When does a Fine become a TAX?

[Jim Richards]

That's a separate, but important, issue, Jim.

[lowyder993s]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

And has Prop 13 kept the state living within its means? Do property taxes even go to the state? Wherever I've lived, they go to the county. And I vote no on every spending/bond issue on every ballot.

They do go to the counties...I'm talking Gov't in general. Had our taxes been pegged to home valuations, during flush times they'd have taken that money and spent it and then some. IMO the best thing is to give them less...moveover, they NEED to live w/in their means as we all do and also have a rainy day fund. So that means spending even LESS than what they take in. Never happen.

[jyl]

Jim and Rick, you are mixing/confusing how "much revenue California gets" with "how volatile that revenue is" and "where that revenue comes from".

My objection with prop 13 is not that it reduces potential state revenues.

My first objection is that prop 13 helps cause those revenues to swing up and down more violently, during in economic cycles, making the state's finances more prone to boom and bust. Because the state gets less property tax, it has to lean heavier on income taxes and sales taxes and other taxes, which are very cyclical.

My next objection is that prop 13 forces young/new homeowners to bear a heavier tax load than old homeowners.

[Jim Richards]

I know it's not much, but elections are your only hope.

[jyl]

California voters caused much of these problems by passing prop 13, prop 98, and constant bond measures. The voters also seemed unconcerned by the extreme gerry-mandering that locks the state in a legislative stalemate at budget time. Failing to pass prop 77 (2005) was idiotic. Finally passing prop 11 (2008) was a long over-due move in the right direction.

I'm not trying to bash California voters uniquely. Here in Oregon we have the ridiculous kicker law which makes it all but impossible to accumulate a sufficient emergency reserve.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by lowyder993s

They do go to the counties...I'm talking Gov't in general. Had our taxes been pegged to home valuations, during flush times they'd have taken that money and spent it and then some. IMO the best thing is to give them less...moveover, they NEED to live w/in their means as we all do and also have a rainy day fund. So that means spending even LESS than what they take in. Never happen.

It has been done in other states. VA has a rainy day fund, is way lower tax than CA, its governor is limited to one term, legislature is part time and they manage to balance their budget. Gotta lay some blame with the voters in both states.

[Jim Richards]

Like RL pointed out earlier, the voters in CA need to start rejecting spending/bond issues that come up at each election.

[Jim Bremner]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Jim, we all (across the nation) pay property tax based on the assessed value of our property. It has nothing to do with our income or ability to pay. Most of us don't have the Prop 13 shield.

I don't understand your concern about illegally parking in a handicap zone. If your wife is handicapped, don't you have a sticker, tag, or plate that indicates you are allowed to park in handicap spots?

I would never park in a handicap spot. 3 years ago I needed to after crushing my T-10 vertebrae to 1/2 of it's height and braking my right ankle in two places.

I'm angry at the rate of the fine. Figure that the average person in the States makes $27 an hour. It's nearly a weeks wage prior to TAX!

The fine is way over the top.

I could see that level of fine if the turd bucket got caught twice.

How much should a regular parking ticket be? $28? I think that's fair. I got one at 9 at night in Huntington beach for $49 that's FARE for an expired meter.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Jim Bremner

How much should a regular parking ticket be? $28? I think that's fair. I got one at 9 at night in Huntington beach for $49 that's FARE for an expired meter.

I hate the whole parking enforcement too. I can't understand why it's free to drive on the streets where you're creating risk and traffic, yet it costs to park there. However, if the nearest parking garage is charging XX, then the fine for illegal parking needs to be plenty more than that to discourage it. In some places it's almost cheaper to get the ticket than to deal with the hunt for a parking garage and then pay what they charge.

[Jim Bremner]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

I hate the whole parking enforcement too. I can't understand why it's free to drive on the streets where you're creating risk and traffic, yet it costs to park there. However, if the nearest parking garage is charging XX, then the fine for illegal parking needs to be plenty more than that to discourage it. In some places it's almost cheaper to get the ticket than to deal with the hunt for a parking garage and then pay what they charge.

Yes, I was wrong for going over the meter. I was on a sales call and wouldn't have thought that I would have 1 been there for two frickin hours. 2 got a parking ticket at 9pm!

This town just spent a TONNE of cash redoing their downtown. It's a good place to go shopping and dining. On the check and included in the envelope was a note saying that it will be a long time before I will come to town to spend $$$

They will lose more in sales tax revenue from me. $20 $30 fine I'm sure that I wouldn't be bitter.

Santa Monica has meters that are 24 hours. After a 11 hour day I was going to eat for the first time in 10 hours I saw a meter maid reading the meter behind me at 8 pm I asked him when did they stop shaking down the cars parked on the street for parking tickets? He said "Christmas"

I drove over to Culver City for diner

[island911]

Originally Posted by jyl

Tobra, do some research on how much California's revenue has declined in the recession. I think in 2009 it went down about 14%. Meanwhile, there's not much state spending that naturally declines in a recession. So the state's budget naturally had a big hole blown through it. The state's political system is also screwed up, that's clear.

The bottom line is; Responsible people/entities plan smartly for future stability.

A State, that big, bringing in billions upon billions, should have some pretty serious reserves. --not living 'paycheck to paycheck.

To point to "revenue has declined 14% in the recession." as an excuse is just pathetic.

Californian, above all, has been spending like a spoiled drunk kids, with some other kid's parent's credit-card.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Jim Bremner

Santa Monica has meters that are 24 hours. After a 11 hour day I was going to eat for the first time in 10 hours I saw a meter maid reading the meter behind me at 8 pm I asked him when did they stop shaking down the cars parked on the street for parking tickets? He said "Christmas"

I drove over to Culver City for diner

I've walked up and down 4th St. in Santa Monica like a panhandler, asking cab drivers to break bills for me at night....more than once.

FWIW, I've fought a ton of parking tickets in court and have never lost. I even won by mail once against NYC. I like to make sure I cost them more than they ever get from me. Nostatic got a ticket while picking me up at LAX once. Cop was such a deeck. He caused more traffic by not letting us move than had we just loaded up his car and been on our way.

[Hugh R]

JYL and others, Prop 13, IMHO, didn't hurt CA. Historically since its passage in 1978, the values of houses here were much greater than in all other states. When house prices in LA County averaged over $500K, they were getting plenty of revenues at 1.25% of assessed values. Including turnovers of houses which started paying at new assessed rates. It did freeze property taxes for businesses as well, so places like Disney Studios/Corporate offices have only paid on the 1978 assessed values, plus the assessed value of improvements. I'm not advocating goring someone else's ox over me (business vs. homeowner). CA has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Unfortunately, the voters here think voting for bonds is free.

[Jim Richards]

Housing values here were much greater than almost all other states. For a while, the house I had in the 'burbs was appreciating at more than $100K/year. BTW, here are our tax rates.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Property Tax Rates: Effective July 1, 2009

Residential real estate property taxes will increase for most Northern Virginia homeowners on July 1.

2010 Residential Real Estate Tax Rates (all rates are per $100 of assessed value):

City Of Alexandria $0.903
Arlington County $0.865 + $0.01 sanitary district fee
Town of Clifton $1.04 + $0.01 stormwater fee
City of Fairfax $0.88
Fairfax County $1.04 + $0.01 stormwater fee
City of Falls Church $1.07
Town of Herndon $1.30 + $0.01 stormwater fee
Loudoun County $1.245
City of Manassas $1.35
Manassas Park $1.65
Prince William County $1.212
Town of Vienna $1.2681 + $0.01 stormwater fee

In addition to the above residential tax rates, the following jurisdictions have approved commercial property tax surcharges (all rates are per $100 of assessed value):

Arlington County $0.125
City of Fairfax $0.08
Fairfax County $0.11

All revenues from the commercial property tax surcharge are dedicated to transportation projects.

[john70t]

state-debt-woes-grow-too-big-to-camouflage: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance Not just California.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by jyl

The fear that old folks will be taxed out of their long-time homes, as house values rise, is easily handled.

Simply allow the property tax payments to be deferred until the home's owner (and spouse) pass away, then the tax is paid from the sale of the house. Easy.

I don't think one group of homeowners should subsidize the other group.

Prop 13 did huge damage to California's finances, by reducing a stable source of revenue (property taxes) and forcing the state to rely more on volatile sources (as explained above). This makes the state more vulnerable in recessions.

Damn right - nor should "non-homeowners" be subsidizing the ones that are underwater because of contracts THEY voluntarily entered into. Problem is the precedent has been set with bailing out stuff that's deemed "too big to fail" (GM, Chrysler, AIG, Citi, etc.) Now "underwater homeowners" are trying to apply the same strategy saying if they're all allowed to go under it'll tank the economy, but I digress. The whole thing is sickening. Nobody likes to hear of anyone facing foreclosure or losing their home but the reality is this is RISK. If you don't like it, don't buy. It's that simple.

The problem with this is it's SO murky and case-by-case as to who bought speculatively and who bought honestly - expecting to live there for a while. It's a difficult if not impossible thing to determine. If ANYONE gets aid, it should only be those who bought in good faith, not looking to do a "quick flip", but how do you determine that? I'd say you could probably exclude all the ARM loans (these were taken typically by speculators hoping to dump the property before the reset) but it's possible that some bought "in good faith" looking to live in the place with an ARM hoping to refi, which now they can't do because the banks won't lend. It would unfairly penalize them I suppose, but maybe it's still better than doing nothing if this segment of the economy really is "too big to fail".

Also, much of CA's problems are systemic and unfixable by any governor or single entity. There's SO much budgetary obligation that's build directly into the state constitution that the state really has very little room to maneuver. Add to that deliberately gerrymandered districts (which effectively force a "Mexican standoff" over every issue constantly - especially the budget which requires a 2/3 majority to pass), ASSembly members who are beholden to special interests (minorities, etc.) CA is going into bankruptcy guys - face it. There's nothing that can fix its problems short of a miracle or a total failure followed by a Constitutional Convention and re-writing of the entire state Constitution. It's not a question of "if", it's a question of "when", and what I'm reading is that the "when" is several months from now at most.

It probably won't be the only one either.

[Jim Richards]

Maybe we could sell California to China, and make Puerto Rico a state so that we don't incur the expense of changing all our flags and flag pins to 49 stars.

[Deschodt]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

I dunno. How would you feel if you were trying to buy the house nextdoor now and it was your first home? You pay 2.5x more in property tax for the same house and same services. Is that fair?

That's exactly the situation in FL, where homes can be homesteaded and prop tax increased are capped...

On the one hand, I am grateful that I am paying taxes on the value of the house when I bought it - it went up since, and down again, but mostly up. On the other hand, my neighbor's been there for 20 years, same size house, and he pays less than 1/2 of what I pay... Fair ? Dunno, I can argue both systems (FL and CA) both ways... I wonder how our kids will ever afford a home though !

What annoyed me the most before I had a kid was paying about 1/2 my $10K prop tax to local schools and getting nothing in return ! ;-)

The very concept of property tax bothers me no end, it is very un-American... You bought the place, yet you need a job just to finance your prop tax. It's a rent on your own home ! I'd much prefer a state tax or a tax on actual consumption, a sales tax that would replace federal and state + county + city.... Make it 20%, I don't care. If you play, you play, if not the bills stop !

My other neighbor pays $16K a year in property tax. If he were to lose his job, there's no way for him to stay in his home... it's wrong ! Say what you will about foreign countries and "socialist" Europe, but over there property tax is a joke compared to the states... Very small amount. You DO pay more income tax, but should the $hit hit the fan, you may not lose your house so readily ! You own it...

I'd prefer higher income/sales tax and ZERO property taxes. Most people don't "feel" this pinch because it part of the mortgage...

[Heel n Toe]

Originally Posted by Jim Bremner

When does a Fine become a TAX?

Off the beaten path, but how about when it's the IRS who's gonna make sure you pay it (as will supposedly be the case in regards to the fine some will be required to pay if they don't wanna buy health insurance under Obama/Reid/Pelosi Care)?

[Tidybuoy]

I didn't see a fee for shooting an officer....perhaps that should be added to the list as it's certain to happen.