Property tax needs to be repealed / abolished NOW! (Morgan Co info here)

[phylodog]

Just coming out of knee replacement surgery. Looked at my assessment and found a 16% increase in taxable value. This is ridiculous. I am in the process of filing an appeal. With that said, what is the answer. Who do we have to contact to stop this madness? I am retired and on a fixed income. I did notice my income has no raised 16%. Something is off kilter here. Again, what is the answer?

Once you stop producing for the state you no longer matter. The mere mention of being on a fixed income will get you belittled for not properly planning your finances.

 

[jsharmon7]

Hendricks County here. Our property value assessment has gone up about $3-$5k every year. Suddenly this year it increased by $92k, which is a 60% increase! To put it in perspective, we only paid $120k when we bought the house in 2012!

 

[KLB]

I never said it did that I can recall, I have just explained that was the mechanism the people decided ago to apportion the costs.

That said, what method of apportionment should be used? Each owner pays equal tax? Then the guy with 1/4 acre 2 bedroom 1 bath pays the same as a guy with 100 acres 9 bedrooms and 11 baths?

Sure. The 2 bedroom could have multiple kids while the big house may have none.

The current logic is just getting people to pay "their fare share" based upon their property holdings.

 

[Ingomike]

The current logic is just getting people to pay "their fare share" based upon the value of their property holdings.

FIFY

 

[Ingomike]

Don't you think 16% is a bit over the top?

Yes it is but buyers are likely willing to pay it. A $32,000 increase in a $200,000 house is pretty common today.

 

[Ingomike]

Hendricks County here. Our property value assessment has gone up about $3-$5k every year. Suddenly this year it increased by $92k, which is a 60% increase! To put it in perspective, we only paid $120k when we bought the house in 2012!

The $3-$5 increase seems low but it was very early coming out of the downturn. If that pattern persisted into the pandemic period they were likely under-assessing you and just now caught it up. How do you look compared to the recent sales?

 

[jsharmon7]

The $3-$5 increase seems low but it was very early coming out of the downturn. If that pattern persisted into the pandemic period they were likely under-assessing you and just now caught it up. How do you look compared to the recent sales?

Other comps are much lower. In fact, the street behind us has a huge house that’s only been assessed at a little more than our house. That house should easily be a couple 100 grand more.

 

[Ingomike]

Other comps are much lower. In fact, the street behind us has a huge house that’s only been assessed at a little more than our house. That house should easily be a couple 100 grand more.

Are you appealing? Good luck…

 

[KLB]

FIFY

No you didn't. It is the same nonsense reason Ds are always using for making people with something pay more.

An income tax or a VAT/consumption would be better than property taxes.

 

[Ingomike]

No you didn't. It is the same nonsense reason Ds are always using for making people with something pay more.

An income tax or a VAT/consumption would be better than property taxes.

So why didn’t our ancestors set it up as you wish? Property taxes have been used in this country since the 1600’s.

So those that do not own property should pay for the benefits property owners receive for their property? That sounds more like a communist/socialist plan to me.

 

[KLB]

So why didn’t our ancestors set it up as you wish? Property taxes have been used in this country since the 1600’s.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Something being done in the past does not make it a good solution.

Maybe because it was a lot easier to keep track of property than sales or income in those days. Things are much different today.

So those that do not own property should pay for the benefits property owners receive for their property? That sounds more like a communist/socialist plan to me.

Again, what benefits do property owners get that non-property owners don't? You keep making those claims and keep not backing them up.

Go look at your County budget and show which parts are for property owners.

Police? Administration? Prosecutors? Courts? Jails?

 

[Ingomike]

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Something being done in the past does not make it a good solution.

Maybe because it was a lot easier to keep track of property than sales or income in those days. Things are much different today.

Again, what benefits do property owners get that non-property owners don't? You keep making those claims and keep not backing them up.

Go look at your County budget and show which parts are for property owners.

Police? Administration? Prosecutors? Courts? Jails?

I have repeatedly told you what specifically benefits property owners. While the homeless may benefit from some of them property owners benefit most. Roads and streets, police, fire, deeds, survey, drainage even schools benefit all property owners. Think many people want to own or rent property without these benefits? Many are actually willing to pay more for good county services. Good luck selling or renting without the above.

Maybe you should study property history. Your post reads like tunnel vision. As I have said before I do not like the property tax philosophically because if one cannot afford their tax they could lose their property, however I equally believe property owners should pay for what benefits their property.

All the things you listed benefit both property owners or renters. And rental properties pay double taxes. Do you know anyone that is not an owner or renter? I don’t!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Go look at your County budget and show which parts are for property owners.

Police? Administration? Prosecutors? Courts? Jails?

Don’t forget schools. Over half the state’s budget goes to education (K-12). That’s a blanket everyone gets to get cozy under, whether you’re a property owner or not.

Unless and until we citizens decide we want the state to do less they’ll never do with less. Fussing over which tax we ought to have and which we should get rid of is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titantic. It’s fussing over who ought to get stuck with the check. The government is never going to go hungry. It’s not going to take a pay cut either.

 

[Knight Rider]

Ok so how bout we keep the property tax but go back to where only property owners get to vote? I would accept that compromise.

 

[KLB]

I have repeatedly told you what specifically benefits property owners. While the homeless may benefit from some of them property owners benefit most. Roads and streets, police, fire, deeds, survey, drainage even schools benefit all property owners. Think many people want to own or rent property without these benefits? Many are actually willing to pay more for good county services. Good luck selling or renting without the above.

Maybe you should study property history. Your post reads like tunnel vision. As I have said before I do not like the property tax philosophically because if one cannot afford their tax they could lose their property, however I equally believe property owners should pay for what benefits their property.

All the things you listed benefit both property owners or renters. And rental properties pay double taxes. Do you know anyone that is not an owner or renter? I don’t!

Again you deflect. How does one with MORE property benefit MORE? You make snide comments about how it is communist to not pay more tax because you have more property and benefit more, but it is all air. Show your work.

Then you go on about owners and renters. What does that have to do with what I said? Just more hot air and deflecting. How does one with MORE property benefit MORE?

 

[phylodog]

Then you go on about owners and renters. What does that have to do with what I said? Just more hot air and deflecting. How does one with MORE property benefit MORE?

It doesn't. It's communist/socialist drivel.

 

[jamil]

Just coming out of knee replacement surgery. Looked at my assessment and found a 16% increase in taxable value. This is ridiculous. I am in the process of filing an appeal. With that said, what is the answer. Who do we have to contact to stop this madness? I am retired and on a fixed income. I did notice my income has no raised 16%. Something is off kilter here. Again, what is the answer?

It is ridiculous. Government gets a windfall just for making policies that increase home values.

The answer? Government at all levels:

1. Spend less.
2. Tax leas.
3. Tax fairer.

Can’t have a “fair” tax. A fair tax would be adding up the total cost of government that each of us consumes, and send a bill to each individual according to consumption.

Obviously government spending would bankrupt most people. So we have the idea of making more affluent people pay higher shares of the burden. And that’s unfair. But is practical. Getting closer to “fair” would also help with getting us to items 1 and 2 above.

 

[phylodog]

Obviously government spending would bankrupt most people. So we have the idea of making more affluent people pay higher shares of the burden. And that’s unfair. But is practical. Getting closer to “fair” would also help with getting us to items 1 and 2 above.

We've decided that property ownership equates to wealth with the current property tax framework and that is the primary problem. If a homeless, jobless person inherits 10 acres of property the government suddenly sees him as wealthy and drops a tax responsibility on him. Can't pay? Well darn, I guess we'll let one of the Sheriff's buddies buy it at the auction next year. Tough luck citizen, all this tax fairness caught up with ya.

 

[Cavman]

We've decided that property ownership equates to wealth with the current property tax framework and that is the primary problem. If a homeless, jobless person inherits 10 acres of property the government suddenly sees him as wealthy and drops a tax responsibility on him. Can't pay? Well darn, I guess we'll let one of the Sheriff's buddies buy it at the auction next year. Tough luck citizen, all this tax fairness caught up with ya.

Yep land rich can really f ya. Got family that inherited their land. They're not rich but because they have land that's been passed down the ol state sees them as rich and wants to tax them as such cause its been appraised at market value.

 

[jamil]

Property tax is not taxing unrealized gain. Your property tax is the proportion of the value of your property to pay for benefits your property receives. One can dispute the assessed valuation, that the tax is too high, but it has absolutely nothing to do with capital gains. The assessed value is the way government apportions the total tax among the property owners. Gee, no one was complaining in the least when assessments went down for many in 2010.

If you base assessment on market value, it ***damn sure is taxing on unrealized gain. You're conflating the reasons for property taxes and the practice of it. If I add a fence or a pole barn to my property, that increases its market value. It doesn't increase the cost of government. If property tax is to pay for benefits my property receives (presumably government services) then me spending money making my home more valuable doesn't cost the government anything. But I'm taxed more because of it.

Value based taxes have little to do with services consumed. One could say that more valuable properties tend to use more government services, but that correlation is quite low.

No one takes the discussions seriously when the principles are not even correctly articulated. So what method of apportionment should be used? Each owner pays equal tax? Then the guy with 1/4 acre 2 bedroom 1 bath pays the same as a guy with 9 bedrooms and 11 baths?

Why do you think no one takes discussions seriously when they disagree with you? Maybe the people disagreeing with you are the serious ones. Maybe? Could it be?

How about this? Take the cost of government consumed on an individualized basis, including common costs, and spread it across all consumers of government. Doesn't even have to do anything with taxing property. Just send a tax bill. Say your local community is ~35,000. Your government spends around $60M per year in common stuff. School system. Local government employees. Police. Fire. Dog catcher. Etcetera. Your property has a total of 1000 ft total road frontage. Let's say the total cost of that for the year is $235. You had a small fire and the fire department had to put it out. Your house was broken into. Cops came out and filed a report. Let's say the total cost of all that was $650.

You get a bill for:

$60M / 35K = $1714.29
cost of property = $235
cost of individual gov services = $650
Total tax bill: $2599.29

But no. we can't do that because it's impractical. Many people could not afford the government they consume. So we kinda loosely tax by affluence. But, basing the tax assessment on the market value of the home has little to do with the cost of government. It's just government leaders trying to gouge as much as they possibly can so that they can spend more on building their legacy. Like the bike paths, that are really no more than statues to themselves. Look at me. I did that.