[quote=flu][quote=CA renter][quote=flu] Attempting to lower one’s assessed values to tricks and games as to what Romney has done is purely legal and no different than anyone else trying to lower his/her tax burden. People who rail against Romney doing this better not have submitted his/her or her own reassessment request and/or tried to lower the assessed value by playing games at closing with the closing cost…Otherwise that’s a huge double standard there and an immediate loss of credibility imho.
[/quote]
Realtors (and others) will tell you all day long that the sellers are the ones paying the commissions. If the buyer pays commissions out-of-pocket, why should they be included in the sales price? If the buyer is the one paying the commissions, why can’t they add the costs to their cost basis when they sell? Why should buyers pay **property** taxes on **tranaction** costs?[/quote]
That’s not usually what happens.
What usually happens is the following
Suppose a house is listed at $1million as fair market value let’s just say for purchased of discussion total closing cost is 7%.. I know that’s high.
1. In a normal transaction, buyer pays $1million for the home, seller gets $1million and pays 7% $70k to agent,escrow,etc.
In terms of property tax, $1million is assessed value, and buyer is taxed accordingly…
2. In some transactions, buyer tells seller hey, sell me the house for $930k, and I’ll pay the $70k that normally you would have paid. From sellers, perspective it’s a wash. From buyer’s perspective assessed value is now at $930k.
Legal? Yes…Dodging taxes? Definitely…Again, the key here is what was the intent. The intent was really to get around paying more taxes.
Anything wrong with it?…Not any more wrong that Romney hiring a bunch of lawyers to reduce his/her assessment, with the exception of Romney having a lot more firepower. It’s no different than folks try to skirt paying sales tax.
Bottomline, is it’s always easier for say someone else should pay more taxes. But no one really wants to “do their part”…Everyone just wants someone else to do “their part”.[/quote]
Okay, but let’s say that “fair market value” is based on other sales in the neighborhood. Those sales might (probably) include the commissions in the price of the house. Should the next seller have to pay a higher price because the commissions were baked into the sales prices of neighboring homes?
Tell you what I’ve seen FAR, FAR, FAR more often than buyers paying commission costs: idiot buyers who wrap all the transaction costs into the price of a home. How many times have we seen sellers pay a portion of the buyers’ closing costs and downpayment? Should the next buyer have to pay a higer price because the reported price of the idiot’s house is artificially inflated with all of the “seller assist” goodies?
