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

Relief prospects

November 29, 2013

For more than 30 years, our state legislators have tried and failed to give real property tax reform to homeowner....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(34)

ToTEXASfromPA

Nov-30-13 8:45 PM

"Carlhiller owns one property but by God he will defend the privileged of those who own trillions of dollars in real estate deluded in thinking he is of their class"--Shulski

++

Maybe I misunderstood what CarlHiller was pointing out.......I thought that he was saying......The property tax will still be in effect to pay various hospital, water/sewer, or other miscellaneous utility districts so it doesn't completely disappear. And the only way to completely get rid of it is an amendment; the HB law does not completely get rid of it. He wasn't trying to defend rich property owners.

My concern is that trying to change the way school taxes are raised will totally screw some people. Since there state income tax increases and sales tax increase, they may have less discretionary income left to buy a home.

There are not enough details to run numbers for people and the 'devil' is in the details. I just don't trust the pols.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-30-13 1:05 PM

Kraut's, ****, blockheads, all dumb, ignorant rubes of luck county

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-30-13 1:05 PM

Realtors want less property taxes for Justice and not profit motivated. Yeah, and Rick Miravito ran on a platform of less property taxes out of the kindness of his heart.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-30-13 1:03 PM

Carlhiller owns one property but by God he will defend the privileged of those who own trillions of dollars in real estate deluded in thinking he is of their class

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-30-13 1:02 PM

Made if your corporate overlords were afraid of you enough to raise your taxes you could pay your taxes. Instead, you cower in fear and defend the ruling class as foolishly and delusionally as a battered wife. Yeah, fox watching Fox News and blaming the ****** is no different than a battered wife of a corporate alcoholic. Dumb

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Nov-30-13 8:05 AM

As a homeowner I want to see a total elimination of property taxes. I don't want to fret over having someone come in and evict me from my home, a real problem that many seniors face. Both the Senate and House bills on the topic are far from becoming law thankfully.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Nov-30-13 7:53 AM

Read the Independent Fiscal Office report on HB76/SB76. The IFO was created by Act 120 of 2010. Remember ACT 120, the one that was supposed to address major pension reforms affecting both the PSERS and SERS. They have some great reading material on a number of topics that you usually do not hear about from our legislators. I am also aware of the PTCC's (Pennsylvania Taxpayers Cyber Coalition) report on the effects of HB76 / SB76, they are wrong on a number of accounts, one being that these bills are the complete elimination of school property taxes, they emphatically do not eliminate them. The only way to eliminate property taxation is through Constitutional amendment to the PA Constitution. These bills along with all the others that have been proffered throughout 2013 are tax shifting bills. There are none that address the issue of not re-instating a school property tax.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BillTriumph

Nov-30-13 6:59 AM

Well shouldn't we ONLY tax the rich? Since homeowners are the rich the current system is obviously "fair". To make it even fairer mortgage interest tax deductibility along with property tax credits should be eliminated. The Government could then step in and cook up another easy credit scheme to relieve the glut of housing by allowing people with no income, job, or assets to obtain mortgages. What could go wrong?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nobud74

Nov-29-13 9:40 PM

The idea of spreading the cost to include everyone sounds good, but pols have no stomach for it. It will affect their voting base, so they won't do it. They will continue to hose the elderly because they will continue to vote the same way they always have--can't teach old dogs new tricks.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nobud74

Nov-29-13 9:39 PM

Shulski, the youth are the ones who must make this happen. The older (over 40) have become pretty set in their ways and aligned with one mess of a party or the other. When the youth finally realize O and his administration are purposely burdening them with the debt for all his programs and policies I hope they can pull off a third party that actually works for the people and not the government/big business/government employees/welfare lifers and all the rest who are a drag on the economy.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 5:53 PM

I mean welfare or warfare. Both cost money

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 5:53 PM

Capricorn, sorry to hear. Taxes and bad credit will be the death of this nation. Taxes need to come from somewhere. Or a truly libertarian party must arise. As I see it, it's either warfare or warfare. Republicans just wanrpt more cops, prisons and war, which are just as expensive as giving out money to people who don't want to work. It's why I like Ron Paul

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Nov-29-13 3:25 PM

Shulski, whatever profit is being made would be taxable income, so the real estate people would still be paying taxes on it.

Why do you feel the need to punish the poorer homeowners to get to the 'real estate people'?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Nov-29-13 3:13 PM

Shulski, what about all the people that would love to own their own home but the added burden of property taxes puts their dreams out of reach? On the house I recently sold, I personally had to turn away three young couples that could afford the mortgage but the taxes made it too difficult for them to buy.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 2:00 PM

Did you ppl ever hear of Google searches?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 2:00 PM

Sure, and realtors Remax don't own any apartment buildings they have to pay taxes on. No condos to pay taxes on. Just kind hearted businessmen.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 1:55 PM

Oh sure, the real estate agency just wants less property taxes out of the kindness of their hearts and out of civic duty. Sure they don't pay real estate taxes. And they never own any property. They won't sell more homes if real estate taxes are lower. No, theres no profit motive. And it wasn't they weren't complicit in tanking the housing market along with bad lending from banks. That was all Barney Frank's fault.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Nov-29-13 11:18 AM

Shulski-"Realtors support it because it'll make them more money from less taxes on all the properties they own"

Realtors don't necessarily own property. But those who do and rent it out will pay income taxes on the rent they collect and sales taxes for any improvement/repair they make.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shulski

Nov-29-13 10:52 AM

The West Branch Valley Association of REALTORS and the Pennsylvania Association of Realtors (PAR) support Senate Bill 76 because it offers real reform"

Realtors support it because it'll make them more money from less taxes on all the properties they own,. Of course, people who own only one home or rent will support then reform just because it sounds like less taxes. Sadly, it'll probably raise income and sales taxes. More cops, prisons and wars will be ordered by local politics thus raising all taxes

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Fredzz

Nov-29-13 10:36 AM

This is a shortened version of an old story that will increase one's ability to decipher Legal Speech.

The power of the Comma...!

A businessman went to an very important out of State meeting.

His wife was very ill and home bound.

They agreed that if she needed him she was to send a telegram and he would return home.

Later she sent a telegram... ( Not getting any better, come home soon. )

When the telegram was sent the comma was in the wrong position.

( Not getting any, better come home soon. )

Same words..... major difference in meaning.

When reading "" Legal Speech "". Move that comma around and see just how many ways both simple & complex speech can be interrupted

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Nov-29-13 10:00 AM

David asks a good question. What would be subject to sales tax and what would not? Our sales tax laws are almost as bad as our income tax laws. For a law to be fair, it must apply equally to everyone and everything. If you are going to have a sales tax, it should be universal. It must apply to the sale of real estate (this writer would hate that), and even rent. If you are going to tax commerce, you must tax all commerce. An income tax, should be just an extension of the sales tax. You are in essence selling your services to your employer, so your pay, if taxed at all should be taxed at the sales tax rate. A tax on commerce and not property is the only tax that should be allowed if we intend to call ourselves a free people, because in order to be free, you must be able to own property and if the government can tax it, you don't really own it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Nov-29-13 9:38 AM

Let me start by saying that I am opposed to the very idea of property tax. A tax on what is owned, negates the very premise of private ownership. But I also oppose property tax reform that just shifts the burden to another source. The bigger problem that isn't being addressed is spending reform. Hiding the taxes in payroll withholding actually makes it easier for politicians to spend more and that is exactly what they will do. And after they have lowered your property taxes with this so-called reform, they will steadily increase again until it is just as if no reform was taken. I've seen it happen. Without spending reform, tax reform means nothing.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Nov-29-13 9:26 AM

A lot of those opposed to property tax reform don't own property. No matter how it's sliced, taxing someone on the perceived value of something they own is an unfair levy of taxes.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Nov-29-13 8:14 AM

I think supporting a switch from property taxes to sales and income taxes is a good idea. They focus on liquid assets. Of course it depends on what is included / excluded. For example, would the sales tax apply to the purchase price of real estate?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Nov-29-13 7:58 AM

Cap, I believe a Constitutional amendment would be the more prudent first step, with a law in the works to fund those that depend on the property taxes for their funding. Without that any law would simply be the stepping stone to higher taxes along with the property tax.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 34 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