Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Unfair taxation

June 15, 2013

I have one question. I’m sure a lot of other retirees who own property want to know the same answer....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(46)

nobud74

Jun-18-13 7:06 AM

I agree spike. I have put lots of money into my rentals that have become vacant. By doing so I am able to charge more and get a better tenant. But, the real key is that I have started to use a realtor to do the background work for me as well as draw up the leases. It not only saves me time, but I have gotten better renters. It costs a bit, but I believe it is worth it in the long run.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Jun-17-13 11:46 AM

Enigma - i own properties. Where did you get the idea that rentals do not follow the same discount period? the only period that is different is the tax that allows the payment to be made in three payments at discount rather than one payment. This does apply only to a homeowner. If you believe rent can always be increased enough to offset taxes, you are crazy. Landlords are also offsetting increases in insurance, increases in water, increases in labor and/or materials for repair. You can include all these and raise rents, however, you can also move rent to a level that is not sustainable by tenants. You then create a transient building and are a contributing cause to declining neighborhoods. Understand, I am talking about areas like lower Vallamont that should remain stable given the mixture of renters and homeowners. Not as simplistic as you set forth.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Jun-16-13 3:18 AM

cheyenne - 2:03 PM

"Correct me if I'm mistaken(and I know you will), didn't someone propose broadening the sales tax a few years back as a means to possibly eliminate property taxes?" Anyone remember Rep. Tony Cimini? we used to have some great conversations and one of the things we agreed on was replacing the property tax with an inrease of 1% state income tax and 2% inrease in sales tax. The money would be placed in a separate account to be used ONLY for financing eduation. He also believed Philly got too large a share of education financing.

Instead of using a "formula" to pay out the money, the payments would be based on dividing the total number of students in the state into the available dollars, and then multiplying the number of students in each school to come up with the amount they would receive. That way, each (STUDENT) would receive the same amount whether from Williamsport or Philly!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Jun-16-13 3:06 AM

Saw this on a blog on the subject of education in the U.S.....

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, write the curriculum.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Jun-16-13 2:59 AM

MrShaman - 8:32 AM

"I can only guess that long-term investing has become another o' those "evils" that Wall $treet has "sold" to the 'Baggers; via The Axis Of Ignorance (FAUX Noise, Porky Limbaugh, NY Post)."

Sham is the poster boy for "Ignorance is bliss."

Everyone knows you should be getting your FACTS from the liberal nut jobs on Youtube.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jun-15-13 6:29 PM

nobud74-"I would rather see a way where it can be raised and kept locally but I have no idea how that could be done."

It's already being done. Our district went from an 'occupational assessment' tax, based on a person's job title, to a percentage based income tax levied by the local school district and collected by the employer. The structure is already there, all we have to do is take advantage of it.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jun-15-13 6:25 PM

CHayes-Jun-15-13 5:19 PM post

Chris, Re the landlord issue, 1) the landlord would still pay taxes on the income from the rent and, like any other business, would figure that into what they charge. 2) the renters would now also pay based on their income. So I don't see the problem here.

Re changing to an income based system from a property tax system, again I don't see the problem.

A family of 4 making $60k living on an acre of ground with a 1200 sq ft mobile home with no foundation pays about $600/year in school property taxes in my district. Their neighbors who are retired and living on $1500/month SS living in a 1200 sq ft stick built home with an unfinished basement pays $2000/year in school property taxes.

Tell me why you, or anyone, think that property taxes are fair.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jun-15-13 5:54 PM

I have to disagree with those who seem to want to make Social Security am entitlement. It's not. People paid into the system all their life with the guarantee of a payout at retirement age. We've also paid taxes for medicare all of our working career. Yes, some people don't plan well for retirement and don't have two pennies to rub together at the end of the month. Some retired out of necessity, so you can't lump them all into the 'just work longer' group. Not to mention the fact that with unemployment so high it would be difficult to find and keep a job at that age.

But none of that changes the fact that the property tax is unfair. Any tax based on a perceived value rather than earned income is an unfair tax.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nobud74

Jun-15-13 5:51 PM

If you want to reduce property tax by increasing another tax, I'd think the most equitable way to do that would be to raise state income tax by a quarter or a half point. Or if you want to eliminate property tax, increase it by the amount that would be required to do that. --CH

That's an idea. But my issue with it would be that every time we send money to Harrisburg or DC we have to fight to get it back and that leads to two things. It leads to our pols being bought so they can "bring home the bacon", and it leads to mandates from the state or fed govt as to how we can spend the money we get back. I would rather see a way where it can be raised and kept locally but I have no idea how that could be done.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-15-13 5:19 PM

The problem from a socio economic standpoint of a sudden reduction in property taxes like that is that landlords aren't exactly going to line up to start cutting people's rent. Property tax is basically a hidden component of rent, so what would wind up happening, is renters would absorb the brunt of the changes, and that isn't really equitable.

So to put a bow on it, I might be ok in property tax relief if it was a small shift to income tax, and I would oppose a big change like property tax elimination, unless it were gradually phased in over many years.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-15-13 5:14 PM

" Correct me if I'm mistaken(and I know you will), didn't someone propose broadening the sales tax a few years back as a means to possibly eliminate property taxes? I'm thinking it may have been State Rep. Cappelli, but I could be mistaken. Curious to know what other's thoughts are on that idea."

I think its bad for retail business, and online stores located in PA that need to collect sales tax on the products they sell. It can be particularly hard on border adjacent businesses.

If you want to reduce property tax by increasing another tax, I'd think the most equitable way to do that would be to raise state income tax by a quarter or a half point. Or if you want to eliminate property tax, increase it by the amount that would be required to do that.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jun-15-13 3:19 PM

"That was a cruel comment, Chuck, especially coming from someone who doesn't maintain his own property."

You have no idea what you are talking about. Education is for the common good. Apparently you need more of it.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 3:01 PM

Am I hot over this topic, indeed! The comments are all over the wall. That's O.K. too because we differ in our opinions. I thought the "right" conservative, outside of Mike and I would take a few hits. Come on conservatives. There are a host of issues why some people work/retire when they chose to. At least their entitlement was contributed to. Age gathers many issues into why some retire. If working until one can afford to retire is a prerequisite to opining about an unfair system, then some wouldn't have a voice until they dropped dead. I understand working till later than 62 or 65. That doesn't hurt most, but let's at least recognize that they worked, unlike the unproductive people who just take and take and take. We should address the takers, before we address the givers. We might have some money left in our budget. :)

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:54 PM

"A more important question might be why do I have to pay taxes for a federal Office of Faith Based Initiatives? "

You know Hayes, for once I was going to agree with your post, especially for those who have no children....but when I got to the end statement, I wondered why anyone would go so far off topic,,,and felt sorry for you once again.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:51 PM

"We all benefitted from education, well we are all suppose to but from reading this letter and some of the posts it apparently did not take."

That was a cruel comment, Chuck, especially coming from someone who doesn't maintain his own property.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:50 PM

Jerry, one more time we agreed. :)

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:49 PM

Error....

Property taxes don't take care of the issues you raised.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:48 PM

radioactive,

Solutions, not sarcasm work much better. Property taxes take care of the issues you raised.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:47 PM

Mike,

Great post of 4:30 am...

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:46 PM

JustSomeGuy,

Surely you jest.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jun-15-13 2:44 PM

Betty, you just parroted a few posts that are on another letter recently submitted to this paper. You are not alone in your thoughts. In a perfect world, you shouldn't be taxed on your property, past retirement age. I run against my conservative friends when I bring this matter up. What the conservatives fail to realize is that until we reform welfare (that is indeed needed welfare) no reform will work. My son, his wife and baby are at an "in between lapse of medical insurance" because of a job change (not unemployed). They have 60 days of no insurance. My son would have been better off not working, at least he would get benefits. I sympathize with you, as a senior. My parents are in the same boat as you. Not to worry....affordable health care is coming January 1, 2014....

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

cheyenne

Jun-15-13 2:03 PM

Correct me if I'm mistaken(and I know you will), didn't someone propose broadening the sales tax a few years back as a means to possibly eliminate property taxes? I'm thinking it may have been State Rep. Cappelli, but I could be mistaken. Curious to know what other's thoughts are on that idea.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-15-13 1:28 PM

" Obviously, the significant portion went elsewhere."

Sure it did. As I pointed out, it went to cover NCLB, and what the state rightly felt at the time would be a significant outlay for the REAL ID Act, that was so ridiculous,that it was essentially just walked away from by the Feds.

I suppose it would be fair to assume that the gambling revenue prevented these other factors from increasing your taxes considerably. Is that a "tax cut"? Not really, but its not an increase either.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

cheyenne

Jun-15-13 12:49 PM

Excuse me, Hayes. That should have been state authorized, not state-run, by Act 71, whose major objective was to deliver a significant source of revenue for property tax relief. Obviously, the significant portion went elsewhere.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-15-13 11:42 AM

" Why should I have to pay taxes to pay for prisons if I am not incarcerated."

Comment of the day.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 46 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web