San Diego Housing Market News and Analysis

County Assessment has nothing to do with current market value. The assessor personnel probably completed their reassessment of your area before the inventory shortage of late and thus the current rise in sold prices.

Enjoy it and be happy ... for as long as it lasts!

we were reassessed with an additional $50k in value compared to our late 2008 purchase price.

the reassessed price is $130k less than zestimate.

the reassessed price is $270k less than the appraisal value just done a couple of weeks ago from my refi.

so yes, enjoy the low value, it isn't based on reality.

Thanks for sharing your experiences, Bearishgurl and Ocrenter. Good to hear that.

-NicMM

My assessment went down by $100k too. So my property tax will drop next year by $1k approximately...

And no, it has nothing to do with reality.

Side note... I wonder how much this is really hurting our city, in terms of lost revenue.

Can someone explain CA law, as regards Prop-13... Am I correct that once assessment drops, it can't be increased by more than 2% per annum, except if the property is sold? Or does it only mean that it can't be increased by > 2%/yr above the original level at purchase?

It has been awhile since I looked into it, but it is my recollection that the assessment can increase by 2% a year from the original assessed value at purchase.

If you get a temporary assessment drop, it can be increased in future years to reach whatever that original assessment + 2%/yr value turns out to be.

May have something to do with general lack of walls in MM, it is considered a premium these days. I think the county assessor also factor in the overwhelming lizard population in CV as well.

It was covered in this thread.

http://piggington.com/property_tax_minim...

Prop 13 dictates that property taxes can rise no more than 2% per year from 1978 if ownership remains unchanged (exempting offspring who inherit, who get to maintain this break). The 2% maximum annual increase applies to all properties bought after 1978.
If a property falls in market value below its assessed value, you can appeal it and get it lowered. But once its value climbs again the assessment can "catch up", that is, go up in excess of 2% per year until it bounces up against the ceiling of "2% per year increase from date of purchase" rule.
So in the two examples you cited, yes, the two owners will end up paying different property taxes on properties with the same market value.

Cash purchased home...Probably better to sell it back to yourself if you really care.

My walls dissolved. Also no AC and front yard.

No, no no!!! It's the pensions and the union goons, I tell you!

[just messing with you, flu!] :)

I thought people had to REQUEST a reassessment. We did this for our old house (purchased in 2006, asked for reassessment in 2009) and it was granted to us after we filled out a short application including a few recent sales comps.

But I had no idea that the county would just send someone a letter saying, "your house has droped in value and now you owe less." I wonder if this varies between the city and the county assessors?

Our house in OC, tax valuation dropped automatically from $600k+ to >$500k in 2007 and have been holding steady. Just did a refi and appraisal came in at $20k less than tax valuation. I am thinking about appealing to get another $200. May not be worth the hassle yet.

Zillow shows tax valuation of most houses dropped in the last 5 years.

LuckyInOC

Actually this shows that pension promises are not flexible enough to match fluctuation in revenues.

That's why a 401k type system is better. The employer only pays a matching contribution now. That takes away future risks.

Gee, maybe if we fixed the tax laws so that a$$holes like Mitt Romney were forced to pay *at least* as much in taxes (as a percentage of income) as those darn union thugs, we wouldn't be in such a financial mess to begin with!

The dude claims he "doesn't even know" where his overseas investments are??? And some people want him to hold the highest political office in this country?

If what he says is true, he is so out of touch with regular working Americans...he poses a huge threat to any working person in this country.

............

"In an interview with Radio Iowa tonight, Romney claimed ignorance of his exact foreign investments but insisted his financial managers adhere to all applicable laws.

“I don’t manage them. I don’t even know where they are,” Romney said of his portfolio of overseas investments. “That trustee follows all U.S. laws. All the taxes are paid, as appropriate. All of them have been reported to the government. There’s nothing hidden there. If, for instance, you own shares in Renault or Fiat, you still have to disclose that in the United States."

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/201...

Actually, I think those are pretty good answers by Romney.
He is obviously rich and has worked hard and long to get there. He now has spread investments into many areas, has managers looking after those investments, and said investments include foreign ones. Given likely world growth trends by area, it is not surprising he has assets in, say, BRIC countries, maybe depressed european countries, etc. He'd be dumb to not diversify his investments and hire smart people to manage them, and I'd rather not have a dumb guy as president. I am also OK that he now hires others to manage his financial affairs and doesn't know the details of everything--spend time instead on getting ready to be president, should that happen.

+1.

politic, shmolitics
They oughta save their breath
Mean streak - blue streak
They sentence me to death
Seems like everybody's shakin'
'Cause the big one's 'bout to fall
I'm just trying to hold it steady while I
Piss on the wall

I agree with you on this specific point, but you're conflating things.

A more progressive tax system at the Federal level would not have any bearing on the municipalities.

My earlier point was that local governments don't have the budgets in order when 20% of revenue goes to pensions.

First priority should be to services for residents. The problem is that pension contracts take precedence over services that matter to quality of life of local citizens.

Those are good answers indeed, for a private citizen who manages his financial affairs well.

But lousy answers for a presidential candidate who wants to relate to ordinary citizens. Talk about elitist and bragging about your financial sophistication.

dup

dup

The vast majority of working Americans have worked harder and longer than Mitt Romney. He was born into wealth and power, and would likely be in a very different place today if not for his family influence, money, and connections.

BTW, I'm not just talking about investing in foreign companies; I'm talking about the fact that he has accounts in well-known tax havens.

Do you think it's necessary to have accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland, etc. in order to invest in BRIC countries?

It stinks of tax evasion (legal or not, because tax laws are written by and for the wealthy)...and I'll bet he'd be the first one to cut salaries of people who REALLY work (public workers and others), and are barely making ends meet, in order to maintain his unjustifiably low tax rates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/e...

CAR, it's not tax evasion. It's legal tax loopholes. Don't blame romney for it, blame the system...It's no different than anyone else being offered a cake and eat it too.

I would argue the point about most americans work harder than romney. I would also argue that most overseas people I know work a lot harder than people here and are paid considerably lower. Working "harder" doesn't entitle someone to make more money. You could work 120+hrs digging a ditch, and let's face it, it doesn't entitle the person digging the ditch to make more than say a loan officer that does a few loans in a few minutes. And like so many times people say, if it really is that easy to not work that hard and amass that kinda of wealth romney does, the strawman argument would be then that the dig ditcher should quit being a dig ditcher and just be like romney.

It's just funny to me that some people at defending Romney. Those same people think that college professors and environmentally conscious consumers are elitists. But Romney is not elitist.

You buy organic food so that makes you elitist. But Romney with cayman islands tax shelters is not elitist. He's just a hard worker.

Hate the game, not the playa.

Yes, he's taking advantage of the system that was designed by wealthy people like himself.

I was responding to Econ Prof's claim that he "worked long and hard," as if that were justification for his wealth and how he manages it. I'd have far more respect for him if he had WORKED long and hard, but he didn't.

I've met so many people who've transitioned from decent, productive work to flipping homes, "investing," and other non-productive "work" over the past decade or more. It's because we look down our noses at the people who do the work that makes the world go 'round, while placing the "capitalists" on an altar. Apparently, people can't grasp the fact that we can't all be gamblers who bet on the work of other people, or skim a portion of every legitimate transaction as middlemen. Somebody has to do the actual work in order to create the capital.

Our economy is upside-down because of this, and it is behind all of our financial problems as of late, IMHO. Everybody wants to get rich by buying low and selling high, because that's how the game is set up. Nobody wants to do productive work anymore. In this world, work is for losers.