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.
Do people not think that Philly wants to collect these taxes? Do people really think the city would rather tax it's hard working core and let the scofflaws get a free ride?
YES. ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.
The city does just about everything in it's power to collect, they simply don't have many tools at their disposal.
THE CITY IS A SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY. SO SOVEREIGN, IN FACT THAT IT WIELDS LIFE AND DEATH POWER OVER ITS CITIZENS THROUGH ITS POLICE FORCE. THEY MOST CERTAINLY HAVE THE POWER TO COLLECT THE TAXES IF THEY'D CHOOSE TO PROPERLY USE IT.
If you want to force people with back taxes to collect, the laws need to be changed so that the city can enact harsher punishments.
FINE BY ME.
The bottom line though is that whether or not the city is successful in collecting back taxes or not, these tax adjustments still desperately need to happen.
THEN I HEARTILY ENCOURAGE THE ENTIRE POPULATION TO CHEAT. IF THE LAWS AREN'T GOING TO BE EVENLY ENFORCED THEN THEY SHOULD BE DISREGARDED.
If implemented properly the AVI along with it's subsequent cuts to wage and business taxes will result in a net decrease in the overall tax burdens for Philadelphians. Or at least that's the plan. This is of course factoring in more jobs and higher wages coming to the city, increasing the tax base, etc. None of this will happen instantaneously or probably even this decade, so this is cold comfort to most, but it's a necessary step for the long term health of our economy.
You are right that Philadelphians pay a lot of taxes but we sure don't pay much in property taxes. Having such an off kilter tax revenue system hurts Philadelphia in being competitive in luring jobs and qualified and highly skilled workers to Philadelphia.
It doesn't really matter how you pay it. If you pay $5000 per year it doesn't matter if it's 50/50 or 75/25 it's still $5000. It's $5k for not a whole heck of a lot.
Quote:
Plus while AVI is going to raise taxes on a lot of Philadelphians t won't for all. I find it sort of funny that some of the most vocal detractors of AVI are the few philly republicans in northeast philly, a place where not only will the AVI not really have much of an affect, but if it does it will likely actually be driving taxes down. The system as is, is just totally off kilter.
Right now the average property tax burden is apparently higher in the 19135 zip code than the 19146 zip code. 19135 is Tacony and 19146 is Graduate Hospital and parts of rittenhouse and point breeze. I mean honestly, does that make any sense to anyone? Sure there are some dumpy homes in point breeze, but there are also multimillion homes in that zip code... something that assuredly is not the case in Tacony.
The property tax system desperately needs to be fixed and for many home owners in the revitalized core of Philadelphia that means paying higher taxes. I'm sorry but no one in Bella Vista should be paying a couple hundred dollars in property taxes. Some of these homes are selling for half a million dollars. That is absurd.
The key though is to do this properly. Homes need to be assessed properly and the the raises have to be gradual and they need to have systems in place that ensure that people who have been living in their homes for years are not forced out due to increases in the property taxes. But this needs to happen. The system is beyond broken, we need to at least attempt to fix it. I just hope it is done right...
A house for $200k in South Philly should have the same taxes as a house for $200k in the Northeast. I completely agree . . . what I don't agree with is the assessment that still doesn't represent market value. That makes it arbitrary. Just use the most recent sale price as the starting point and peg it to inflation from whenever that sale was to the present. That makes it uniform, fair, it doesn't punish the elderly and it doesn't punish people from making improvements to their homes and it encourages people to stay.
Quote:
Also to all those who are saying the city should collect back taxes before raising them on those who already pay taxes, this simply isn't possible. I don't get it. Do people not think that Philly wants to collect these taxes? Do people really think the city would rather tax it's hard working core and let the scofflaws get a free ride? The city does just about everything in it's power to collect, they simply don't have many tools at their disposal. I applaud Nutter for some outside the box thinking here, holding press conferences in front of delinquent tax payers homes and businesses demanding they pay as well as publicly distributing the names of those with back taxes.
Sorry but this is straight garbage. Get the Sheriff out there to do his job, let the city lawyers do theirs. Start taking properties, put them in a land bank, auction off the strategic/most valuable parcels and leverage the rest. If the city takes your tax delinquent property and doesn't get back at auction what you owe in taxes they should come after you for the rest. While we're at it, the city can also start selling off some of the 10,000 vacant lots that it owns.
If there's $510 million in back taxes out there to be collected and you set aside 10% for collection costs - that's still a lot of damn money to be collected.
In 2000 my neighborhood was still a bit rough around the edges. I had an idea that the neighborhood was improving, but I didn't anticipate Spruce Hill becoming as pricy or 'gentrified' as it has become.
When I moved into my house, there were still bars on the windows.
I have put many thousands of dollars, within the confines of my rather modest budget, in restoring the house to it's original Victorian roots. Houses like mine have chopped up into 3, 4, and 5 unit apartments; all of the original features were stripped of these places that now serve as student housing. Mine is one of very few in the neighborhood that is still a single family house with all the original stained glass windows, pocket doors, fireplaces, moldings, etc.
I became active in the Spruce Hill Neighborhood Association, Friends of Clark Park, University City District, and for the past few years I was elected to the Board of Governors of the University City Historical Society.
So much of my identity is now tied both to my house and neighborhood, and to Philadelphia. I want to stay where I am. I have an emotional investment. I love this city ... only as someone who was not born nor raised here but moved here out of choice - can (and I told Mayor Nutter those very words when I first met him!)
My greatest fear is that if I cannot afford to live in my own because of taxes - not because of my mortgage or utility bills - I will have to move and some of the real estate companies like Campus Apartments or University City Housing will snatch it and strip off all the original features and turn it into student housing ... and all my years of careful and painsaking restoration would be for naught.
I really hope that day never comes. That is why although I understand the need for changes and in many cases increases in property taxes, any changes that result in people like yourself being forced to move out of this city will be doing a great disservice to our city.
Myself, I'm basically a lifelong Philadelphian, I know this city well, and so it pains me to say that I'm not optimistic that city council won't total f**k this up. But i really hope they don't. This city will be much worse off with people like you gone.
It doesn't really matter how you pay it. If you pay $5000 per year it doesn't matter if it's 50/50 or 75/25 it's still $5000. It's $5k for not a whole heck of a lot.
It doesn't matter to tax payer how they are taxed but it matters to the city. As you say 5K is 5K. Onerous wage taxes keep jobs and qualified employees out of this city and that is fact. They don't want to hear, "oh but the property taxes are low." That wage tax is a big bite out of people's pay checks and it's not good for business. Rather than having low property taxes and high wage taxes, the city would benefit from a more even handed approach.
A house for $200k in South Philly should have the same taxes as a house for $200k in the Northeast. I completely agree . . . what I don't agree with is the assessment that still doesn't represent market value. That makes it arbitrary. Just use the most recent sale price as the starting point and peg it to inflation from whenever that sale was to the present. That makes it uniform, fair, it doesn't punish the elderly and it doesn't punish people from making improvements to their homes and it encourages people to stay.
absolutely agree. replacing one arbitrary system with another does no one any good. sure it may make more sense now, but in 20 years we'll be in the same mess. As you say unless these assessments are based on actual sales prices they're worthless.
Sorry but this is straight garbage. Get the Sheriff out there to do his job, let the city lawyers do theirs. Start taking properties, put them in a land bank, auction off the strategic/most valuable parcels and leverage the rest. If the city takes your tax delinquent property and doesn't get back at auction what you owe in taxes they should come after you for the rest. While we're at it, the city can also start selling off some of the 10,000 vacant lots that it owns.
If there's $510 million in back taxes out there to be collected and you set aside 10% for collection costs - that's still a lot of damn money to be collected.
You misunderstand. I'm not saying that the city SHOULDN'T go after tax delinquents. I'm just saying they don't have many tools at their disposal. People never want to hear this but it's true and you can argue til you're blue in the face, it won't change anything. Unless the city is given the ability to garnish wages or even the threat of imprisonment that really isn't going to change.
Listen, I want them to take properties, I want them to sell them and auction them off and get rid of the lots they already own. I'm behind you 100%. They should be doing this if not for any other reason than to act as a deterrent so that people like mancat don't suddenly stop paying their taxes because they think they can get away with it like he just said in the post above yours. People should pay their fair share, especially those who can afford to do so and just don't because they're sacks of s**t. These people make my blood boil. But it's fine to say we need to get that money, it's another to actually get it.
Also your estimates for 10% collection costs are low, not to mention the fact that the industry standard for debt collection only yields about 20% of the debt. So you're not looking at 90% of $510 million as you suggest but rather about 20% of 510 million with costs to pay on top of that. The fact of the matter is in some instances the city could actually stand to lose money by going through the process you suggest to collect.
I still believe we should go after them harder, as I said if for no other reason than discourage people from being a**holes and not paying their taxes. But even if Philadelphia did a SUPERB job of collecting this money, they'd be lucky to walk away with half of what owed and while 250 million is nothing to sneeze at, the fact is 250 million is only ONE TWELFTH(!) of just one year of just the city's annual school budget. Unpaid taxes need to be collected, but it's hardly the magic bullet many assume it is. A full scale readjustment of our property taxes is needed regardless.
You misunderstand. I'm not saying that the city SHOULDN'T go after tax delinquents. I'm just saying they don't have many tools at their disposal. People never want to hear this but it's true and you can argue til you're blue in the face, it won't change anything. Unless the city is given the ability to garnish wages or even the threat of imprisonment that really isn't going to change.
Listen, I want them to take properties, I want them to sell them and auction them off and get rid of the lots they already own. I'm behind you 100%. They should be doing this if not for any other reason than to act as a deterrent so that people like mancat don't suddenly stop paying their taxes because they think they can get away with it like he just said in the post above yours. People should pay their fair share, especially those who can afford to do so and just don't because they're sacks of s**t. These people make my blood boil. But it's fine to say we need to get that money, it's another to actually get it.
Also your estimates for 10% collection costs are low, not to mention the fact that the industry standard for debt collection only yields about 20% of the debt. So you're not looking at 90% of $510 million as you suggest but rather about 20% of 510 million with costs to pay on top of that. The fact of the matter is in some instances the city could actually stand to lose money by going through the process you suggest to collect.
No. If a debt collector comes after you for credit card debt it's unsecured debt. There's no collateral. If your credit is already destroyed they're not getting squat from you and in most cases they have no real way to get any cash out of you.
Real estate taxes? It's called real estate for a reason - because it's real collateral and a city or town can take it from you in a heartbeat if you don't pay your bills. The city doesn't need new laws - it just need to run its departments efficiently and it needs for city council people to stop being obstructionist when it comes to these deadbeats.
I'm well aware that revenue from debt collecting is a one-time deal for the city but raising taxes before you've collected even a fraction of the debts owed to you and before you've sold off your surplus assets . . . that's just insulting to anyone who pays taxes.
If they try to raise taxes without first collecting the hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes, fines, bail and fees, the taxpayers should go into open revolt. And when I say revolt, I mean that in the most horrific possible sense.
Just the idea of letting scofflaws go and then pursuing the honest people for an even bigger bite makes my blood boil. It's patently unjust and should in no way be tolerated or submitted to.
There is about 500 million of unpaid property taxes that the city is not going after.Less not forget the 250 million from unpaid 911 trips to the hospital for non emergency reasons. Some of you are being very naive if you think Philly is going to get rid of the city wage tax after this goes into place. It`s like trying to get a single mom with 5 kids off of welfare. I am already paying some of the highest taxes in the city. I don`t know how much more the city expects me to pay. If I have to pay much more then I will just sell my house and move out. The ones that can`t afford to sell because they owe to much,will section 8 their homes out and move.That is what is going on in some parts of the NE. Mr. Nutter keep draining the middle class families for all you can and watch what happens to your city.You will have hipsters in and around center city and the rest of the city,one big ghetto. HELLO THE NEW DETROIT
My greatest fear is that if I cannot afford to live in my own because of taxes - not because of my mortgage or utility bills - I will have to move and some of the real estate companies like Campus Apartments or University City Housing will snatch it and strip off all the original features and turn it into student housing ... and all my years of careful and painsaking restoration would be for naught.
I understand and was only joking with you about paying up. But seriously, that tax number is still VERY low for a $180 K home. You would be paying a lot more in the burbs. With some creative budgeting the added cost of your taxes can be taken care of and you will be fine. You won't lose your home
No. If a debt collector comes after you for credit card debt it's unsecured debt. There's no collateral. If your credit is already destroyed they're not getting squat from you and in most cases they have no real way to get any cash out of you.
Real estate taxes? It's called real estate for a reason - because it's real collateral and a city or town can take it from you in a heartbeat if you don't pay your bills. The city doesn't need new laws - it just need to run its departments efficiently and it needs for city council people to stop being obstructionist when it comes to these deadbeats.
I'm well aware that revenue from debt collecting is a one-time deal for the city but raising taxes before you've collected even a fraction of the debts owed to you and before you've sold off your surplus assets . . . that's just insulting to anyone who pays taxes.
That is very true and so hopefully that means the city is able to collect a higher percentage of the debt. Again I'm certainly not advocating that the city doesn't go after the debt, it just seems as though some people have this impression that the city doesn't the want the money. That they don't care and would rather tax hardworking people more than collect it from tax skirting deadbeats. That's just silly. You can accuse the city of incompetence, but the accusation that they don't want to collect the money just doesn't make sense. Why would they not want to? How would they benefit?
Perhaps I'm guilty of buying the company line too much, but this city is broke, when people act like collecting this money is so easy I just can't buy it. Because if it were as easy as people make it out, then I just don't understand why they wouldn't do it.
Regardless my point still stands. 510 million is whole ton of money, money this city needs, and money tax payers like deserve to have in our city's budget... but when taking into account the enormity of our city's budget, the fact is that 510 million is a drop in the bucket and fixes to our real estate taxes must come regardless.
I understand the anger that the city would have the audacity to come after tax payers before collecting from these delinquent deadbeats. But if the city did decide to only raise the property taxes AFTER they collected back taxes it would only be to assuage people's feelings and would not be based on any type of sound policy. The truth is the city should be doing both at the same time, the property tax structure in this city needs to be fixed sooner rather than later. A fix to that structure is the type of policy that can lead to the long term health of government and school systems. Going after these back taxes on the other hand is a necessary task and one that needs to be handled in a much better way (your policies seem sound, drive carephilly for city sheriff!) but in the end it doesn't really have much affect on our city in the long run. By far the biggest affect actually collecting these back taxes would have and the biggest reason this needs to get done is simply to discourage not paying your taxes so that number doesn't continue to grow. The actual amount of money collected is secondary to that because in the end it's not as much as people make it out to be and it's collection will have virtually no longterm affect on our city.
By far the biggest affect actually collecting these back taxes would have and the biggest reason this needs to get done is simply to discourage not paying your taxes so that number doesn't continue to grow.
This is basically my point from above. I'm scrupulously honest in my daily life and in paying my debts. However, if I perceive a gross injustice, then a different value-set starts coming into play. It's the "I'm not gonna be a sucker" school of thought. When it comes to taxation, either everybody should be made to pay or nobody should be made to pay. If thousands of people are going to be let off the hook, then it's my intention to also be off the hook - period.
This is basically my point from above. I'm scrupulously honest in my daily life and in paying my debts. However, if I perceive a gross injustice, then a different value-set starts coming into play. It's the "I'm not gonna be a sucker" school of thought. When it comes to taxation, either everybody should be made to pay or nobody should be made to pay. If thousands of people are going to be let off the hook, then it's my intention to also be off the hook - period.
Understandable. But let's not get carried away. You're not a "sucker" for paying your property taxes just because scum bags are getting away with not doing so. As terrible as Philadelphia's collection rate is, over 80% of Philadelphia home owners pay their property taxes, the vast majority are good citizens. And while most like to think of those 15% or so who don't pay their property taxes as rich absentee owners like the buck hosiery etc... the fact is your average philadelphian who doesn't pay the property taxes is a lot more like to be in debt and living in poverty than some big shot who is manipulating the system to their advantage. Many homes that are not up to date on their taxes are basically worthless structures with unclear ownership situations out in the ghetto.
Not saying that means these tax scofflaws should get a pass, just saying you shouldn't feel like a "sucker" for paying your taxes.
But regardless of who exactly owes these taxes and why, the situation needs to be rectified. 15% isn't a high percentage obviously when viewed by itself, but when put in perspective with the average rate in other municipalities in PA that stand at below 5%, 15% is enormous.
These taxes need to be collected. They need to be collected because the city needs all the money that it can get, but also because it's the right thing to do and we need to make sure that other people don't get the same idea as yourself and decide they're going to stop paying their taxes too "because other people get away with so why shouldn't I?"
I don't disagree with anyone who wants to collect these back taxes. I'm just trying to explain that this topic doesn't really have anything but a tangential relation to the AVI, and regardless of what happens to this money owed in back taxes, changes need to come to our property tax system. Honestly more important that figuring out a way to recoup past losses is just ensuring that we collect at a better rate going forward because if our collection maintains at 85% and AVI goes through and raises the taxes on many of these delinquent owners, that $510 million is going to look like chicken scratch compared to how much people will owe in back taxes in the future.
The property tax system itself and Philadelphia's collection rate are both problems. Both need to be fixed. It can't be one or the other.
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.
