Another stupid California Fee

[regency]

Recently sold my one, only & last Rental house. Purchased it in 02, did a bunch of work & up-grades throughout the years. When the financial dust settles, I expect to break even ( I hope ).

So, at the Title Company yesterday, The State of California takes 3-1/3% off the top and then when I do my taxes, we'll see what I will owe or maybe a refund. Fine, I'm ok with that. The STUPID comes in the form of a $50.00 Fee to pay the 3-1/3%.

1973 911 T MFI Coupe, Aubergine
1970 FJ40

Steve

[Jim Bremner]

Would that be Taxation upon Taxation? Kinda like our Sales Tax on new cars followed up by a registration fee that is a tax based on the value of the car! Oh and if it's an imported car there's a DUTY on it wait is that three taxes on that car? Oh and the sales tax is at the end so let's say that there's 3,000 bucks in duty and the importer places a margin on their expense of the duty now that 3k cost you 3,800 and the dealer add his margin now that duty cost you 4,950 now add in your sales tax and it's 5,300 at your end good times.

Hey, what about our gas tax, First there's the federal highway tax followed by our State Highway tax and of course our sales tax.

[look 171]

Originally Posted by regency

Recently sold my one, only & last Rental house. Purchased it in 02, did a bunch of work & up-grades throughout the years. When the financial dust settles, I expect to break even ( I hope ).

So, at the Title Company yesterday, The State of California takes 3-1/3% off the top and then when I do my taxes, we'll see what I will owe or maybe a refund. Fine, I'm ok with that. The STUPID comes in the form of a $50.00 Fee to pay the 3-1/3%.

1973 911 T MFI Coupe, Aubergine
1970 FJ40

Steve

Tell your escrow officer to remove it and pay it later on your gain (if there are any?) when you file in April.

[RWebb]

sounds like a processing fee

is it stupid b/c you have to pay it? (as opposed to not being stupid if people who did not sell their homes were to subsidize you by paying it?)

[sammyg2]

It's stupid because it's yet one more example of gubmint (and other people) thinking they are entitled to your money.
It's as if they think your money belongs to the gubmint and if they allow you to keep a little of your own money, its somehow a subsidy.
In truth they are just hoping to get a little of it for themselves and they think if the gubmint gets it, their chances of getting some increases.

It's the gimmee gimmee gimmee crowd, people who truly believe they are entitled to your stuff because you earned it and they didn't.

[RWebb]

do I understand you correctly, sammy?

you are claiming that others should subsidize the processing fee for sellers?

or just that no one should ever pay taxes for anything?

[regency]

RWebb........U'r right, it is some kind of processing fee. I guess, I'm just "venting" because there is "always" some kind of "processing" fee.

How much Processing is involved in this??

I'm in the service industry & I haven't been able to boost my maintenance fees at all for the last 5 years for fear of my account then going out to bid. All the while, my cost continue to go up. This year alone, my W/Comp has doubled without a single clame in 2 years.

1973 911 T MFI Coupe, Aubergine
1970 FJ40

Steve

[dan88911]

aka extortion fee.

[Esel Mann]

Rwebb,

If I understand the OP correctly, CA is snagging 3.5% upfront (for the benefit of its residents collectively) and then the seller needs to reconcile year end with the state . Most likely CA is trying to solve some sort of cash flow issue? Seems almost like sellers are being forced into loaning the state money but in such a way as it doesn't fall under the borrow bucket for the state?

Additionally if I understand the OP correctly, there is a $50.00 processing fee in processing the 3.5% mandate by CA. If this is correct, then because it is cash flow into the state to keep the state running, for which all its residents benefit, it would seem then such a cost burden in implementing and carrying out such a program be like others, the tax payers of the state collectively are on the hook and not just the seller.

[Evans, Marv]

California takes 9.33% on your capital gains when you sell a rental property. They take 3.5% of that up front. The tax payers aren't collectively on the hook for the "processing fee," only the seller of property they've realized a gain on. If tax payers were "on the hook" collectively, they'd start charging a "processing fee" for processing every ones' income taxes. In fact they'll probably start that next. So at this time a hard working investor pays the California capital gains tax and the federal capital gains tax, which accounts for about a quarter total of your hard work & investment over the years. It may be worse in other states, and will be worse when they raise the federal capital gains tax. In addition, the sale might bump you into the alternative minimum tax bracket too. Screwed, blued, and tattooed.

[Dantilla]

A few years ago I was very interested in an income-producing property in California.

I was about ready to to sign a Purchase Agreement when it occured to me to look into California's tax structure.

...You've got to be kidding......

Not a chance! Told the broker under no circumstance will I consider any property in California!

[look 171]

Originally Posted by Evans, Marv

California takes 9.33% on your capital gains when you sell a rental property. They take 3.5% of that up front. The tax payers aren't collectively on the hook for the "processing fee," only the seller of property they've realized a gain on. If tax payers were "on the hook" collectively, they'd start charging a "processing fee" for processing every ones' income taxes. In fact they'll probably start that next. So at this time a hard working investor pays the California capital gains tax and the federal capital gains tax, which accounts for about a quarter total of your hard work & investment over the years. It may be worse in other states, and will be worse when they raise the federal capital gains tax. In addition, the sale might bump you into the alternative minimum tax bracket too. Screwed, blued, and tattooed.

Marv, its true that is on capital gain only, but when you sell, they take the 3.5% off the sales price. it happen on the last house we sold. I had a little chit chat with my escrow officer and she took it off there but we had to pay percentage on the gain later. I rather hold on to "my" money and pay them when the time comes. Total BS if you ask me.

[Evans, Marv]

Yes, I know how they take the 3.5%. I also agree we'd all like to hold onto our money, but the states (especially CA) and the feds are starting to take theirs up front more and more. I sold my last rental 10 years ago. I believe that was before they implemented taking the up front tax portion - at least I didn't have to go through that at the time. There is a lot of BS. The common tax payer person is getting screwed more & more as time goes on. Where will it ever end? It's because the sheeple keep returning the same people to state & fed governments.

[look 171]

I don't think it will ever end. I am not sure how to put a stop to it? We just have to make more to keep up with the feeding.

[onewhippedpuppy]

aka extortion fee.

Aka tax.

[fred cook]

Yet another reason to stay out of Kalifornia! I've been there a couple of times, once in the military, the other as a visitor. Didn't see a thing that would bring me back! Maybe the world will get lucky and the San Andreas fault will do it's thing soon! Nevada needs some ocean front property!

[look 171]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Fred.

[Jim Richards]

Yeah, California sucks! Stay away! Blah, blah, blah!

[70SATMan]

I hate it here but, I'm to weak and scared to leave.

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by 70SATMan

I hate it here but, I'm to weak and scared to leave.

Figures.

rjp