Reader comments
As property values go up, appeals surge
37 comments | Read story
Tab L. Uno | 5:25 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I'm first impression is that with all the tremendous federal spending and
debt that has occurred that big sucking sound out of our pockets and away from
local and state government. If only we hadn't invaded Iraq, I wonder what
the money could have been used for? Tax refunds on property taxes maybe?
Anonymous | 7:12 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Americans pay more in local taxes than Federal taxes. The federal government
wouldn't give you a tax refund for your local property tax, since they
don't charge property tax.
Alma | 8:16 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Ut needs a form of proposition 13; the Howard Jarvis initiative that limits
yearly increases to a small fixed percentage rate each year. New homes or
resold homes naturally are taxed on the present value and then protected by
excess tax increases by proposition 13's tax protection provisions.
It is a God send that protects people from being "taxed" out of their homes after paying off a mortgage and living on a fixed income.
It is a God send that protects people from being "taxed" out of their homes after paying off a mortgage and living on a fixed income.
Comments continue below
Dee | 8:40 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I wonder if we had an average house price drop of say 20%, would the local
governments live with the decreased revenue or increase tax rates?
jackhp | 9:15 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Dee,
To answer your question, if average house prices dropped 20% there wouldn't be a decrease in revenue. The tax rate would automatically increase to provide the same revenue as the previous year.
Please read the Truth in Taxation information I linked to in my previous post.
To answer your question, if average house prices dropped 20% there wouldn't be a decrease in revenue. The tax rate would automatically increase to provide the same revenue as the previous year.
Please read the Truth in Taxation information I linked to in my previous post.
SL | 10:25 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I think there should be limits on the amount that property tax can increase each
year. Last year, ours almost doubled and this year they are proposing another
$300 hike.
jackhp | 10:29 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
So where's my first comment? Ugh, this is frustrating . . . here it is
again:
This is just bad journalism. The article does nothing to explain how property taxes are actually figured and now we're going to get the usual calls for "Prop 13" and other nonsense.
Property tax revenues do not necessarily go up along with property values. In fact, overall property values are NEUTRAL with repsect to property tax revenues. The only way an individual's property taxes will go up is if their home appreciates FASTER than the average in a particular tax district. My personal property taxes actually went DOWN this year even though my valuation went UP by about 14%.
People, please read and UNDERSTAND the following Truth in Taxation information before making uninformed comments about property taxes in Utah.
http://propertytax.utah.gov/about/truth.html
Even the conservative tax watchdog group, the Utah Taxpayers Association likes TNT.
http://utahtaxpayer.blogspot.com/2006/11/truth-in-taxation-works.html
http://utahtaxpayer.blogspot.com/2007/07/property-taxes-part-1-how-truth-in.html
"Truth-in-Taxation is Utah�s most taxpayer-friendly law. It�s even BETTER than California�s Prop 13 (more about that in a later post)." (emphasis added)
This is just bad journalism. The article does nothing to explain how property taxes are actually figured and now we're going to get the usual calls for "Prop 13" and other nonsense.
Property tax revenues do not necessarily go up along with property values. In fact, overall property values are NEUTRAL with repsect to property tax revenues. The only way an individual's property taxes will go up is if their home appreciates FASTER than the average in a particular tax district. My personal property taxes actually went DOWN this year even though my valuation went UP by about 14%.
People, please read and UNDERSTAND the following Truth in Taxation information before making uninformed comments about property taxes in Utah.
http://propertytax.utah.gov/about/truth.html
Even the conservative tax watchdog group, the Utah Taxpayers Association likes TNT.
http://utahtaxpayer.blogspot.com/2006/11/truth-in-taxation-works.html
http://utahtaxpayer.blogspot.com/2007/07/property-taxes-part-1-how-truth-in.html
"Truth-in-Taxation is Utah�s most taxpayer-friendly law. It�s even BETTER than California�s Prop 13 (more about that in a later post)." (emphasis added)
Cowboy Love | 11:19 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Taxation is a part of being a free american, and living without the threat of
annihilation by their
dictatorship government or king. We should all embrace the throes of democracy and be appreciative
of our freedom and opportunity to live in a house with roofs and walls. These are not the cases in
Iraq and other places where they would love to have the "taxation burden" that we all like to whine
and complain about. Hug a senator, and show them free love!
dictatorship government or king. We should all embrace the throes of democracy and be appreciative
of our freedom and opportunity to live in a house with roofs and walls. These are not the cases in
Iraq and other places where they would love to have the "taxation burden" that we all like to whine
and complain about. Hug a senator, and show them free love!
AdjustableSpanner | 11:32 a.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I'd agree with you to some extent, jack, except that TNT (guess you
can't use the correct acronym in Utah) still allows assessors to determine
values, and that can be done vindictively at times. Revenue stays neutral for
the county, but not for individual properties or even neighborhoods. (If your
taxes went down, that means someone else's went up.) Prop 13 took that
randomness out of the assessors hands.
And really, let's stop calling UTA conservative. They oppose taxes going to things they don't like, but they're not committed to smaller government in all areas. To some of us, welfare for millionaires is still welfare.
And really, let's stop calling UTA conservative. They oppose taxes going to things they don't like, but they're not committed to smaller government in all areas. To some of us, welfare for millionaires is still welfare.
jackhp | 12:18 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
TNT is the Utah Taxpayers Association's acronym, not mine (as if it really
matters).
Assessors are beholden to the public. They are elected officials and if there were widespread "vindictiveness" they would hopefully not be re-elected. Furthermore, there IS an appeals process. If anyone's values are out of line (mistakes ARE made) then they should appeal. As a matter of fact, isn't that what this article is about?
Yes, some peoples' taxes go up while others' go down and others' stay relatively the same. But it's not random, it's based on market fluctuations. I thought convservatives were all about the "market". Yes, there are some anomalies (such as the Huntsville area in Weber County the past few years), but I fail to see how it is unfair to tax everyone on the current market value of their property. If you buy into, or your area becomes, a rapidly appreciating area, then you are gaining a lot of equity.
It is a fallacy that a lot of people are being "taxed out of their homes." There are tax relief measures already in place to help those whose taxes increase beyond their means to pay. I would like to see those measures increased and added to, especially to help out in anomolous situations.
Prop 13 is the exact opposite of fair and equitable. How is it fair to tax two properties of roughly the same value at two wildly different amounts?
Truth in Taxation, for the most part, is the most fair and equitable way to assess property taxes. Prop 13 is just an over-reaction to a relatively small problem.
Assessors are beholden to the public. They are elected officials and if there were widespread "vindictiveness" they would hopefully not be re-elected. Furthermore, there IS an appeals process. If anyone's values are out of line (mistakes ARE made) then they should appeal. As a matter of fact, isn't that what this article is about?
Yes, some peoples' taxes go up while others' go down and others' stay relatively the same. But it's not random, it's based on market fluctuations. I thought convservatives were all about the "market". Yes, there are some anomalies (such as the Huntsville area in Weber County the past few years), but I fail to see how it is unfair to tax everyone on the current market value of their property. If you buy into, or your area becomes, a rapidly appreciating area, then you are gaining a lot of equity.
It is a fallacy that a lot of people are being "taxed out of their homes." There are tax relief measures already in place to help those whose taxes increase beyond their means to pay. I would like to see those measures increased and added to, especially to help out in anomolous situations.
Prop 13 is the exact opposite of fair and equitable. How is it fair to tax two properties of roughly the same value at two wildly different amounts?
Truth in Taxation, for the most part, is the most fair and equitable way to assess property taxes. Prop 13 is just an over-reaction to a relatively small problem.
AdjustableSpanner | 2:03 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Prop 13 is more fair and equitable precisely because increases in equity are of
no value to a homeowner until they sell the property. Equity does not put money
into your pocket, and makes no change in your standard of living - except if
your taxes are increased because of it, in which case it DECREASES your standard
of living by taking money out of your pocket and giving it to the government.
Under Prop 13, if you borrow against your equity, thereby gaining cash, then your property is revalued according to the current market value. However, if you do not take a new mortgage, then your property stays where it should be - valued at the actual price transacted. A piece of property, for tax purposes, is worth its purchase price and nothing more. ever. Taxes should never be assessed on a speculative basis - they should only be allowed to be assessed on real, hard numbers that have evidence to back them up.
"It is a fallacy that a lot of people are being "taxed out of their homes."" Baloney. Guess it depends on what you consider 'a lot'. One is too many.
Under Prop 13, if you borrow against your equity, thereby gaining cash, then your property is revalued according to the current market value. However, if you do not take a new mortgage, then your property stays where it should be - valued at the actual price transacted. A piece of property, for tax purposes, is worth its purchase price and nothing more. ever. Taxes should never be assessed on a speculative basis - they should only be allowed to be assessed on real, hard numbers that have evidence to back them up.
"It is a fallacy that a lot of people are being "taxed out of their homes."" Baloney. Guess it depends on what you consider 'a lot'. One is too many.
jackhp | 3:03 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
You didn't answer the question regarding fair and equitable tax policy so
I'll ask again. How is it fair to tax two properties of roughly the same
value at two wildly different amounts?
I agree that "one is too many" when it comes to people actually being taxed out of their homes. That is why I referenced the tax relief measures currently in place and said that I would like to see them expanded.
Prop 13 has many problems besides simply being inequitable tax policy. Prop 13 disincentivizes and, in fact, prevents people from moving because they won't be able to afford the taxes on a new home. Prop 13 actually forces some people to stay in the same home forever, probably more often than those who are "taxed out of their homes" under Truth in Taxation systems.
In Utah, Prop 13 would automatically INCREASE taxes by about 50% on many property owners. How? Prop 13 caps tax RATES at 1%. Well, my current tax rate in Salt Lake County is about .0067 (two thirds of one percent). If Prop 13 passed, everyone in Salt Lake County would get an automatic 50 percent increase.
I agree that "one is too many" when it comes to people actually being taxed out of their homes. That is why I referenced the tax relief measures currently in place and said that I would like to see them expanded.
Prop 13 has many problems besides simply being inequitable tax policy. Prop 13 disincentivizes and, in fact, prevents people from moving because they won't be able to afford the taxes on a new home. Prop 13 actually forces some people to stay in the same home forever, probably more often than those who are "taxed out of their homes" under Truth in Taxation systems.
In Utah, Prop 13 would automatically INCREASE taxes by about 50% on many property owners. How? Prop 13 caps tax RATES at 1%. Well, my current tax rate in Salt Lake County is about .0067 (two thirds of one percent). If Prop 13 passed, everyone in Salt Lake County would get an automatic 50 percent increase.
Cameron | 3:11 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
So the appeal deadline for Utah County was Monday @ 5:00?
jackhp | 3:22 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I'm pretty sure all of Utah had the same deadline Cameron.
AdjustableSpanner | 3:29 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I thought I did answer it but I will again.
It is fair because the owners paid wildly different amounts.
If you and your neighbor buy the same car from different dealers, but you pay $3000 less, should you have to pay the same sales tax as your neighbor?
I ask again, how is it fair to tax me as if I'd paid $500,000 for something I only paid $35,000 for? Equity is not real money, and it may not even be permanent (as we will see as the current real estate freefall picks up steam).
Disincentivizes people from moving? What kind of psuedoeconomic doubletalk is that? The issue is people who don't want to move but are forced to by speculative taxation. Prop 13 prevents that. The TNT approach benefits buyers, but does not protect the investment of those who already own.
As far as capping rates, the legislation could be written to cap rates wherever you want to cap them. However, once that rate was established, your tax basis could not be increased unless you took a new mortgage on your existing home, and your taxes could not be increased above the legal limitation.
It is fair because the owners paid wildly different amounts.
If you and your neighbor buy the same car from different dealers, but you pay $3000 less, should you have to pay the same sales tax as your neighbor?
I ask again, how is it fair to tax me as if I'd paid $500,000 for something I only paid $35,000 for? Equity is not real money, and it may not even be permanent (as we will see as the current real estate freefall picks up steam).
Disincentivizes people from moving? What kind of psuedoeconomic doubletalk is that? The issue is people who don't want to move but are forced to by speculative taxation. Prop 13 prevents that. The TNT approach benefits buyers, but does not protect the investment of those who already own.
As far as capping rates, the legislation could be written to cap rates wherever you want to cap them. However, once that rate was established, your tax basis could not be increased unless you took a new mortgage on your existing home, and your taxes could not be increased above the legal limitation.
AdjustableSpanner | 3:31 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Maybe I should simplify all that.
You bought a house last year for $100,000. This year, someone buys the very comparable house next door for $500,000. Should you be penalized because your new neighbor is insane?
You bought a house last year for $100,000. This year, someone buys the very comparable house next door for $500,000. Should you be penalized because your new neighbor is insane?
jackhp | 4:22 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
LOL, you are good at skirting around the issues AS. I'll continue to ask
the same questions until you provide an answer based in reality.
Your sales tax scenario is not the same thing. Of course you don't pay the same sales tax as someone who pays $3000 dollars less for a similary valued vehicle. Sales tax is a consumption tax. Property taxes are not consumption based. They are recurring. For your scenario to be valid, you'd have to be paying sales tax every year.
In order to get an answer, maybe I need to provide YOU with a scenario. I bought my house 7 years ago for $150000. My neighbor bought his earlier this year for $350000. Both houses are currently worth approximately $350000. If our tax rate is 1%, then I'll pay $1500 and my neighbor will pay $3500. How is that fair? Why should my neighbor have to pay an inordinately higher amount of the tax burden to provide local services just because he recently moved to the area?
Your sales tax scenario is not the same thing. Of course you don't pay the same sales tax as someone who pays $3000 dollars less for a similary valued vehicle. Sales tax is a consumption tax. Property taxes are not consumption based. They are recurring. For your scenario to be valid, you'd have to be paying sales tax every year.
In order to get an answer, maybe I need to provide YOU with a scenario. I bought my house 7 years ago for $150000. My neighbor bought his earlier this year for $350000. Both houses are currently worth approximately $350000. If our tax rate is 1%, then I'll pay $1500 and my neighbor will pay $3500. How is that fair? Why should my neighbor have to pay an inordinately higher amount of the tax burden to provide local services just because he recently moved to the area?
jackhp | 4:33 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Disincentivizes people from moving . . . I guess a scenario is in order.
Homeowner "Bill" bought his first home 10 years ago for $100000 and pays $1000/year in taxes. He now has a family and has outgrown the home and would like to move. However, housing prices have increased dramatically. A comparable home is now going for $500000. Bill would like a larger home that is going for $700000, but he can't afford to pay an extra $6000/year in taxes (that's $500/month in case you were wondering). Bill is "disincentivized" from moving because he can't afford the TAXES if he does.
Homeowner "Bill" bought his first home 10 years ago for $100000 and pays $1000/year in taxes. He now has a family and has outgrown the home and would like to move. However, housing prices have increased dramatically. A comparable home is now going for $500000. Bill would like a larger home that is going for $700000, but he can't afford to pay an extra $6000/year in taxes (that's $500/month in case you were wondering). Bill is "disincentivized" from moving because he can't afford the TAXES if he does.
Cincinnatus | 4:54 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Property taxes should only be based on historical values of the property, not
current market values. In other words, the tax should be based on the value of
the house the last time it was sold, even if it was 25 years ago.
Mortgage Underwriter | 5:29 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
As a mortgage underwriter for California properties(among other states), I would
like to disagree that if you do a cash out mortgage on your property your taxes
go up. They do not, as this information is not reported to the state(privacy
laws and all that). Furthermore, if you transfer to an heir, under Prop 13 there
is no increase in assessed value, therefore no increase in taxes.
Where I live (not California), they increase assessed values and tax rates virtually every year, the money goes to the county and gets squandered on the mayor's beautification projects while overlooking the serious infrastructure deficiencies. The elderly pay the same rates as the young, with very little "exemption" from taxes, and the average family pays $350/mo in property taxes.
Where I live (not California), they increase assessed values and tax rates virtually every year, the money goes to the county and gets squandered on the mayor's beautification projects while overlooking the serious infrastructure deficiencies. The elderly pay the same rates as the young, with very little "exemption" from taxes, and the average family pays $350/mo in property taxes.
East Coast | 5:38 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Wow. In our area, a homeowner with about a $300,000 house (three or four bedroom
in modest neighborhood) will pay over $4000 a year in property tax. Add to this
a 1% local income tax, about 3% state income tax, payroll taxes and federal
income tax. I don't know what the total tax burden is in Utah, but
it's pretty high here.
Maximous Marvelous | 9:30 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
My comment was deleted because I spoke the truth. Sensorship in Utah. Whoever
thought it would come to this
My comment was not ab | 9:33 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
My comment was not abusive or off topic. Property taxes go to schools where the
severe spending abuse occurs. I'm calling your paper in the morning to more
than complain about what happened here tonight
Maximous Marvelous | 9:39 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Unlike you.
Maximous Marvelous | 9:41 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
It truly has become the DESPERATE NEWS
SMART GUY | 9:59 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
THE TRUTH IS THAT WE'RE BEING DOUBLE TAXED WICH IS PROBABLY A GOOD THING AT
THE MOMENT BECAUSE IF THE YOUTH REALIZE THIS SIMPLE FACT THEN THEY JUST MITE
START VOTING FOR LESS TAX WICH WILL LEAD TO BETTER THINGS IN THE FUTURE
SUPPORTER | 10:04 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
SHAUN HANNITY FOR PRESIDENT!!!
COOL DUDE | 10:07 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
The thing is that property tax is a good thing when it's used for good
things
I am an american | 10:19 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
I pledge aligence to the flag, of the united states of america, and to the
republic for wich it stands, one nation, under GOD, indivisible, with LIBERTY
and justice for all. property tax is not liberty it's bondage, if we
don't pay it they take our land away, that's not owning our own land,
that's not freedom.
average jo | 10:53 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
If i didn't have to pay property tax then i could afford to buy things i
want, but see then the government would still be making money off of the sells
tax, and you would technically now own your own land, it's a win win
situation...
annomynus | 10:58 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
i don't like property tax... they cut me off every time i try to tell you
why lol
Anonymous | 11:06 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
the problem is that honesty is hardly ever heard, everyone is so untrue. QUOTE:
peace | 11:12 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
Why do we continue to argue about property tax when all we have to do is just
simply get rid of it lol
me | 11:22 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
taxs are just over all very lame, the governmet is just stilling our "lunch
money" and it's time we stand up to the "bolies" and stop
letting them bolie us around, it's all about standing united against
tyranny
peace | 11:27 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
PEACE AND LOVE BABIE!
Anonymous | 11:35 p.m. Sept. 18, 2007
it's a conspiracy man! the governments got a grip on the market!
they're feeding us a bunch of lies
Do you sleep? | 9:40 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007
Dear Jackhp. I wonder if you sleep nights, or if you stay awake and wonder where
you might end up in a few years. Not everyone can just look at the logical facts
and accept this increase. I am a young widow with children still at home. I get
social security, but currently have breast cancer and can not work. The social
security is barely above the limit to give me a tax abatement. The only security
my children and I have for the future is this home. I don't think they
would be secure if we moved. I can't get them life insurance...heck..now I
can't get myself health insurance..My home is all we have and all we will
ever have..So when people are fearful of losing their homes, and fret a good
deal about the increase in taxes, you ought to get to know some of them. Now,
things that ought to be fixed, will stay broken. The heat will be too low, and I
will live with one more worry. I hope every single night, that I can keep my
home,and that we don't have anything break. Before this I worked a long
long time.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Related content
- UVU downs Alcorn State in Alabama 8:59 p.m.
- Family thanks effort after cave deat 7:34 p.m.
- Fesenko out with stomach virus 7:31 p.m.
- Cowboys get past Raiders 24-7 7:30 p.m.
- The Who for the Super Bowl 7:08 p.m.
- Thursday's sports transactions 7:06 p.m.
- Holiday festivals offer family fun 6:30 p.m.
- Story of the 'Bells' retold 6:30 p.m.
- Reasons Brooks, Reiner are classics 6:30 p.m.
- Festival of Trees 6:30 p.m.
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies
- Rivalry has had some 'turkeys'
- Cave rescuers committed to free man
- Holiday television program listings
- Highland players make special friend
- Temple Square to use LEDs
- Matt Reynolds vs. Koa Misi
- Missions teach players perseverance
- Salt Lake City woman shot
- Provo star leads Bulldogs to win
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
262 - Protests against Phoenix LDS temple210
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks202
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match139
- BYU records with win133
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin131
- Thunder rolls by Jazz130
- Boys basketball rankings118
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin112
- Hall, Johnson matchup key102
Latest comments
So sad and tragic.. My heart breaks for this young man, and my thoughts and...
Our prayers are with the family what a sad thing to happen for them. Last I...
Everything is great at Scaddy's, but you *have* to try the Wayne Burger. Its...
i agree the brittney girl is tough. She played very well last year as a ninth...
What an amazing story. I love to be reminded that there are great people out...
@Let him go.....someone had too much turkey today! What a sour blogger....
I am also interested in knowing where to find the stacking blinds that...
Dear mark: government getting into the business of competing with private...
I know everyone lists those salt lake schools on top, but that syracuse team...
@Nattering.... 90% or more of bills that go up for debate get passed. You...
Advertisements