Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)
-   -   Taxes - Fed/State/Property/Sales (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/149148-taxes-fed-state-property-sales.html)

fcoolaiddrinker 01-13-2025 02:54 PM


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.

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.

OpieTaylor 01-13-2025 03:16 PM


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.

Profane Kahuna 01-13-2025 03:20 PM


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.


.

fcoolaiddrinker 01-13-2025 03:34 PM


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.


.

I would probably be for removing the ability to leave the same burden to hiers. That way it could just die on the vine over time and you’re not forcing retirees (that contributed high payroll for decades) to sell.

OOfff 01-13-2025 04:04 PM


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.


.

at least their kids can inherit the low tax rate and continue to ******* those behind them.

OOfff 01-13-2025 04:08 PM


Originally Posted by OpieTaylor (Post 3870491)
Identical means same sales price, in which case they would pay the same.

not to me. identical means identical value


It’s not fair to repo paid off property because taxes spike due to comps.
it’s as fair as charging others higher taxes for the same asset.


If most buy a house at the same % of their income then the taxes stay commiserate with their salary.
now look at home prices vs income over the past 40 years


If young people can’t afford the tax then they don’t buy and that corrects the home value.
yep. screwing those with the misfortune to have been born after you


Assessing and taxing unrealized equity is sounds ridiculous and a cap gains tax at sale should be favored over taxing equity.
i don’t think it’s ridiculous at all

fcoolaiddrinker 01-13-2025 04:37 PM


Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3870530)
at least their kids can inherit the low tax rate and continue to ******* those behind them.

Good news. A crash pad roommate’s dad just moved back to ca from Phx. That means you and I (younger) just shifted the tax burden to an older person. Lol. Sorry couldn’t help myself when he told me.

galaxy flyer 01-13-2025 07:19 PM


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.

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"?

OOfff 01-13-2025 08:47 PM


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"?

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

ThumbsUp 01-14-2025 05:59 AM


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