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'm more discouraged by the insurance premiums in Florida, which are often higher than the property taxes.
I pay about $800 for $305,000 in coverage. A 2004 or newer house or one that has had wind mitigation inspection, if all roof clips and other such things are in place, will save you a lot on insurance.
I agree. Consumption taxes (with some considerations for the lower-income folks when it comes to essentials like food, fuel and medicine) make a lot more sense to me. The wealthy among us like having more stuff, so let them pay more of those taxes.
If unprepared food is left as it is with essentials being non taxable, medicine and fuel left as it is also since we are already taxed enough on fuel, I think it is the way the state needs to go.
This would need to be closely regulated, however, since someone can always buy an expensive item in a state that is tax free. That's one reason we pay sales tax when we register our vehicles. When I lived in Massachusetts, many people would cross the border to New Hampshire to buy televisions and computers.
Actually, I think a higher sales tax might hurt small businesses. I mean, the price might not be on the tag, but it would still reflect in the total cost.
How often do you but an item that costs over $10,000? On $10,000 you could be looking at an extra $300 if you figure 3%. If the item costs $10,000 most probably it is also a large item that needs to be delivered and you are going to have to pay a large sum to get something like a living room set delivered from out of state not even counting the gas it took you to drive there and back and a night at the hotel.
You need to look at the border of Florida's population density and realize that most of the population is in central and southern Florida and it would not be cost effective to drive all the way to GA to save 3% or less.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Wait...what is that I see??? Property! From your friendly Fifth Amendment, besides the point of property rights being the foundation of all liberties, and in which is the foundation the US is built upon as derived from Classical Liberal philosophies from Locke.
Now, why does due process of the law allow for the seizing of property over a tax that is not dependent on the ability of a person to pay? And it is a tax that is far from being fairly proportional as it is not dependent on a person's use of those tax based services.
When you purchase land you are entering into a quasi-contract with the taxing municipality and agree to pay taxes at a rate set by that taxing authority for the services they have provided. Whether the tax levied is proportional to the services used is immaterial as when the property is purchased you are already aware of what taxes you are paying and for what. If the taxing authority attempts to raise the taxes or add another service to be taxed then the tax payers can vote those attempting this out of office.
What about Eminent Domain? That gives the government the right to take your property for the greater good of the community. The property owner is supposed to get fair market value, but what if they want you to sell when the real estate climate is bad, before the market has had a chance to improve? Also, who decides what is for the greater good?
Anyway, the Fifth Amendment does say "due process of law" as you mentioned. Isn't that what happens when your land is taken for nonpayment of taxes? The government doesn't just knock on your door and take your land or house. There's a long process which is explained in the State of Florida Property Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. From myflorida.com
The 2000 Florida Legislature created the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights for property owners
in the state of Florida. It guarantees that your rights, privacy, and property are safeguarded during
the assessment, levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes.
This brochure is designed to explain your property tax rights and the obligations of property appraisers,
tax collectors, local governing boards, and the Florida Department of Revenue in property tax matters.
Most eminent domain cases that I have seen, the property owners have come out way ahead of the game and those are the first ones to sell, the hold outs who get an attorney clean up. Not always, before someone goes posting a story of someone who got screwed but most times.
The property tax issue in Florida is a painful one for many residents. They have a "last-come, worst-screwed" philosophy that they call "homestead". As someone who truly loves Florida I find the property tax to be one issue that really ticks me off. For all the crowing I heard "way back when" about protecting the low income and senior citizens with the homestead exemption, the system they set up does nothing but protect those who got here first, and really screws those who try to buy property more recently, like the young high school and college grads who might like to buy a home and start a family in Florida.
If you owned a waterfront home in Florida back 20-40 years ago, and you held onto it and enjoyed the massive increase in property values that came with the American public's love affair with the beach that came afterward, Florida allows you, as a homeowner, to be protected from the tax increases that would accompany your property's increasing value.
But local governments and schools have financial obligations they have to meet, and property taxes are one of the biggest contributors to "the pot." So local governments end up taxing the "unprotected" homes at a far, far higher rate. The end result of this homestead exemption law in Florida is that you can visit any county property tax office's web site and look at the taxes being paid on many of the two and three-decade old waterfront homes, and find that are worth millions where the homeowners are paying less in property tax than young homeowners who bought homes of far less retail value, but bought more recently. I built a home in the last decade, and I pay more in property taxes than some homes in my county that are worth over 5 times what my home is worth.
So young couples who did nothing wrong other than being born too late to enjoy the benefits of this welfare program for rich homeowners that was promoted as a plan to "protect the poor and elderly"...they're unable to afford to buy a home in Florida, because when they buy a home their home is taxed at 100% of it's retail value. Other big loosers in this are also renters, who pay higher rents because landlords are not protected by the homestead law, so they pay property tax on 100% of the value of the rental property, and they roll those tax costs into what they charge for rent. The homestead law has done a great deal of damage to the Florida real estate situation, and it continues to damage that part of our economy today. And it's a net negative for the Florida economy overall.
Truthfully, of the short list of "negatives" about living in my area of Florida, this is the #1 issue I have with living here.
What does that have to do with paying taxes on land you own ?
I think the point he was trying to make is that the use of a property tax violates the concept of the right to property. When a government institutes a tax on property the "ownership" becomes a questionable concept since you don't really own something that you're forced to pay taxes on in order to keep it.
What would happen is snowbirds, vacation home owners, and out-of-state investors would benefit, and residents would be picking up the tab. This kind of proposal can't be good for one's political career...
Homestead exemptions have to be reformed, however. You can't have people paying 3-4X what their neighbors pay for an identical home, especially when many of the newcomers are just starting a family in a tough economy. Young, productive members of society will just go to other States where they're not punished for being the newcomer to the neighborhood. Perhaps homestead exemptions should be "capped" at a 30-50% discount from the market rate, but a fixed 3% is just asking for trouble down the road. In that case you'd be able to lower overall rates a bit and keep revenue the same. Of course, you'd have to do this gradually over 10 years or so not just all at once in one year.
I think the point he was trying to make is that the use of a property tax violates the concept of the right to property. When a government institutes a tax on property the "ownership" becomes a questionable concept since you don't really own something that you're forced to pay taxes on in order to keep it.
The Government isn't instituting any taxes on your property, atleast, not the federal government. Property taxes come from the state. I've heard people complain about taxes and insurance in this thread quite often and basically it comes down to this, if you want to live and own in a desirable place, you have to pay high prices.
When my parents owned a home in Florida in the 1990's, our property tax in Hillsborough County was roughly $3500 and our insurance was roughly $1800 a year. When I owned a home in Nashville (Davidson County, Tennessee) my property tax was $1,200, and my insurance was $460 a year. My house in Tennessee was $250k, my parents house in Florida was considerably less.
Many people claim that property taxes in Texas are high, and in some cities, they are.
You can look at houses in Houston and they property taxes can differ from $2000 on one block, to $5200 on the next, depends on the school districts and mud's. Obviously, the closer you live to the coast, the higher the insurance costs are, I haven't bought a house yet in Texas, but when I do, I'll be sure to make comparisons.
The Government isn't instituting any taxes on your property, atleast, not the federal government. Property taxes come from the state. I've heard people complain about taxes and insurance in this thread quite often and basically it comes down to this, if you want to live and own in a desirable place, you have to pay high prices.
When my parents owned a home in Florida in the 1990's, our property tax in Hillsborough County was roughly $3500 and our insurance was roughly $1800 a year. When I owned a home in Nashville (Davidson County, Tennessee) my property tax was $1,200, and my insurance was $460 a year. My house in Tennessee was $250k, my parents house in Florida was considerably less.
Many people claim that property taxes in Texas are high, and in some cities, they are.
You can look at houses in Houston and they property taxes can differ from $2000 on one block, to $5200 on the next, depends on the school districts and mud's. Obviously, the closer you live to the coast, the higher the insurance costs are, I haven't bought a house yet in Texas, but when I do, I'll be sure to make comparisons.
"The Government isn't instituting any taxes on your property, atleast, not the federal government. Property taxes come from the state."
Fourteenth Amendment covers this. Again I will ask; why should due process allow for the seizure of someone's property?
"if you want to live and own in a desirable place, you have to pay high prices."
Prices should be dictated by the market, not the government. And again, why should due process allow for the government to seize property? And why should due process allow for the government to levy a tax not based on the ability for the person to pay? No other tax is like this, and no other tax has the power of seizure.
I have made clear my position in my other posts, no use rehashing.
Insurance is a separate debate and has nothing to do with property taxes.
I will never understand why people will give so much authority to the government to seize their property, People do not own their property, the government does. This, as I stated in posts before, is in direct conflict of property rights in which the notion of freedom and liberty is based upon.
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.
