Taxes and fairness?

[billvon 3,095]

>We have properties worth millions of dollars that is being taxed at a
>significantly lower rate by virtue of "a few cows".

Yep. Instead we should up the tax rate so that he has to sell it. Because we need more strip malls and less open space . . . .

The property should be taxed based on its status, not on what other people want to do with it.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

no, you tax it based on it usage type.

Residents need police, fire, municipal infrastructure, schools, etc. Property taxes are a large contributor to that. Renters pay as well, but indirectly.

but it's not by usage, is it?

you own a $500,000 home and I own a $100,000 home, and you pay quite a bit more even though you use the same services

since the tax is scaled to the audited value of the investment - it's assuming a virtual gain on a static property - they are clearly "taxing on promise"

let's not even get into schools being a part of it - that aspect of usage is even more contrived

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

you own a $500,000 home and I own a $100,000 home, and you pay quite a bit more even though you use the same services

since the tax is scaled to the audited value of the investment - it's assuming a virtual gain on a static property - they are clearly "taxing on promise"

Not sure how it works in the US, but in Canada you can challenge the value attributed, so you aren't paying on "promise" of future value but on current value.

All my commercial properties are valued on actual or average rental income with a deduction for vacancies. Again, taxed on actual value, not potential value.

And value of property is only one portion of the property tax equasion. The municipality sets what we call mill rate based on budget. Hence, an increase in value does not necessarily mean an increase in property taxes payable.

[GeorgiaDon 379]

Quote

but it's not by usage, is it?

you own a $500,000 home and I own a $100,000 home, and you pay quite a bit more even though you use the same services

since the tax is scaled to the audited value of the investment - it's assuming a virtual gain on a static property - they are clearly "taxing on promise"

let's not even get into schools being a part of it - that aspect of usage is even more contrived

Out of genuine curiosity, what would be your alternative?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

no, you tax it based on it usage type.

Residents need police, fire, municipal infrastructure, schools, etc. Property taxes are a large contributor to that. Renters pay as well, but indirectly.

but it's not by usage, is it?

you own a $500,000 home and I own a $100,000 home, and you pay quite a bit more even though you use the same services

Yes, that's usage. You're using that land as a residential property. The amount you pay is effectively a proportional tax on your wealth. In California, it's a bit more complicated with Prop 13. The assessed value of the house is based on the sale price. If you make a substantial improvement, it will be reassessed, but otherwise it remains at that level forever. So neighbors that have been there for a couple decades will be paying substantially less.

Unfair? Yes, but it's a better solution that allowing property taxes to spiral upward. We're already covered that 'fairness' is a silly term in such a complicated subject. But with prop 13, you know what taxation you're agreeing to at the point of sale.

[normiss 883]

Agreed...I'll have to dig some as I thought I had read the classification of this property was changed and that's what first started the outcry.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So neighbors that have been there for a couple decades will be paying substantially less.

for the exact same services, so you are NOT paying for your usage of the services (in terms of fire and police, I do concur that 'using' the service includes just having it available - I pay for fire department even if I never have a fire....I don't want someone to knee jerk to that blind alley)


it's no different than Kelpdiver with his Million dollar home and me with my 100K home and we both go to the store and Kelp pays $10 for a gallon of milk, and I get to pay 50 cents for the same gallon

Quote

The amount you pay is effectively a proportional tax on your wealth

that's not really true, though it does admit the real intent - and it's not usage

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

that's not really true, though it does admit the real intent - and it's not usage

so as asked already, do you have a viable alternative?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

that's not really true, though it does admit the real intent - and it's not usage

so as asked already, do you have a viable alternative?

Since you asked twice, I have to assume that the first was apparently wasn't just a pointless rhetorical question like I thought, so:

not at all - Have I pretended to offer one?

so what - Isn't discussing the overall underlying philosophy of how government works a good enough goal in a discussion forum where we don't actually set policy for the world? Or are you on a city council somewhere?

Do you always have a perfect solution for everything you bring up here?

However - If you want to extend that, one could infer a lot of ideas, wacky or not: a straight fee based structure, or charging every resident a flat fee rather than scaled to income or property ownership, or a pay as you go (which IMHO is a non starter), or literally scaling every purchase to income, not just fees, sales tax based government revenue, etc etc etc. But that's great for those that want to get bogged down in those discussions. But not for me. I'm just pointing out the inherent inequity of the structure that charges families different amounts for equivalent services, even including services that some never use at all.

If government was run like a business (needed products for a competitive price) maybe we'd have some kind of fair trade. But in reality, that's not what government does - it's about accumulation of power by individuals using the power of law to take from some and give to others where sometimes the giving is counterproductive to true societal health but still allows the accumulation of power by giving a false appearance of benefit to some. It's a giant randomizer combined with pure end result advertising. Rarely do we see the good of all in the mix, just the illusion for those sheep that refuse to look deeper than the bare cosmetic trimmings.

Just look at all the manuvering that goes into a community needing a simple bridge fixed - first, two equally balanced sides in the local gov divide up and fight it like it's armageddon. That's ensures everyone on the issue has someone to vote for. Then half fight to budget it while the other half fight to add taxes (power) to cover the extra. After a great fake battle (on how the bridge will bring peace and order to the galaxy vs the end of mankind), the inevitable taxes arrive. then, they overspend by twice as much - pretty much every project. then someone gets a sweetheart deal to add "art/culture" to the bridge with decorations that "represent" some wacky cultural thing. Then when the project is done, the taxes stay on. This type of procedure doesn't strike cynicism into your heart?


If so many dems and reps in congress weren't such complete idiots, or even worse, clearly extreme and unreasonable fanatics - I'd just assume they were all on the same side and this is all staged for the masses.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Southern_Man 0]

Property taxes have always been a form of wealth tax. when capitol and banking arose they became a bit less effective as a form of wealth tax (as a lower percentage of wealth is held as personal property or real estate) but that is what they were originally intended to do and how they continue to function practically.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Property taxes have always been a form of wealth tax. when capitol and banking arose they became a bit less effective as a form of wealth tax (as a lower percentage of wealth is held as personal property or real estate) but that is what they were originally intended to do and how they continue to function practically.

finally

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 379]

Quote

Since you asked twice, I have to assume that the first was apparently wasn't just a pointless rhetorical question like I thought...

Actually, I think I was the one who asked first, and that was because you usually have something funny/thoughtful/interesting to bring to the discussion.

Quote

Do you always have a perfect solution for everything you bring up here?

I know you're responding to Kelp, but I'll just say that there are no perfect solutions (IMHO), just compromises, sometimes messy, to get things done.

Quote

If government was run like a business...

then nothing that could not be exploited for a profit would ever get done. Where is the profit in treating sewage before it's returned to the river? Who is your client base who is going to pay you to do that? Does that mean we would be better off/more free/whatever if people just dumped their raw shit in the river? There's tons of things that have to get done to make for a civilized society, where everybody benefits but no "product" is made that can be sold. Well, I suppose we could just foul all the water and then sell bottled water to the people who can afford that, and everybody else can just risk cholera every time they take a drink. Same with air I guess, those who can afford it can breath bottled oxygen, the rest whatever comes out of the smokestack.

I don't really get the "government should be like business" argument. If business can do something efficiently and make a profit, then business should be doing that job. Government, by default, should be doing those things that have to get done but are not amenable to profit. There's lots of scope for discussion about what really has to get done; I would include providing basic education to kids whose parents can't afford private schools, but I'm sure there are lots of people who would say fuck 'em, they should have selected better parents or whatever.

I don't disagree about the art on the bridge thing, though.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Where is the profit in treating sewage before it's returned to the river? Who is your client base who is going to pay you to do that?

the client base is pretty clear don't you think?

just because the client base is broad and inferred, doesn't mean we do it in the most twisted and expensive way possible.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 379]

Quote

just because the client base is broad and inferred, doesn't mean we do it in the most twisted and expensive way possible.....

No matter how you do it, someone will complain. Or maybe everyone will complain. I doubt the NPR model will work well for even the most essential government services: just put them out there and then guilt people into contributing whatever they think they can maybe afford. 95% of the recipients will pay nothing but still demand a quality service. Alternatively you can mandate that everybody pays (i.e. taxes), and then they cry about being "robbed of their freedom" or whatever. Or, you can just not offer the service, and people complain that there's so much crime, or the air stinks, or they can't find qualified people to work in their business.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)