Why aren't any PA counties among the highest property taxes? (Pittsburgh: homes, neighborhood)

[gg]

Originally Posted by ML North

This is quite clearly a comparison of Fox Chapel tax burden to City of Pittsburgh average incomes.

Last I checked there was no industry in FC, so the comparison was FC working in Pittsburgh and Connecticut commuters to NYC. Pittsburgh wage vs. NYC wage and two suburbs that are expensive. Guess I could have used Rye NY as a more particular example as opposed to Greenwich, CT which I figured I wouldn't need to type out since it seemed obvious.

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

A lot of people recently learned that paying more for a home on the theory it will make you richer at retirement doesn't always work out so well. What you should do is not overpay for your home, and invest the money you save on housing costs in a conservative, diversified retirement portfolio. Living in Pittsburgh makes that easier to do in comparison to a lot of other cities.

The point is there is very little appreciation on investment in real estate in the Pittsburgh area due to amazingly high school taxes. Home ownership isn't like a car that depreciates, it is viewed more as an investment and one would like to think that your investment in your home would at least keep up with inflation. School tax eats up any little appreciation that might be realized most of the time unless you are a very savvy buyer and know what you are doing.

Look, I am in investments and to be honest, I am not going to view balance sheets the same as people on here. There are cheap places to live everywhere, but many don't want to raise families there. I will always view Pittsburgh as a very high tax area because it is. It is also a personal view. I want to retire in a different place and our very lower home values is not good. I compare real estate values here to other areas and if you want something nicer, you are going to have to pay one heck of a tax burden. In other areas homes can be a much better investment and I know I will have no problem paying more since I know I will get more at the end and not have that yearly school tax burden that is so high. It just eats away at any investment you feel you have.

[gg]

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. Everyone has a view on the subject and mine is from an investment standpoint and not just a love affair with my home.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Looking at these charts, apparently I am getting ripped off..... taking my assessed home value in regards to the property taxes I paid in 2010, it comes out to be 2.87% which is substantially higher then the median listed here....where would I come across the data on what the upper limits in regards to the home value to tax ratio is rather than the median? Thanks.

I don't know if there is a list of the worst cases somewhere, but the upper bound is definitely higher than that given the 2002 Base Year system in place in Allegheny County (because some areas have seen depreciation since 2002).

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I don't know if there is a list of the worst cases somewhere, but the upper bound is definitely higher than that given the 2002 Base Year system in place in Allegheny County (because some areas have seen depreciation since 2002).

Sorry, I meant my county assessed 2002 value, rather than the actual current value.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

The point is there is very little appreciation on investment in real estate in the Pittsburgh area due to amazingly high school taxes.

No, the moderate amount of appreciation in the Pittsburgh area is due to the fact that in recent decades in our area, supply can easily meet demand, and there has been no unusual speculative activity. Other places with high property taxes have seen high appreciation, which was either because of supply constraints, speculation, or both.

By the way, I would note that the appreciation rate in Pittsburgh is consistent with the long-term historical appreciation rate. In that sense, it isn't Pittsburgh appreciation that is low, it is appreciation in other areas that went crazy in the 2000s--with many having crashed back to earth.

The fact is that how appreciation works in Pittsburgh is how it is supposed to work. The idea that the universe would pay you a lot of money simply for living somewhere never made sense, and it turned out to be a mirage in most cases.

Home ownership isn't like a car that depreciates, it is viewed more as an investment and one would like to think that your investment in your home would at least keep up with inflation. School tax eats up any little appreciation that might be realized most of the time unless you are a very savvy buyer and know what you are doing.

Again, fundamentally this doesn't make sense (that the total costs of your housing would actually result in you making a profit). Ultimately, owning a house should cost you something, but it shouldn't cost you more than renting, and in fact it should cost less than renting if you hold the property long enough. That's all people should expect, and the practical takeaway is you should buy no more house than you need. If you have savings to invest, you should really be investing those savings in other ways, not deliberately overpaying for your house.

There are cheap places to live everywhere, but many don't want to raise families there. I will always view Pittsburgh as a very high tax area because it is. It is also a personal view.

I think what you have experienced is that if you overstretch your income to buy in a more prestigious location than you can really comfortably afford, hoping in vain that extraordinary appreciation will make up for trying to live beyond your means, the failure of your plan may end up coloring your perceptions and make you bitter about the whole thing.

But if you are willing to live within your means, Pittsburgh is a very good place to be a homeowner.

In other areas homes can be a much better investment

You can also lose 50% or more of your investment. Your own home really should not be an investment vehicle. Investments should be diversified, and your own home isn't a diversified investment. If you want to make diversified investments in real estate, and don't have a gigantic portfolio (like university-endowment big), you should use REITs.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Sorry, I meant my county assessed 2002 value, rather than the actual current value.

I believe most of these studies are using current values, so that may explain a lot of the discrepancy you observed.

[UKyank]

A much more meaningful comparison among cities would be the actual assesed value at time of tax calculation compared to taxes paid, rather than using current home values compared to taxes paid, which is not really useful at all to compare different metro areas (especially if 2006 year is used which would arguably be the apex of home values in the US).

[ML North]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Last I checked there was no industry in FC, so the comparison was FC working in Pittsburgh and Connecticut commuters to NYC. Pittsburgh wage vs. NYC wage and two suburbs that are expensive. Guess I could have used Rye NY as a more particular example as opposed to Greenwich, CT which I figured I wouldn't need to type out since it seemed obvious.

That's not the point that I'm arguing. You said that taxes in Fox Chapel are exorbitantly high when considering the salaries of people in Pittsburgh. My point is that taxes are not exceptionally high when you consider the median earnings of households in Fox Chapel, nearly all of which earn significantly more than the average Pittsburgher.

[ML North]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Looking at these charts, apparently I am getting ripped off..... taking my assessed home value in regards to the property taxes I paid in 2010, it comes out to be 2.87% which is substantially higher then the median listed here....where would I come across the data on what the upper limits in regards to the home value to tax ratio is rather than the median? Thanks.

The values I used are estimated median values from 2008. They are from a report prepared by the Department of City planning that you can find here.

Also remember that these are median values, meaning that there are discrete points on both sides. You happen to be above the median.