Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [spudone] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
King County (Seattle area) where I live is something like 1.025% of home+property value//

That is pretty good if that is the total you pay. Does that include the usually fire dept, schools, libraries etc taxes they tack on? If so you are on the low end, Texas pays almost double that, same as Vermont. Of course in Vermont you get some state sponsored medical I believe, so that is a huge perk if you dont have to pay medical insurance...
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [spudone] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I don't know what a "normal" property tax range is nationwide - never really looked into it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/04/16/comparing-average-property-taxes-all-50-states-and-dc/100314754/


High-end is over 2% (NJ, TX, IL, NH). I pay ~0.6%.
Last edited by: oldandslow: Mar 7, 18 10:46
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, in AZ we pay about 0.8% in property taxes. The assessed value is only about 75% of the actual street value..not sure if that is the case in CA so I'll disregard it. But my home in Chandler would assess at least 1.5X in most comparable CA cities. So to do the math, I've been researching a possible move to the Folsom area and $/ft is $259, vs $161 with a tax rate in Folsom of 0.95%. So for the same house (~3000 sq ft), I would pay $7381 in tax vs $3864, which is a 91% increase in property taxes alone. And...if CA assess at 100% of street value, the difference is even more than that.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well you happen to live in one of the few states or areas that have a tiny bit lower property tax than us. My point was not that we are the lowest, but looking at oldandslow's chart we are near the lowest at .77.

Of course if you move from Hawaii it will be even more, but move from Texas and you hit the jackpot!! And here it just depends on how long you have held onto your house. Some only people who live in Malibu pay $2k for a 4 million dollar home, as long as they have been there since inception. Other people who have had huge appreciations on their homes, which is not unusual in CA, will be paying a small % of that real value in taxes. Like I said, it gets fixed at purchase, and if you home goes up 40% in the next 5 years(not unusual) you are still basically paying on that original purchase price plus a couple % a year as a cap that it can go up.

In you case it is just a matter of where you really want to live I guess, Folsom is pretty nice, close to the Sierras and some spectacular training and vistas. Too cold for my liking in the winter, but love that place in the other 3 seasons..

https://www.usatoday.com/...es-and-dc/100314754/
Last edited by: monty: Mar 7, 18 10:53
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:

But my home in Chandler would assess at least 1.5X in most comparable CA cities. So to do the math, I've been researching a possible move to the Folsom area and $/ft is $259, vs $161 with a tax rate in Folsom of 0.95%. So for the same house (~3000 sq ft), I would pay $7381 in tax vs $3864, which is a 91% increase in property taxes alone.


CA property taxes are 1.25% of assessed value at point of sale, with limited annual rise (which is why long-term owners pay much lower rates). If you bought a house the tax would be 1.25%.


Regarding your choices, get a smaller house? That is a basic option in higher cost areas. Life is full of choices, and they are all good, depending on your priorities. FYI, my house is ~1300 sq. ft., which is absolutely perfect considering that our kids are going off to college.
Last edited by: oldandslow: Mar 7, 18 10:59
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CA property taxes are 1.25% of assessed value at point of sale, with limited annual rise (which is why long-term owners pay much lower rates). If you bought a house the tax would be 1.25%.


Regarding your choices, get a smaller house? That is a basic option in higher cost areas. Life is full of choices, both are good. FYI, my house is ~1300 sq. ft., which is absolutely perfect considering that our kids are going off to college. //

I think you guys must have some other tack ons, mine in LA county is just 1%. But good advice on the size of house, I realized that when I moved here to Orange County. I got the smallest stand alone house I could 1530 sq ft, and I have 3 young kids too. I mean really, I could live in a motor home and be happy, but this was bare minimum for my wife..(-;
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The tax rate is 1% plus bond debts voted in,. In many areas of Cen Cal is closer to 1.3%.

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I pay 11% in state income taxes. It maxs out at 13% which has got to be the highest in the nation.

I just paid $750 to register my pickup. My buddy just moved to Idaho and paid $35.

Tier 1 in CA is 17 cents/kwh. Tier 2 is like 25 cents and it goes up from there. Do you think anyone living inland can stay in Tier 1 or 2. My bill in Cen Cal is $600-700/mo.

Gas tax in CA is legendary.

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [last tri in 83] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
last tri in 83 wrote:
I pay 11% in state income taxes. It maxs out at 13% which has got to be the highest in the nation.

I just paid $750 to register my pickup. My buddy just moved to Idaho and paid $35.

Tier 1 in CA is 17 cents/kwh. Tier 2 is like 25 cents and it goes up from there. Do you think anyone living inland can stay in Tier 1 or 2. My bill in Cen Cal is $600-700/mo.

Gas tax in CA is legendary.

What year is the truck? I just paid this week $130 in Washington for a 10 year old car.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, in 1879 Henry George wrote Progress and Poverty. The book's claim is that the most eggregious monopoly was land monopoly, and that high property taxes were the best method for society to combat it. I highly recommend the book. The guy was an unbelievable writer -- none of today's dumbing down phenomenon found in so many books.

Anyway, states like Texas are semi-Georgist in their stance with regards to property taxes, and I can see many good things -- good things for society but not necessarily for me -- coming from it.

Here is a short list:

1.) The high property tax is an incentive to purchase a smaller, cheaper home. A $200,000 home means you pay $4,000. Therefore, a $1M home entails $20,000. The amount goes up and down based on yearly value assessments as well. That's money coming straight out of your pocket, and you are never getting it back. Personally, if I had Washington state or California property taxes I would have a home at least 2x in value from my current home. The small property taxes don't really discourage you because they are dwarfed by potential increases in home value over the course of your living in it.

2.) As alluded to in #1, these property taxes help keep home values down. With people electing to allocate less money to housing there is more to go around.

3.) High property taxes also discourage idle land. Often times, when property taxes are really low, the rich can just sit on their property safe in the knowledge that it will appreciate in certain areas because other people are investing in their land. With high property taxes you must "shit or get of the pot" so to speak. The land more quickly finds its most efficient uses.
Last edited by: SH: Mar 7, 18 11:38
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Uncle Arqyle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
2014

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Post deleted by spudone [ In reply to ]
Post deleted by spudone [ In reply to ]
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [SH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the tip, I'll put it on my reading list. I wonder if he would have thought of other asset classes if he was alive today? (stock options?) FYI, Prop. 13 has completely skewed the tax burden here, but it is nearly impossible to do anything with it (too many vested interests, on all sides).

BTW, what did you think about the fact that the Bay Area was less Bernie-centric than the rest of the country?
Last edited by: oldandslow: Mar 7, 18 12:02
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [last tri in 83] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I pay 11% in state income taxes. It maxs out at 13% which has got to be the highest in the nation. //

So you make so much money that you get none of that back?? Good for you, I would not complain if I made so much that I stayed in the highest brackets..


I just paid $750 to register my pickup. My buddy just moved to Idaho and paid $35.

Well your buddy will more than make up for it in increased property taxes, is that where you want to live??

Gas tax in CA is legendary.

Yes, but how much more than other states, and what is the total"difference" at the end of they year? Someone already posted up Washington, looks like maybe the difference is an expensive dinner out for the family.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [last tri in 83] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
last tri in 83 wrote:
2014

Fuuuuck. That's a lot for a 4 year old vehicle.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Uncle Arqyle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fuuuuck. That's a lot for a 4 year old vehicle. //

Thats exactly what I pay for a brand new van too, so must be the liability here that is the killer. And it has gone up two periods in a row, so I'm not really happy about that either. But it is a drop in the bucket compared to my savings on property taxes say compared to Texas...
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [spudone] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
registration

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Uncle Arqyle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The way it was explained to me is that CA assumes every pickup is a commercial vehicle and charges you that way, even if it is just basic transportation.

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The lower rate in CA is offset by the much higher prices in many areas.

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [spudone] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spudone wrote:
This is the Washington depreciation garbage I was talking about. They use their own made-up value instead of what your car is really worth.

http://www.dol.wa.gov/...iation-schedule.html

Do a mental check against the blue book value of your used car and those percentages are insane, esp if you're in the 3-8 year old range. And yeah I'm a grouchy sports car enthusiast :P

Yeah, I know all about this and almost started a thread a few months back. Its complete bullshit. What's really the story in this state is how much our transportation policy is hurting the lower income folks who drive older cars and also live in more remote areas and now have to pay tolls on freeways.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [Uncle Arqyle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Uncle Arqyle wrote:
spudone wrote:
This is the Washington depreciation garbage I was talking about. They use their own made-up value instead of what your car is really worth.

http://www.dol.wa.gov/...iation-schedule.html

Do a mental check against the blue book value of your used car and those percentages are insane, esp if you're in the 3-8 year old range. And yeah I'm a grouchy sports car enthusiast :P


Yeah, I know all about this and almost started a thread a few months back. Its complete bullshit. What's really the story in this state is how much our transportation policy is hurting the lower income folks who drive older cars and also live in more remote areas and now have to pay tolls on freeways.

Wow. I can't believe what some of you are paying.

A few years ago my state started offering permanent registration for vehicles 8 and older (http://doa.alaska.gov/dmv/reg/Perm_Reg.htm).

It cost me a little over $100 to register my pickup, which I intend to drive 'til it dies. Never have to pay another nickel for registration.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It cost me a little over $100 to register my pickup, which I intend to drive 'til it dies. Never have to pay another nickel for registration.//

Man that would be nice to have, also incentivize holding onto cars longer.. But once again it appears that on a $500k house, you would pay about a grand more than the California counterpart, so we pay $650 more a year for the car and you pay $1k more for property taxes. So I still am throwing it out there that unless you are in that top percentile that doesn't get tax money back, CA is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be for the average family..
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
It cost me a little over $100 to register my pickup, which I intend to drive 'til it dies. Never have to pay another nickel for registration.//

Man that would be nice to have, also incentivize holding onto cars longer.. But once again it appears that on a $500k house, you would pay about a grand more than the California counterpart, so we pay $650 more a year for the car and you pay $1k more for property taxes. So I still am throwing it out there that unless you are in that top percentile that doesn't get tax money back, CA is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be for the average family..

A $500,000 house in california gets you something in an armpit like Palmdale. You also have other costs like excessive car insurance because of proximity to mexico, earthquake insurance, sometimes additional fire insurance.
Quote Reply
Re: why do SF real estate prices bother right wingers so much? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
It cost me a little over $100 to register my pickup, which I intend to drive 'til it dies. Never have to pay another nickel for registration.//

Man that would be nice to have, also incentivize holding onto cars longer.. But once again it appears that on a $500k house, you would pay about a grand more than the California counterpart, so we pay $650 more a year for the car and you pay $1k more for property taxes. So I still am throwing it out there that unless you are in that top percentile that doesn't get tax money back, CA is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be for the average family..

Yeah, my property taxes are 1.32%, which is high considering that I have to haul all my garbage 10 miles to a dumpster. But you also have to consider that $500K here will buy a lot more house than in most places in Cal.

We have no state income tax and no sales tax, so my $3K property tax is pretty much all I pay in state/local, other than a few odds and ends like a miniscule gas tax (8cents/gal), a 5% alcohol tax and a $2.50 tire tax (more for studs).

And although the Dividend has been chopped, we still got $1100 each last year here in our little socialist libertarian utopia!
Quote Reply

Prev Next