Reminder: Your massive property taxes are due

[bearishgurl]

I want to take partial issue with Prop 13. I am a lifelong CA resident but my parents divorced and moved to other states (after us kids were gone) where they subsequently retired and died.

I live in an area (central Chula Vista) where the average homeowner age is 77. Not only do most of my neighbors own their homes outright, their PT’s are regulated by Prop. 13. Average taxes on my block are $327 annually. Mine are now $3434, ONLY after a 1-1/2 year-long appeal and stipulated agreement with the (overloaded) assessor just short of a scheduled hearing (I purchased this particular property in 2001).

These post-World-War II homeowners (who keep up their properties themselves or hire it done) eventually die, thereby leaving their propertie(s) to their child(ren). What happens next really incenses me. The decedents’ 50-65 year-old “children” then move into the property (BTW this is also my demographic), PROMPTLY use it as their personal ATM machine, INHERIT THEIR PARENT(S) LOW TAX BASIS and let the property go to waste while they and their families are living in it. In all cases that I know of, these “children” had never owned real property in their lives until “mom and dad” both died.

I don’t think a Prop. 13 tax basis should be transferable through an interfamily transfer deed or by the filing of a death certificate. I think the law should be rewritten to repeal this loophole. I think real property in CA should be reassessed on a stepped-up basis at the time of death. My experience is that many heirs, it seems, have NO APPRECIATION WHATSOEVER for property that they never had any financial stake in and NO CLUE how to maintain real property. A stepped-up PT at the time of death might weed out the local heirs from moving into the property and living there for free (except for utility payments). Instead these “heirs” might be encouraged to SELL the property to a “qualified” party as opposed to attempting to live in it themselves (on TANF/SSD/OASDI/SSI/Worker’s Comp/UI/VA Disability etc.) and “attempt” to pay annual property taxes they couldn’t otherwise afford.

BTW, this post isn’t just a “sour grapes” rant. Both my parents left me and my siblings real property in other states, neither of which had “Prop. 13” – type legislation in place. We simply sold the properties rather than try to place tenants in them and keep up the taxes and, in one case, HOA dues.

“Heir ATM machines” (all encumbered with sucker loans made to “equity holders” with no other capacity to borrow) were representative of the three foreclosures on the block in recent months/years, which hurt the rest of our property values. “Mom and Dad” must be turning over in their graves by now.

This is NOT a small issue. The state and counties could realize A LOT of teeter funds coming their way via the reassessment of properties through deaths. Pre-1978 original property owners are a large demographic in CA who will pass down their wealth through their depression-era savings mentality.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] but prison guards (and cops, in general) have one of the toughest jobs out there.[/quote]

Tough has nothing to do with pay. It’s supply and demand.

Fruit pickers have tough jobs. But the state doesn’t pay them high wages.

If we want good schools, we need to cut back elsewhere or raise taxes. I don’t believe the voters want higher taxes.

But I so see the school bond issues getting passed. That’s because parents are selfish and want to pass the cost of their children’s education onto future generations. We can’t do that forever. One day, there won’t be enough money to pay back the debt (unfortunately, I don’t know when that day will be).

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] but prison guards (and cops, in general) have one of the toughest jobs out there.[/quote]

Tough has nothing to do with pay. It’s supply and demand.

Fruit pickers have tough jobs. But the state doesn’t pay them high wages.

If we want good schools, we need to cut back elsewhere or raise taxes. I don’t believe the voters want higher taxes.

But I so see the school bond issues getting passed. That’s because parents are selfish and want to pass the cost of their children’s education onto future generations. We can’t do that forever. One day, there won’t be enough money to pay back the debt (unfortunately, I don’t know when that day will be).

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] but prison guards (and cops, in general) have one of the toughest jobs out there.[/quote]

Tough has nothing to do with pay. It’s supply and demand.

Fruit pickers have tough jobs. But the state doesn’t pay them high wages.

If we want good schools, we need to cut back elsewhere or raise taxes. I don’t believe the voters want higher taxes.

But I so see the school bond issues getting passed. That’s because parents are selfish and want to pass the cost of their children’s education onto future generations. We can’t do that forever. One day, there won’t be enough money to pay back the debt (unfortunately, I don’t know when that day will be).

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] but prison guards (and cops, in general) have one of the toughest jobs out there.[/quote]

Tough has nothing to do with pay. It’s supply and demand.

Fruit pickers have tough jobs. But the state doesn’t pay them high wages.

If we want good schools, we need to cut back elsewhere or raise taxes. I don’t believe the voters want higher taxes.

But I so see the school bond issues getting passed. That’s because parents are selfish and want to pass the cost of their children’s education onto future generations. We can’t do that forever. One day, there won’t be enough money to pay back the debt (unfortunately, I don’t know when that day will be).

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] but prison guards (and cops, in general) have one of the toughest jobs out there.[/quote]

Tough has nothing to do with pay. It’s supply and demand.

Fruit pickers have tough jobs. But the state doesn’t pay them high wages.

If we want good schools, we need to cut back elsewhere or raise taxes. I don’t believe the voters want higher taxes.

But I so see the school bond issues getting passed. That’s because parents are selfish and want to pass the cost of their children’s education onto future generations. We can’t do that forever. One day, there won’t be enough money to pay back the debt (unfortunately, I don’t know when that day will be).

[UCGal]

Bearishgurl…

Hey – I resemble that remark. LOL.

What about kids who purchase, at market value, from their parents?

That’s what I did. When my dad was ready to downsize, he needed/wanted the equity to fund his new home and his retirement. I paid full market value – but had Dad’s prop-tax-rate transferred. My neighbors across the street did the same thing 4 years earlier when their dad was downsizing. The guy at the top of our street did it about 7 years earlier. Only one 2nd gen’er on our block inherited the house, the guy 2 doors up – but he was primary caretaker for his mom for the final 10 years – he inherited 1/2 the house – he paid his brother for the other half.

I know for a fact that most of us owned other homes before purchasing from our parents. This is my third home. Neighbors across the street and up the hill both owned in Clairemont before moving back to the homestead in UC.

None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.

I can see an argument against transferring the prop 13 rate between generations. I also agree with CAR’s point about prop 13 being disallowed for non-owner-occupied… But, since it was available, I took advantage of it. But it wasn’t a full-on freebie. My dad was downsizing and hoped to transfer his tax rate to his new condo… You can’t do both. We decided to pool the two property taxes and split them – that way we both got some benefit.

As far as maintenance… well, perhaps I resemble that remark too… My front yard has a lot of weeds. My bad. But the other 2nd gen owners all have impeccable houses.

[UCGal]

Bearishgurl…

Hey – I resemble that remark. LOL.

What about kids who purchase, at market value, from their parents?

That’s what I did. When my dad was ready to downsize, he needed/wanted the equity to fund his new home and his retirement. I paid full market value – but had Dad’s prop-tax-rate transferred. My neighbors across the street did the same thing 4 years earlier when their dad was downsizing. The guy at the top of our street did it about 7 years earlier. Only one 2nd gen’er on our block inherited the house, the guy 2 doors up – but he was primary caretaker for his mom for the final 10 years – he inherited 1/2 the house – he paid his brother for the other half.

I know for a fact that most of us owned other homes before purchasing from our parents. This is my third home. Neighbors across the street and up the hill both owned in Clairemont before moving back to the homestead in UC.

None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.

I can see an argument against transferring the prop 13 rate between generations. I also agree with CAR’s point about prop 13 being disallowed for non-owner-occupied… But, since it was available, I took advantage of it. But it wasn’t a full-on freebie. My dad was downsizing and hoped to transfer his tax rate to his new condo… You can’t do both. We decided to pool the two property taxes and split them – that way we both got some benefit.

As far as maintenance… well, perhaps I resemble that remark too… My front yard has a lot of weeds. My bad. But the other 2nd gen owners all have impeccable houses.

[UCGal]

Bearishgurl…

Hey – I resemble that remark. LOL.

What about kids who purchase, at market value, from their parents?

That’s what I did. When my dad was ready to downsize, he needed/wanted the equity to fund his new home and his retirement. I paid full market value – but had Dad’s prop-tax-rate transferred. My neighbors across the street did the same thing 4 years earlier when their dad was downsizing. The guy at the top of our street did it about 7 years earlier. Only one 2nd gen’er on our block inherited the house, the guy 2 doors up – but he was primary caretaker for his mom for the final 10 years – he inherited 1/2 the house – he paid his brother for the other half.

I know for a fact that most of us owned other homes before purchasing from our parents. This is my third home. Neighbors across the street and up the hill both owned in Clairemont before moving back to the homestead in UC.

None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.

I can see an argument against transferring the prop 13 rate between generations. I also agree with CAR’s point about prop 13 being disallowed for non-owner-occupied… But, since it was available, I took advantage of it. But it wasn’t a full-on freebie. My dad was downsizing and hoped to transfer his tax rate to his new condo… You can’t do both. We decided to pool the two property taxes and split them – that way we both got some benefit.

As far as maintenance… well, perhaps I resemble that remark too… My front yard has a lot of weeds. My bad. But the other 2nd gen owners all have impeccable houses.

[UCGal]

Bearishgurl…

Hey – I resemble that remark. LOL.

What about kids who purchase, at market value, from their parents?

That’s what I did. When my dad was ready to downsize, he needed/wanted the equity to fund his new home and his retirement. I paid full market value – but had Dad’s prop-tax-rate transferred. My neighbors across the street did the same thing 4 years earlier when their dad was downsizing. The guy at the top of our street did it about 7 years earlier. Only one 2nd gen’er on our block inherited the house, the guy 2 doors up – but he was primary caretaker for his mom for the final 10 years – he inherited 1/2 the house – he paid his brother for the other half.

I know for a fact that most of us owned other homes before purchasing from our parents. This is my third home. Neighbors across the street and up the hill both owned in Clairemont before moving back to the homestead in UC.

None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.

I can see an argument against transferring the prop 13 rate between generations. I also agree with CAR’s point about prop 13 being disallowed for non-owner-occupied… But, since it was available, I took advantage of it. But it wasn’t a full-on freebie. My dad was downsizing and hoped to transfer his tax rate to his new condo… You can’t do both. We decided to pool the two property taxes and split them – that way we both got some benefit.

As far as maintenance… well, perhaps I resemble that remark too… My front yard has a lot of weeds. My bad. But the other 2nd gen owners all have impeccable houses.

[UCGal]

Bearishgurl…

Hey – I resemble that remark. LOL.

What about kids who purchase, at market value, from their parents?

That’s what I did. When my dad was ready to downsize, he needed/wanted the equity to fund his new home and his retirement. I paid full market value – but had Dad’s prop-tax-rate transferred. My neighbors across the street did the same thing 4 years earlier when their dad was downsizing. The guy at the top of our street did it about 7 years earlier. Only one 2nd gen’er on our block inherited the house, the guy 2 doors up – but he was primary caretaker for his mom for the final 10 years – he inherited 1/2 the house – he paid his brother for the other half.

I know for a fact that most of us owned other homes before purchasing from our parents. This is my third home. Neighbors across the street and up the hill both owned in Clairemont before moving back to the homestead in UC.

None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.

I can see an argument against transferring the prop 13 rate between generations. I also agree with CAR’s point about prop 13 being disallowed for non-owner-occupied… But, since it was available, I took advantage of it. But it wasn’t a full-on freebie. My dad was downsizing and hoped to transfer his tax rate to his new condo… You can’t do both. We decided to pool the two property taxes and split them – that way we both got some benefit.

As far as maintenance… well, perhaps I resemble that remark too… My front yard has a lot of weeds. My bad. But the other 2nd gen owners all have impeccable houses.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Bearishgurl…
None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.[/quote]

UCGal, my post above wasn’t directed to any one poster.

I think if you grew up in UC, the OLDEST properties up there might be circa 1968 or 1971. My block was built in 1949. Thus, the “heirs” on my block are probably a generation older than your one neighbor “heir” who cared for his mom. All of the “heirs” I am speaking of here are living on a small FIXED income. This type of income by itself cannot maintain a house and utilities, much less market property taxes. A person with this type of low income can only obtain a “sucker” equity loan or reverse mortgage, if old enough. These “heirs” are too old NOW to EVER pay off the loans they took out on their free and clear “bequest.” (The banks knew this, obviously, but that’s another story.)

Two of my neighbors as “heirs” even qualified for “lifeline” utility rates. One “heir” actually moved out of his van that he had lived in for seven years into Dad’s house, as soon as he died!

Re: maintainence, I’m not even talking about weeds after a rain. I’m talking about real eyesores such as long-unfinished room additions, never-running vehicles, etc. This was all started or parked after the heir moved in.

UC’s younger demographic is evident in that you and your neighbors purchased your childhood home while your parents were STILL ALIVE and you are still employed and have kids in school. My neighbor “heirs” are retired and/or long-disabled with grown children.

Acc. to your post, your neighbors don’t appear to be trying to run their entire households on $800 – $1500 (fixed income) per month.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Bearishgurl…
None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.[/quote]

UCGal, my post above wasn’t directed to any one poster.

I think if you grew up in UC, the OLDEST properties up there might be circa 1968 or 1971. My block was built in 1949. Thus, the “heirs” on my block are probably a generation older than your one neighbor “heir” who cared for his mom. All of the “heirs” I am speaking of here are living on a small FIXED income. This type of income by itself cannot maintain a house and utilities, much less market property taxes. A person with this type of low income can only obtain a “sucker” equity loan or reverse mortgage, if old enough. These “heirs” are too old NOW to EVER pay off the loans they took out on their free and clear “bequest.” (The banks knew this, obviously, but that’s another story.)

Two of my neighbors as “heirs” even qualified for “lifeline” utility rates. One “heir” actually moved out of his van that he had lived in for seven years into Dad’s house, as soon as he died!

Re: maintainence, I’m not even talking about weeds after a rain. I’m talking about real eyesores such as long-unfinished room additions, never-running vehicles, etc. This was all started or parked after the heir moved in.

UC’s younger demographic is evident in that you and your neighbors purchased your childhood home while your parents were STILL ALIVE and you are still employed and have kids in school. My neighbor “heirs” are retired and/or long-disabled with grown children.

Acc. to your post, your neighbors don’t appear to be trying to run their entire households on $800 – $1500 (fixed income) per month.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Bearishgurl…
None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.[/quote]

UCGal, my post above wasn’t directed to any one poster.

I think if you grew up in UC, the OLDEST properties up there might be circa 1968 or 1971. My block was built in 1949. Thus, the “heirs” on my block are probably a generation older than your one neighbor “heir” who cared for his mom. All of the “heirs” I am speaking of here are living on a small FIXED income. This type of income by itself cannot maintain a house and utilities, much less market property taxes. A person with this type of low income can only obtain a “sucker” equity loan or reverse mortgage, if old enough. These “heirs” are too old NOW to EVER pay off the loans they took out on their free and clear “bequest.” (The banks knew this, obviously, but that’s another story.)

Two of my neighbors as “heirs” even qualified for “lifeline” utility rates. One “heir” actually moved out of his van that he had lived in for seven years into Dad’s house, as soon as he died!

Re: maintainence, I’m not even talking about weeds after a rain. I’m talking about real eyesores such as long-unfinished room additions, never-running vehicles, etc. This was all started or parked after the heir moved in.

UC’s younger demographic is evident in that you and your neighbors purchased your childhood home while your parents were STILL ALIVE and you are still employed and have kids in school. My neighbor “heirs” are retired and/or long-disabled with grown children.

Acc. to your post, your neighbors don’t appear to be trying to run their entire households on $800 – $1500 (fixed income) per month.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]Bearishgurl…
None of us (to my knowledge) have ATM’d the house. My neighbors across the street have the same stated goal we do – pay it off before retirement. That’s hard to do if you’re pulling cash out rather than paying off the balance. I don’t see a lot of fancy upgrades in the garages indicating HELOC madness on our block.[/quote]

UCGal, my post above wasn’t directed to any one poster.

I think if you grew up in UC, the OLDEST properties up there might be circa 1968 or 1971. My block was built in 1949. Thus, the “heirs” on my block are probably a generation older than your one neighbor “heir” who cared for his mom. All of the “heirs” I am speaking of here are living on a small FIXED income. This type of income by itself cannot maintain a house and utilities, much less market property taxes. A person with this type of low income can only obtain a “sucker” equity loan or reverse mortgage, if old enough. These “heirs” are too old NOW to EVER pay off the loans they took out on their free and clear “bequest.” (The banks knew this, obviously, but that’s another story.)

Two of my neighbors as “heirs” even qualified for “lifeline” utility rates. One “heir” actually moved out of his van that he had lived in for seven years into Dad’s house, as soon as he died!

Re: maintainence, I’m not even talking about weeds after a rain. I’m talking about real eyesores such as long-unfinished room additions, never-running vehicles, etc. This was all started or parked after the heir moved in.

UC’s younger demographic is evident in that you and your neighbors purchased your childhood home while your parents were STILL ALIVE and you are still employed and have kids in school. My neighbor “heirs” are retired and/or long-disabled with grown children.

Acc. to your post, your neighbors don’t appear to be trying to run their entire households on $800 – $1500 (fixed income) per month.

[Author]

Posts