patrick.net

Actually it was an initiative, not a referendum.

And actually Idaho has a much better plan than Prop 13 to keep granny in her home.

By Idaho law:
1) All property is taxed at about 1% of assessed value.
2) Assesments are made yearly - up and down.
3) All owner-occupied homes have an approximately $100K exemption. You live in a $400K house you own - you pay property taxes on $300K. All others (investors, commercial property owners) pay full retail.
4) Retired people over a certain age pay property tax on a sliding scale. People at the bottom of income pay NO tax. People in the next tier pay more. People who make above a max threshold pay the going rate.

Malcolm,

And one does not have to go all the way to rich, it is plenty fun just to be comfortable financially. The chap who went from poor to lower middle can enjoy life also, and watch his kids go up the next rung.

"Poor" is a relative term also. I remember the fuss when local Welfare checks started requiring a ink thumbprint to cash. Problem was, the recipient had to see the inside teller, and could no longer use the drive thru.

Prop-13 was an amendment to the state constitution, adopted by a referendum of California voters.

Yup, and the "third rail" of CA politics. Gotta love the Tyranny of the Selfish and Greedy.

Well, I guess Idaho is a no-nonsense state.

Isn't a looter someone who takes money? I'm not sure I follow how not paying taxes is somehow looting. It's sort of like calling a homeowner a squatter, I don't quite follow the definitions being tossed out here.

Yep Headset, the slippery slope of those who label some as rich just because they have more than they do soon slides down the scale to where 100K per year is considered rich. Next thing people know is that they look down one day and see the target on their own chest because being comfortably middle class is rich to some liberal activist who is trying to work a bunch of migrants into a frenzy to get elected.

@DennisN,

The thing is, you will *never* get Boomer voters to amend Prop.13 if they feel you are "taking away" some of their special privileges. Appeals to reason and "fairness" will fail --as they have failed before. We're talking about the ME GENERATION here. They will fight tooth and bong against anything that either: a) increases Boomer taxes, or b) extends those same benefits equally to non-Boomers, esp. later generations.

Bully for Idaho.

We need some leadership here. Most of us are too busy working and commuting and that stuff to get involved. But that's not true for retired fatcats who have the time and the resources to make a difference, but they have to be here to make a difference. Otherwise, what is their point?

That said, if I could, I "might" cash out and leave, too. But if I did, I'd probably not be telling the poor slogs that I left behind how they oughta solve their problems.

Well shoot, that's why I prefaced my fantasy with the US Supreme Court striking down Prop 13. ;)

And there's no compromise. If we were allowed to make government efficient, the debate would be moot. If we had a surplus no one would really care. I'll tell you all what:

Let's get vouchers into the school system, eliminate all entitlements, and I will personally do some transfers here and there as to have my house totally reassed at the new market value. Screw it, I'll just buy a new house, it's time to move up anyway.

BTW, some of us are just naturally generous. I give more to charities in any given year than my current prop 13 savings allow, some people just want to see some results for their social contributions.

Note: I would support Prop. 13 if I got the same 1979 + 2% tax basis as every (Medicare-provided) Viagra-taking, bong-hitting, oversexed, narcisstic CA Boomer. Unfortunately, being from a much later generation, I get to pay full-market-rate tax basis.

Oh my goodness....surfer-x has absconded with HARM's login identity.

funny

Let’s get vouchers into the school system, eliminate all entitlements, and I will personally do some transfers here and there as to have my house totally reassed at the new market value. Screw it, I’ll just buy a new house, it’s time to move up anyway.

Yes. Welfare should be replaced by charity.

Voucher is the way to go.

;-) Hey, now that X rarely posts these days, someone has to tow the line.

That's toe the line.

HARM,

you paying market rate property taxes now? Sounds like besides following surfer-x into superlative, you've followed him (and SQT) into the capitulation. In that case it means that prices aren't near the bottom yet.

This is really, really sad: :(

http://www.luxist.com/2008/02/24/protests-prompt-a-menu-change-at-posh-english-restaurant/

@sybrib,

No, haven't capitulated (yet). Btw, I think you meant LILLL, not SQT.

@DennisN,

Thanks for the correction. Yet another eggcorn to add to the collection.

Around here goosies are my friends and neighbors. No matter where you go around Boise there are goosies walking around and honking.

I really enjoy them.

I also have a semi-auto Winchester SuperX2 12 gauge, a hunting license, and can easily get goose tags.

My kitties and I love poultry.

Well, I guess Idaho is a no-nonsense state.

In Idaho, ballot initiatives are by law normal statutes. In California, the initiatives are constitutional amendments.

In Idaho the legislature can overturn initiatives by regular legislation.

A few years ago, some smarty-pants guys got an initiative on the ballot for state legislature term limits. The voters passed it.

Then everyone realised that this was a dumb idea here. The state senate and house only meet January through March and the salary is $16K. Most state legislators don't run for re-election many times because they can''t afford it.

So the legislature here - Senate and House - overturned the initiative.

There are now no term limits in Idaho, and the general population now is thankful of this fact.

OK, I have to admit, I do very much like your idea of doing away with the deductions from the federal income tax, for mortgage interest and for property tax.

This might also help with other challenges on the federal budget.

dont forgot in p13 anything bought pre-1978 is NOT subject to% yearly raise.
1977 tax rate 4eva.

And I REALLY MEAN FOREVER children inherit the p13 tax basis on home (up to 1 mill per boomer) and corporations cant die anyway, just get sold.

Its going to be hilarious in 50 years when we will have the Capitol records building (and all older buildings) paying 50 cents a year property tax and new buildings(or newly acquired) paying 30 million a year in property tax for same sq footage building. How can you compete? you cant. so we have landed aristocracy both at the business and individual levels.

DennisN,

I like your idea and it will definitely benefit me personally, but I think it has a hard time getting traction in a heavily indebted country like ours.

What I propose has a better chance of getting passed, levy an extra charge on mortgage for its lifetime. In Australia, you actually have to pay extra to the government (something in the neighborhood of several thousand to tens of thousands depending on mortgage loan size) if you take out a mortgage loan on your PRIMARY residence.

HelloKitty Says:
February 25th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
"dont forgot in p13 anything bought pre-1978 is NOT subject to% yearly raise.
1977 tax rate 4eva."

Can you cite a source for that?

sybrib Says:
February 25th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
"OK, I have to admit, I do very much like your idea of doing away with the deductions from the federal income tax, for mortgage interest and for property tax."

So basically people get to pay tax on tax, yikes!

This is way off topic, but I got a great chuckle out of it, courtesy of the folks over at Calculated Risk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6IQ_FOCE6I&eurl=http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/

Repost w/ the correct url:

This is way off topic, but I got a great chuckle out of it, courtesy of the folks over at Calculated Risk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuAJHaXKgFk&feature=related

Freaking hilarious. What else is left now?

So if you're rich and can buy your house outright you contribute zilch to city services. Let all the common folk pay for it.

Brilliant.

OK, I have to admit, I do very much like your idea of doing away with the deductions from the federal income tax, for mortgage interest and for property tax.

Get rid of phantom depreciation deductions for property investors too. That's part of the reason property values are so out of whack, and so damn expensive for the non-investor class. You can make almost as much pretending that your investment property's value is going down as you can collecting rent.

there is whole society that worships Howard Jarvis(wrote p13) and they exist to keep it 4eva alive.

http://www.hjta.org/node/320

BTW: June 6th, 2008 is the 30th anniversay of Prop 13

30 years of inequity and poor land use (poor elderly on SSI in beach front homes which are now crapshacks....near the beach/employment centers.....)

I hope someone starts a 'move outta CA on june 6th day' and every year people can rush to uhaul and leave CA forever.

@malcolm
I might be confused about that part of p13 where pre p13 owners do not pay the 2 percent increase.

her is a quote from a good article
"For purposes of transition from one system to another, Proposition 13 rolled California property values back to their assessed fair market values in 1975-76. California properties which have not been sold or had substantial new construction since the 1975-76 assessment retain the 1975-76 base assessment value indefinitely."

http://vls.law.vill.edu/orgs/tax-law-compendium/Student/prop13.htm

"In Anaheim, for example, the Walt Disney Co. pays on average 5 cents a square foot for some of the Disneyland property it has owned since the 1950s. By contrast, a person who just bought a home at the median Orange County price of$428,000 pays $1.71 a square foot in property taxes."

"In downtown Sacramento, for example, the Holiday Inn pays 22 cents a square foot, while the nearby Sheraton Grand pays $1.45 a square foot, according to data collected by the California Tax Reform Association, an advocate of Proposition 13 reform."

Well i read most of the text of the actual law on the howard jarvis shrine:
http://www.hjta.org/node/67

cant tell if pre 78 purchases are subject to 2%....any accountants here?

You see, I'm not that smart so I need something to help me understand the subprime mess. Fortunately, somebody put this together.

http://docs.google.com/TeamPresent?revision=_latest&fs=true&docID=ddv7hj34_03774hsc7&skipauth=true&pli=1

WARNING: Language

OT to the thread, but may be of interest to Fortress Watchers...

Cupertino's prime area, in the foothills west of Hwy 85, top shcools and everything...

21609 Edward Way
For Sale: $1,325,000
Last Sold Nov 2006: $1,366,000

21422 Elm Ct
For Sale: $1,525,000
Last Sold Dec 2007: $1,567,000

21897 Shattuck Dr
For Sale: $1,350,000
Last Sold Nov 2007: $1,488,000

1100 Elmsford Dr
For Sale: $1,590,000
Last Sold May 2007: $1,625,000

11622 Seven Springs Dr
For Sale: $1,595,000
Last Sold July 2007: $1,670,000

Nice Haircut, Suxorz!

And speaking of haircuts, anyone see the action on GOOG today?

OT but the IRS has now made arrangements for those wanting to deposit their "rebate" directly into their IRA! Use IRS Form 8888 (must be REALLY lucky) or begin on line 73 (Form 1040) to have it deposited directly.

This will apply as a contribution for 2008.

*Not Inv./Tax Advice

DennisN,

Loved it! Are there some loopholes that are bound to be exploited? Sure. Is it healthier than what we currently have? You bet.

"Proposition 13 allows for an upward adjustment in the base assessment value each year for inflation, however it caps this annual adjustment at 2% of base value."

HelloKitty, yes, the next sentence clarifies it. The base amount is set at the 75-76 level "for ever" but is adjusted upwards a maximum of 2% per year. There's no freeze for the older transactions, it was passed in 78 and rolled all the prices back to the 76 level. You're correct in principle, if there are no transfers or significant rennovations the base assessment is the 76 value plus a max of 2% per year.