Property tax needs to be repealed / abolished NOW!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

[Shadow01]

Taxing real property can never be done in a fair equitable manner. A 2 bedroom single bath bungalow in Indy and out in rural Indiana are not the same, but they are the same. On one hand you assess them the same because they are Identical, but their location changes their value when it comes time to collect that tangible assessment upon the sale. So we assess them based on their market location, now someone is being over taxed strictly based on location and not the specifics of the property. Out here I could never recoup an assessment equal to an urban setting on an identical house. No way to tax me fairly. By the same token an urban owner is being over taxed because his real property is being valued differently than my identical real property. You either include location as part of the taxing equation which makes it unfair for one party or you exclude location as part of the equation and it is unfair to the other party.

 

[firecadet613]

Taxing real property can never be done in a fair equitable manner. A 2 bedroom single bath bungalow in Indy and out in rural Indiana are not the same, but they are the same. On one hand you assess them the same because they are Identical, but their location changes their value when it comes time to collect that tangible assessment upon the sale. So we assess them based on their market location, now someone is being over taxed strictly based on location and not the specifics of the property. Out here I could never recoup an assessment equal to an urban setting on an identical house. No way to tax me fairly. By the same token an urban owner is being over taxed because his real property is being valued differently than my identical real property. You either include location as part of the taxing equation which makes it unfair for one party or you exclude location as part of the equation and it is unfair to the other party.

It's almost as if life isn't fair...

 

[Pepi]

It's almost as if life isn't fair...

Life is fair ... Our so-called government is NOT

 

[bobzilla]

Life is fair ... Our so-called government is NOT

Actually neither are fair. But that's how you learn to successfully navigate life, learning that it isn't always fair and you're not always going to win.

 

[Pepi]

Actually neither are fair. But that's how you learn to successfully navigate life, learning that it isn't always fair and you're not always going to win.

I look at life as fair because it beats the alternative

 

[bobzilla]

I look at life as fair because it beats the alternative

We assume but we haven't tried the alternative yet. We may be wrong.

 

[Ingomike]

Taxing real property can never be done in a fair equitable manner. A 2 bedroom single bath bungalow in Indy and out in rural Indiana are not the same, but they are the same. On one hand you assess them the same because they are Identical, but their location changes their value when it comes time to collect that tangible assessment upon the sale. So we assess them based on their market location, now someone is being over taxed strictly based on location and not the specifics of the property. Out here I could never recoup an assessment equal to an urban setting on an identical house. No way to tax me fairly. By the same token an urban owner is being over taxed because his real property is being valued differently than my identical real property. You either include location as part of the taxing equation which makes it unfair for one party or you exclude location as part of the equation and it is unfair to the other party.

Which is why they chose to assess based on market value, a fact that every property has, and the Supreme Court ruled that “fair” whereas they ruled that depreciated value jwas not “fair” and struck that system down.

 

[Shadow01]

Which is why they chose to assess based on market value, a fact that every property has, and the Supreme Court ruled that “fair” whereas they ruled that depreciated value jwas not “fair” and struck that system down.

Unfortunately my home has zero “market value” until I place it on the market. I shouldn’t be taxed until then.

 

[Shadow01]

It's almost as if life isn't fair...

True, but I see this dilemma as an endless court case for homeowners to pursue.

 

[Ingomike]

Unfortunately my home has zero “market value” until I place it on the market. I shouldn’t be taxed until then.

Then I will offer you zero for it.

That joke said, everything has a market value and selling is not a requirement to to have a market value. Then you are not taxed on market value increase until you sell it and must calculate capital gains taxes. You are assessed taxes for county services based on the market value but not taxed on the market value itself.

 

[Shadow01]

Then I will offer you zero for it.

That joke said, everything has a market value and selling is not a requirement to to have a market value. Then you are not taxed on market value increase until you sell it and must calculate capital gains taxes. You are assessed taxes for county services based on the market value but not taxed on the market value itself.

So you are saying they use fake numbers since it isn’t the actual market value that is taxed?

 

[firecadet613]

True, but I see this dilemma as an endless court case for homeowners to pursue.

Homeowners will run out of money fighting it before the government runs out of our money fighting us.

 

[racegunz]

Then I will offer you zero for it.

That joke said, everything has a market value and selling is not a requirement to to have a market value. Then you are not taxed on market value increase until you sell it and must calculate capital gains taxes. You are assessed taxes for county services based on the market value but not taxed on the market value itself.

This is a pretty good description of how it works, but only for primary residences, if they did it for farm ground the farmers couldn’t afford 2% or even close.

 

[Ingomike]

This is a pretty good description of how it works, but only for primary residences, if they did it for farm ground the farmers couldn’t afford 2% or even close.

I think the farm ground point is interesting and would like to know what is going on with it. One other point, not all property, even residential, hits the 1%, 2%, or 3% circuit breaker when the tax is calculated.

 

[racegunz]

I think the farm ground point is interesting and would like to know what is going on with it. One other point, not all property, even residential, hits the 1%, 2%, or 3% circuit breaker when the tax is calculated.

The state sets a value for farm ground it does get adjusted but is nowhere even close to what present market value is. I believe but don’t quote me it is around 1500.00 an acre. It sells at about 10-20 x that amount. I do not know if businesses are assessed at property market value or not. So basically from what I do know is the that primary residences that do notget any income from the property are assessed at “market value”. I pay 50% what one of my relatives does on his 400+ acre farm and residence.
Seems patently unfair at face value but there’s more to it I’m sure.
First off they could not afford 2% or even 1% of the true market value. I would like to see them assessed that way though because then it would get the system changed.

Of course they don’t hit the circuit breaker as that is the assessor’s multiplier to buffer their assessments. If they charge the top % and didn’t raise the assessments enough to cover the budget it would expose they way the system works by having a budget shortfall and we can’t have that now can we? The house always wins.

 

[jamil]

Which is why they chose to assess based on market value, a fact that every property has, and the Supreme Court ruled that “fair” whereas they ruled that depreciated value jwas not “fair” and struck that system down.

Sometimes SCOTUS is full of ****.

 

[Ingomike]

Sometimes SCOTUS is full of ****.

Could you explain what SCOTUS had to do with my post?

 

[jamil]

Could you explain what SCOTUS had to do with my post?

Sure.

Which is why they chose to assess based on market value, a fact that every property has, and the Supreme Court ruled that “fair” whereas they ruled that depreciated value jwas not “fair” and struck that system down.

Regardless which supreme court ruled it, the point remains valid. Courts often get it wrong. When they rule against something YOU like, YOU seem to know they got it wrong. Right?

 

[Ingomike]

Sure.



Regardless which supreme court ruled it, the point remains valid. Courts often get it wrong. When they rule against something YOU like, YOU seem to know they got it wrong. Right?

I have raised the point a few times here, it is hard to discuss issues like this with those that have strong opinions but do not seem to know details of what they are talking about like which courts were involved decisions.

 

[jamil]

I have raised the point a few times here, it is hard to discuss issues like this with those that have strong opinions but do not seem to know details of what they are talking about like which courts were involved decisions.

I knew it was Indiana supreme court. I just said SCOTUS by mistake. Don’t orgasm too hard.