[quote=bearishgurl][quote=sdrealtor]. . . I have a good friend back in NJ who pays $30,000 per year in property taxes. He lives in 100 year old Tutor home (about 3,000 sq ft in South Orange)he bought in the late 1980’s for about $350,000 and his taxes were about $10,000 at the time. In just over 20 years his taxes have tripled. In California he would have paid about $4,000 at the time fo purchase and 20 years later he might be up to $6,000. Prop 13 keeps tax revenues low for long time owners forcing the municipalities to look to new owners to make up the short fall.[/quote]

sdr, would you purchase this same home today (in NJ) if you knew your current property taxes would be $30K annually??

Just wondering . . .

Do you think it is fair for CA buyers of *new* or *newish* properties to have to “subsidize” (as you call it) the municipal/county services that longtime property owners receive (who are protected by Prop 13)??

If not, do you have a solution to this dilemma??[/quote]

I think the question is for NJ residents not me because I wouldnt ever live there again. The answer is yes, they do it every day. High property taxes are part of the deal for the desireable parts of NJ just like high prices are part of the deal out here.

Do I think Prop 13 is fair? To some extent yes and to some no. It gives those long time residents who harken back to the olden days an advantage over the new arrivals who have necessitated the expanded municipal services. The MR makes its a temporary tax to some extent on the newbies which works also. When the MR expire, they will be on more equal footing.

What doesnt work is keeping the tax basis so low for so long. I met a guy living oceanfront in Carlsbad who paid about $75K for his home in the 1970’s. His house is worth several million but his taxes are still under $4,000. I guess in the long run it all works out eventually. His house is now on the market for about $6M and once sold the taxes will be about $60,000.