UT: Dip in property-tax defaults delights county's collector

User Forum Topic
Submitted by pencilneck on August 6, 2009 - 9:34am

UT: Dip in property-tax defaults delights county's collector
http://tiny.cc/JbECl

Did anyone see this article in today's UT? I'm baffled by the increase in the amounts of tax due. I'm wondering if anyone could help explain how property taxes due more than tripled since 2005?

These figures don't include outstanding dues from prior years which would have been my first guess.

Also, remember those blaming California's budget woes on prop. 13? Farcical.

As of | Amount due | Percent | July 1 (in millions) late

2009: $168 |.43 | 3.7

2008: $168 |.63 | 3.8

2007: $112 | .9 | 2.8

2006: $71 | .3 | 2.0

2005: $50 | .8 | 1.6

Submitted by lookingagain on August 6, 2009 - 10:40am.

Pencil,

As I read this, the amount of taxes in default has tripled since 2005, not the total amount of property taxes collected. At $168 million, that is just a bit over $3000 per default.

Submitted by BGinRB on August 6, 2009 - 11:04am.

pencilneck wrote:
UT: Dip in property-tax defaults delights county's collector
http://tiny.cc/JbECl

Did anyone see this article in today's UT? I'm baffled by the increase in the amounts of tax due. I'm wondering if anyone could help explain how property taxes due more than tripled since 2005?

These figures don't include outstanding dues from prior years which would have been my first guess.

Also, remember those blaming California's budget woes on prop. 13? Farcical.

As of | Amount due | Percent | July 1 (in millions) late

2009: $168 |.43 | 3.7

2008: $168 |.63 | 3.8

2007: $112 | .9 | 2.8

2006: $71 | .3 | 2.0

2005: $50 | .8 | 1.6

The chart is messed up.

It should look like this:

As of | Amount due | Percent
2009 | $168.4 | 3.7
2008 | $168.6 | 3.8
2007 | $112.9 | 2.8
2006 | $71.3 | 2.0
2005 | $50.8 | 1.6

David Butler is one of my favorites. What was that thing about getting a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it?
In Butler's case make it a double.

Submitted by pencilneck on August 6, 2009 - 2:25pm.

Thanks, I get it now.

Actual revenue is only up 43% over 5 years, not 300%.

Submitted by fsbo on August 7, 2009 - 1:46am.

I know a guy who has been in property-tax defaults since 2006. Not paying any single cent of property tax, he owes SD county over $20K by now, not including the penalties.
What will be the consequence of property-tax defaults? It seems county's collector would rather collect the tax later for more penalties:)

Submitted by UCGal on August 7, 2009 - 7:45am.

fsbo wrote:
I know a guy who has been in property-tax defaults since 2006. Not paying any single cent of property tax, he owes SD county over $20K by now, not including the penalties.
What will be the consequence of property-tax defaults? It seems county's collector would rather collect the tax later for more penalties:)

I'm curious about this for purely vindictive reasons. The slimy contractor that abandoned our project is currently in default to the tune of over $14k. I'd love to see something more tangible done to him than just being listed in default for a few years. (He also has a state tax lien against him.)
I'm not surprised, he took our money and didn't pay subs... so why would he pay tax obligations. (Like I said - I'm vindictive in my interest. Not the nicest side of my personality.)

Submitted by propertysearcha... on August 7, 2009 - 9:08am.

What is the consequence for not paying your property taxes? Can the county take back your property?

I want to buy a home that was a short sale for 2 years. It is no longer on the MLS and has been vacant for 6 months. The SD County Tax site says it is processing taxes from 2008/2009 since 6/30/2009.

Does that mean a bank bought it and is paying taxes? Or did the county take the property?