around uneducated, is a myth. The literacy rate was actually quite high in the 19th century in the US, including areas without public schools (and in a time before they existed in the earlier part of that century). Parents who use the schools can share the costs as they did then. It will end the wastefulness the current system ecourages. Some can't afford to, obviously, but they either homeschool, or I'm sure that as in the 19th century there would be privately funded charities to take care of things (which could be as complex as entire schools for the purpose or simply some families agreeing to split up the extra costs to let the poorer children attend).