![]() |
Originally Posted by OpieTaylor
(Post 3870491)
Identical means same sales price, in which case they would pay the same.
It’s not fair to repo paid off property because taxes spike due to comps. If most buy a house at the same % of their income then the taxes stay commiserate with their salary. That is the point of sales price equaling assessments. Anything else is just a guess. Like other places there’s been a lack of building since the Great Recession. Builders didn’t want to take risks for several years after. Couple that with Covid building shutdowns and were in an unbalanced supply/demand market. All the state legislators can do is remove red tape lowering risk and cost for builders. Maybe throw in sub 1% property tax for first time and veterans. IMO that should be the focus. Not advocating property tax increases. |
Originally Posted by fcoolaiddrinker
(Post 3870498)
High House prices leading to the high property tax initially are the problem in ca right now imo. It’s frustrating.
Like other places there’s been a lack of building since the Great Recession. Builders didn’t want to take risks for several years after. Couple that with Covid building shutdowns and were in an unbalanced supply/demand market. All the state legislators can do is remove red tape lowering risk and cost for builders. Maybe throw in sub 1% property tax for first time and veterans. IMO that should be the focus. Not advocating property tax increases. Yea, property taxes existed to tax the rich back when property was used to generate cash flow, and poor people didn’t own anything to pay a tax on. In the south it was used to pay for the civil war, in the 1800s it was too hard to try and tax the cotton revenue so just tax the dirt that produces it and exempt the home. Since property doesn’t necessarily produce cash flow anymore and we aren’t in the 1,800s anymore there are much fairer ways to have a progressive tax for local services. |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3870407)
.....because we shift the burden to a younger person who wishes to buy. my answer is that two identical houses should have an identical tax burden. AMEN! What is even worse is the people grandfathered in with low taxes keep voting for more services with absolutely no consequences since their tax is locked in. Recipe for disaster. . |
Originally Posted by Profane Kahuna
(Post 3870506)
AMEN!
What is even worse is the people grandfathered in with low taxes keep voting for more services with absolutely no consequences since their tax is locked in. Recipe for disaster. . |
Originally Posted by Profane Kahuna
(Post 3870506)
AMEN!
What is even worse is the people grandfathered in with low taxes keep voting for more services with absolutely no consequences since their tax is locked in. Recipe for disaster. . |
Originally Posted by OpieTaylor
(Post 3870491)
Identical means same sales price, in which case they would pay the same.
It’s not fair to repo paid off property because taxes spike due to comps. If most buy a house at the same % of their income then the taxes stay commiserate with their salary. If young people can’t afford the tax then they don’t buy and that corrects the home value. Assessing and taxing unrealized equity is sounds ridiculous and a cap gains tax at sale should be favored over taxing equity. |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3870530)
at least their kids can inherit the low tax rate and continue to ******* those behind them.
|
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3870375)
sounds scary in a talk radio sound bite, but it’s fairly logical in practice once you understand the loophole it’s designed to close.
also, since few of us are worth $30m, it’s not much to worry about. |
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
(Post 3870600)
It's a ridiculous exit tax. First, only applies to $30 millionaires, why not everyone? Or no one? That's hardly equal,protection of the law. Second, if I decide to move to a lower tax state, where does Cali have the right to chase my capital? Since when is moving to another tax jurisdiction a "loophole"?
as for equal protection, there’s a long history of progressive taxes being acceptable |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3870620)
if you have gains as a california resident, it’s logical that those gains get taxed by california.
as for equal protection, there’s a long history of progressive taxes being acceptable What happens when you leave the state and your portfolio subsequently goes down, are you given that money back by CA? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:07 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands