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.
Yes, I realize I can research it myself. I wanted to hear first-hand accounts from actual people regarding their local tax situations. Reading about it never tells the whole story. People may have relocated in consideration, at least in part, of the tax consequences.
What do you think is the missing part of the story when it comes to a list of states that don't tax it?
In CA, a military retirement is taxed at the same rate as any other income, mostly at 9.3% marginal rate - both would be about $4K for the same $120K income. Believe me I know, pay over $10K/year to CA just on retirement income that includes Mil and Fed pensions.
Yet you choose to stay. There must be something here that's worth the $10K/yr of additional taxes.
Although Michigan does not tax SS Benefits, the State has a sliding scale regarding taxation of pensions. My M-I-L was exempt for the pension tax having been born in 1938. I on the other hand, having been born in 1956, would be subject to including any pensions as part of taxable income.
I do qualify for a reduction in property tax as I am not charged for most of the School Operating Millage.
Yet you choose to stay. There must be something here that's worth the $10K/yr of additional taxes.
People remain in places due to memories and due to simple inertia, even as those places critically deteriorate. In the late 1930s, the vast majority of Jewish families in Central Europe remained in their long-standing family homes in the face of mounting hostility and danger. Those who left managed to save themselves, but relatively few left. There is a definite tendency to put one's head in the sand like an ostrich, to avoid the painful acknowledgement that something meaningful and familiar can't be saved any more, and that one must run.
I am in fact talking partly about myself, wondering why I am still holding onto my pied a terre condo in NorCal like an idiot, when the writing is on the wall, when I should be getting out of there. I AM trying to force myself to get out of there, but the long goodbye is dragging on...
People remain in places due to memories and due to simple inertia, even as those places critically deteriorate. In the late 1930s, the vast majority of Jewish families in Central Europe remained in their long-standing family homes in the face of mounting hostility and danger. Those who left managed to save themselves, but relatively few left. There is a definite tendency to put one's head in the sand like an ostrich, to avoid the painful acknowledgement that something meaningful and familiar can't be saved any more, and that one must run.
I am in fact talking partly about myself, wondering why I am still holding onto my pied a terre condo in NorCal like an idiot, when the writing is on the wall, when I should be getting out of there. I AM trying to force myself to get out of there, but the long goodbye is dragging on...
Not to discourage you but your "pied a terre condo" is probably surrounded by homeless people with drug addition and high crime rates. It's no longer safe. I will, however; be willing to rescue you out of this dilemna by offerring you $100K (all cash!!) for your property
There's an ulterior motive why I make that comment to ddeemo. I too live in SoCal (LA/OC area) and thinking for us if we should relocate to a lower cost area after my retirement. But everytime I think about this issue, I came up with many "pros" on why staying in this area. Obviously, a sense of comfort and familiarity with local area is an influence but objectively this area has much to offer so it's hard to justify moving.
Not to discourage you but your "pied a terre condo" is probably surrounded by homeless people with drug addition and high crime rates. It's no longer safe. I will, however; happy to rescue you out of this dilemna by offerring you $100K (all cash!!) for your property
There's an ulterior motive why I make that comment to ddeemo. I too live in SoCal (LA/OC area) and thinking for us if we should relocate to a lower cost area after my retirement. But everytime I think about this issue, I came up with many "pros" on why staying in this area. Obviously, a sense of comfort and familiarity with local area is an influence but objectively this area has much to offer so it's hard to justify moving.
Correct, my pied a terre condo is surrounded by homeless people, drug addiction and high crime rates, but a condo same size as mine in the same area has recently sold for about $400k cash, so regrettably can't accept your offer :-). As I mentioned several times, I live on two coasts, and think that the East Coast actually has much more to offer now than the West Coast, and there is no evidence that will change any time soon. For me, the question is whether to fully retract from the West Coast into Boston, and just travel to other places (not to the West Coast though!) more than I am traveling already. It is not feasible for me to do it this year and the next; after that, we'll see.
Btw, speaking here of state taxes in retirement (and otherwise), the measure is going on the ballot in California in Nov 2024, seeking to change the current law (where in some situations a new state or local tax can be enacted by 1/2 votes +1) to the situation where a new tax could be enacted only by 2/3 votes. In other words, if this measure passes in Nov 2024, any new tax could be enacted in CA only by solid majority of 2/3 vote in favor of the tax. I don't know how much chance this has of passing (the far left claims California will starve to death if new taxes cannot be enacted by the current typically marginally small majority of pro-tax votes, but require the approval of 2/3 voters :-); however, if you are a CA voter and if you do not want more taxation, vote for this measure next year!
In AZ, pay about $200 less in tax if from Mil pension than if from other income with very small exemption.
Just for clarification, AZ now exempts all military retirement income.
When we moved here from Florida, we purchased a home that was twice what our Florida home cost. But, even though we now have state income tax, our overall tax and insurance burden went down by almost 5k a year.
Not to discourage you but your "pied a terre condo" is probably surrounded by homeless people with drug addition and high crime rates. It's no longer safe. I will, however; be willing to rescue you out of this dilemna by offerring you $100K (all cash!!) for your property
There's an ulterior motive why I make that comment to ddeemo. I too live in SoCal (LA/OC area) and thinking for us if we should relocate to a lower cost area after my retirement. But everytime I think about this issue, I came up with many "pros" on why staying in this area. Obviously, a sense of comfort and familiarity with local area is an influence but objectively this area has much to offer so it's hard to justify moving.
Here is what I am talking about. Vote for this measure next fall if you want to limit future taxation in CA to only what is actually beneficial to everyone (or at least to 2/3 of Californians):
Correct, my pied a terre condo is surrounded by homeless people, drug addiction and high crime rates, but a condo same size as mine in the same area has recently sold for about $400k cash, so regrettably can't accept your offer :-). As I mentioned several times, I live on two coasts, and think that the East Coast actually has much more to offer now than the West Coast, and there is no evidence that will change any time soon. For me, the question is whether to fully retract from the West Coast into Boston, and just travel to other places (not to the West Coast though!) more than I am traveling already. It is not feasible for me to do it this year and the next; after that, we'll see.
Btw, speaking here of state taxes in retirement (and otherwise), the measure is going on the ballot in California in Nov 2024, seeking to change the current law (where in some situations a new state or local tax can be enacted by 1/2 votes +1) to the situation where a new tax could be enacted only by 2/3 votes. In other words, if this measure passes in Nov 2024, any new tax could be enacted in CA only by solid majority of 2/3 vote in favor of the tax. I don't know how much chance this has of passing (the far left claims California will starve to death if new taxes cannot be enacted by the current typically marginally small majority of pro-tax votes, but require the approval of 2/3 voters :-); however, if you are a CA voter and if you do not want more taxation, vote for this measure next year!
Of course, because CA can never suck enough taxes out of its citizens. Have they showed the fireman in their TV ad yet telling everyone fire departments will need to close if this measure voted for? Are they also using the one about thousands of teachers will be laid off? They've been using those since the 1970s.
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.
