taxes discourage sprucing up your property

[lildog]

Carried over from the barn raising thread.

When you fix up your home, or build on to it, it raises the value and hence raises your taxes.  So how can this system be made to be more fair (aside from doing away with taxes out right since that just wont happen).

[AlanM]

Make the tax on land only, based on square footage, not some arbitrary valuation. So much per acre.

[lildog]

I'm not sure that's much fairer, since then you'd encourage huge McMansions on the size of a postage stamp and discourage small reason homes with a lot of land.

What about a flat rate regardless of where you live... if it's huge house or a condo?  Everyone pays the same amount, period.

That would certainly cut back on those elderly people or condo dewlers who pay 1/3 what homeowners do from contunally asking for more and more town services.

[error]

Sure, I'll support a flat property tax... of zero.

[AlanM]

I'm not sure that's much fairer, since then you'd encourage huge McMansions on the size of a postage stamp and discourage small reason homes with a lot of land.

What about a flat rate regardless of where you live... if it's huge house or a condo?  Everyone pays the same amount, period.

That would certainly cut back on those elderly people or condo dewlers who pay 1/3 what homeowners do from contunally asking for more and more town services.

What do you mean by flat rate? Are you talking flat tax rate? Flat rate of valuation?

[AlanM]

A tax on land only does several things:
1) It discourages sprawl.
2) It does not penalize you for keeping your property up
3) It encourages maximum utilization of land
4) Everyone pays the same

[cathleeninnh]

IF local tax is to pay for local services, then a fair tax  is one that is apportioned relative to the usage of those services as closely as possible. Obviously a use tax would be best. That is easier for some things than others.

Cathleen

[cathleeninnh]

A tax on land only does several things:
1) It discourages sprawl.
2) It does not penalize you for keeping your property up
3) It encourages maximum utilization of land
4) Everyone pays the same

Sorry Alan, 1 and 3 are still social engineering through taxation.

Cathleen

[AlanM]

A tax on land only does several things:
1) It discourages sprawl.
2) It does not penalize you for keeping your property up
3) It encourages maximum utilization of land
4) Everyone pays the same

Sorry Alan, 1 and 3 are still social engineering through taxation.

Cathleen

That is the end result, yes. But that is true of any form of taxation. Do you really think we will ever abolish ALL taxes? Taxation is not just theft, it is a form of social engineering. I just think if taxes are going to exist in my lifetime, they should be simple and direct, with no exemptions of any kind, for any purpose.

[lildog]

I'm not sure that's much fairer, since then you'd encourage huge McMansions on the size of a postage stamp and discourage small reason homes with a lot of land.

What about a flat rate regardless of where you live... if it's huge house or a condo?  Everyone pays the same amount, period.

That would certainly cut back on those elderly people or condo dewlers who pay 1/3 what homeowners do from contunally asking for more and more town services.

What do you mean by flat rate? Are you talking flat tax rate? Flat rate of valuation?

Basically saying homes on average are worth X so EVERYONE is taxed at the rate of X.

In other words, lets assume Town X has residencial making up 50% of it's worth, industry and commerical make up the other 50%.

Leaving them alone... that means 50% of the town's budget comes from residencial property taxes.

For argument sake let's say the town has a 2 million dollar budget, 50% would mean 1 million is covered by residents.

If there were 500 homes and 500 condos or appartments, each and every dewling would pay $1,000 in taxes.

As it stands now those 500 homes may average $300,000 while the condos or apparentments average $150,000 each so the home owners pay $1500 on average while the condo owners pay $500 on average (assuming my math is correct).

Meanwhile those living in condos could be the people demanding the larger library, the music in the park for the 20 seniors who sit and watch it, etc and the people in the homes use police, fire and expect paved roads and that's about it.

Idealy an ala cart tax system where you pay for those services you actually use would be the most ideal but how do you get to that point?

[KBCraig]

Taxation is not just theft, it is a form of social engineering.

Even when that's not the intent, it's the effect. People modify their behavior based on taxes, even subconsciously; taxes are always a factor in the market.

Kevin

[AlanM]

Taxation is not just theft, it is a form of social engineering.

Even when that's not the intent, it's the effect. People modify their behavior based on taxes, even subconsciously; taxes are always a factor in the market.

Kevin

Which is why you can't have a totally free marketplace until taxation is eliminated.

[AlanM]

I'm not sure that's much fairer, since then you'd encourage huge McMansions on the size of a postage stamp and discourage small reason homes with a lot of land.

What about a flat rate regardless of where you live... if it's huge house or a condo?  Everyone pays the same amount, period.

That would certainly cut back on those elderly people or condo dewlers who pay 1/3 what homeowners do from contunally asking for more and more town services.

What do you mean by flat rate? Are you talking flat tax rate? Flat rate of valuation?

Basically saying homes on average are worth X so EVERYONE is taxed at the rate of X.

In other words, lets assume Town X has residencial making up 50% of it's worth, industry and commerical make up the other 50%.

Leaving them alone... that means 50% of the town's budget comes from residencial property taxes.

For argument sake let's say the town has a 2 million dollar budget, 50% would mean 1 million is covered by residents.

If there were 500 homes and 500 condos or appartments, each and every dewling would pay $1,000 in taxes.

As it stands now those 500 homes may average $300,000 while the condos or apparentments average $150,000 each so the home owners pay $1500 on average while the condo owners pay $500 on average (assuming my math is correct).

Meanwhile those living in condos could be the people demanding the larger library, the music in the park for the 20 seniors who sit and watch it, etc and the people in the homes use police, fire and expect paved roads and that's about it.

Idealy an ala cart tax system where you pay for those services you actually use would be the most ideal but how do you get to that point?

As Cathleen says, Simplify, simplify.
Are you saying each dwelling unit would pay the same? Apartments included?

[lildog]

As Cathleen says, Simplify, simplify.

Sorry, I'm an egineer... long drawn out rambling is in my blood.

Are you saying each dwelling unit would pay the same? Apartments included?

Simply put, Yes. 

Everyone pays the same amount.  If they don't want to pay as much then they cut back services.  I'd think we'd see FAR more people willing to cut if EVERYONE paid the same.

But as it stands now, what incentive would Mr X have to want the government to cut services when you pay for the majority of the cost of that service and Mr X uses it all the time?

[cathleeninnh]

I don't see how that would change. If I have never called the police or the fire department or used the library or had a kid in the school and Mr x does it all, he will have no incentive to reduce services, will he?

Cathleen