Seeking a new family home in Idaho/Montana. Help us choose.

[pnwguy2]

My research shows Bozeman very expensive. Areas such as Missoula, or Idaho Falls/Pocatello may be less expensive with similar climates.

[banjomike]

I think the best response about Bozeman would come from the Montana forum.

I lived in Bozeman twice for a couple of years each time, but the most recent was quite a while ago now, so I don't know what things are really like there now.

[Parnassia]

Originally Posted by Heron31

Idaho sales tax = 6%


Montana sales tax = 0%

There are more things factoring in to any location's COL than sales tax.

[pnwguy2]

Sales taxes hit retirees more than income taxes. Unfortunately I live in a high sales tax State, am retired but don't get a break. I need to stay in Washington for various reasons, so I have no choice but to pay them. I think WA should go to a combined sales/income tax, but only if it lowers the sales tax significantly.

[oregonwoodsmoke]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

........, but only if it lowers the sales tax significantly.

It won't. Politicians never give up a source of money.

[banjomike]

Sales taxes take nibbles. A dollar here, a dollar there.
The nibbles don't hurt anyone so badly they will put up a serious protest against them.

A serious protest is a protest that's strong enough to make any politician fear their loss of their job.
In Idaho, that's just about every single one of them. No New Taxes has been a conservative mantra for close to a half century now.
A sales tax is seen as being more equitable than others; the rich and the poor all pay them, but the rich pay more and the poor pay less, because the rich buy more stuff than the poor.
That's the theory. Like most theories, it's not exactly the way things work, but is close enough for the legislature, who often seek simple solutions to complicated problems.

So, for Idaho, a state that never had an industry that never subsidized its tax base with a depletion tax, the sales tax was a safe way of raising the revenue the state needed as it grew. The taxpayers complain about it, but everyone complains about taxes.

Montana never needed a sales tax for well over a century. The state was blessed with the largest single copper deposit in the North American continent. The Anaconda mine was so wealthy the owners volunteered to electrify the state at it's own expense, and was granted a monopoly on the electricity the Anaconda generated.
The amount of depletion taxes the mine paid to the state was almost enough by itself to pay all the state's revenues.

It worked out fine for the mine, too, as the Anaconda electricity was generated with Anaconda-owned coal in Montana, passed through lines made of Anaconda's copper, which also went into the power generators. All at a profit to the corporation. The mine eventually owned all the natural gas supply in the state as well.
...and all of it was kept at low rates to the taxpayers. They were paying the equivalent of sales taxes to the mine, not the state, whenever they paid their monthly power bills and heating bills.

So it all was great until the copper ran out. Once that happened, the bottom fell out of the bucket. Anaconda went bankrupt, and the state's power utilities went to other corporations.

But the taxpayers still wanted no sales tax. So, for revenue, Montana began taxing everything else instead It's property taxes all went way up, as did all the permitting taxes, such as license plates.
In Idaho, the cost of yearly license plates is very low. They cover the cost the state has in it and brings in a little revenue. The property taxes bring in more, and the sales tax more. All in smaller bits.

In Montana, a car is Blue Booked yearly. So a new car's license plates cost a percentage of what that car is worth in the Blue Book. A $20,000 car has no $4,000 sales tax added to the sale, but the plates for that same car will cost $1,000, then $950, then $900, and so on until the car's value bottoms out. The state makes more money using the Blue Book than Idaho makes by far on its license plates.

So, for the taxpayer, the difference is big bites instead of nibbles. The guy who buys a new car had better prepare to drop a ton of money on the first set of plates he needs for that car. He'll have to have them to drive legally, and if he's a newcomer, all he has is 90 days before his old home state's plates are illegal.
And then, if he tries to duck the cost, he'll have to pay a big fine on top of paying all that money for the plates.

No sales tax always looks good if a person hasn't ever lived in the state. But the state residents hate the big bites out of their paycheck a lot. That's why there are so many old cars on the Montana roads.

Montanans live with no sales tax partly because the state has never used the sales tax. It's not in the state's tax traditions. And Montana is like Idaho. No one there wants any new taxes, so proposing a sales tax in Montana is political suicide.

I think both states generate about the same amount of tax revenue overall.

I also know taxation, unpleasant as it is, is necessary anywhere a person goes to live. Taxes should never be the prime reason for anyone to pack up and move.

They're important, but no more than a state's quality of life, the potential it has for someone to lead a better life, or whatever else is the important stuff in a person's life and lifestyle. They all have to be weighed and balanced as part of the decision to move.

Life isn't just about money. Money alone doesn't make for a happy life, though it sure helps.

[dcisive]

To me property tax is the killer. When I was leaving Salt Lake City 5 years ago I looked at so many places as potentials. Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington. I had a friend in Idaho that encouraged me to consider it. Ironically the other areas got ruled out largely due to their property tax other then Nevada (the costs there were in general prohibitive). Thus far I've really enjoyed the lower property tax here. Sales tax is what it is and I guess to some degree I don't notice it much. Washington in particular was outrageously high in property tax so that clinched it. It was a blessing as the people here are just the BEST! I know it gets beaten up plenty, but I rather enjoy the conservative realm here.

[banjomike]

Originally Posted by dcisive

To me property tax is the killer. When I was leaving Salt Lake City 5 years ago I looked at so many places as potentials. Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington. I had a friend in Idaho that encouraged me to consider it. Ironically the other areas got ruled out largely due to their property tax other then Nevada (the costs there were in general prohibitive). Thus far I've really enjoyed the lower property tax here. Sales tax is what it is and I guess to some degree I don't notice it much. Washington in particular was outrageously high in property tax so that clinched it. It was a blessing as the people here are just the BEST! I know it gets beaten up plenty, but I rather enjoy the conservative realm here.

In the Sunday, July 10th edition of the Post-Register, Idaho Falls' newspaper, a retired gentleman named Heckathorn is appealing his 2022 property assessment.

Prior to the 2019 Covid-19 pandemic, his home was assessed at $381,587. From 1999 to 2019, his taxes increased at an average of $6,579 a year. A 10-year total of $131,581.

His new assessment increased by $256,955 in a single year.

He's maintaining that the assessment shouldn't be based on a price bubble caused by the pandemic. Mr. Heckathorn believes his assessment should remain where it was for another year to see if the housing bubble has permanently increased home prices or it is only a temporary increase.

He has a good point, I think. A jump of 45% to 55% in one tax year is way too much for a lot of homeowners, especially those who are on fixed incomes and/or retired.

[nowhereman427]

Originally Posted by Heron31

Idaho sales tax = 6%


Montana sales tax = 0%