What will the repeal of Prop 13 do to the market?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SD Realtor]Yeah I know FLU. Obviously there are just so many of these wealthy old people around. They just flood the San Diego area. It also goes without saying that there are tons and tons of kids who have these homes from there old but not dead parents and are not paying the so called market rate property taxes.

It is almost laughable.

At least the opponents for prop 13 should argue other problems with it (as there are many) and they don’t have much to do with residential real estate.[/quote]

SDR, I did not intend to imply that these =<1978 homeowners were all "wealthy." Often the family home is their largest or only asset and they have two or more children who would be potential "heirs." What typically happens is that one heir buys the other heirs out of the property upon death of the last parent. If the =<1978 homeowner has not already transferred title to child(ren) prior to death, the "heirs" find a way for the property to stay in the family. One or more will take title and at least one will live there. Even if the property is NOT the kind of property that ANY of them would purchase, they keep it because of the permanent ultra-low assessment.

Typically, the only "estate sale" listings you see in SD County are properties in which the heirs have long ago relocated, have established themselves elsewhere and have no intentions to return to SD.

Edit: SDR, you must know that there is a WIDE chasm between the "so-called market rate" tax and the tax that =<1978 homeowners (or their "heirs") pay. The difference here is by no means "chump change" and my neighbors on either side of me enjoy all the same City services that I do.

It's patently unfair for "heirs" to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=bearishgurl]
It’s patently unfair for “heirs” to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.[/quote]

You make very sound arguments, but you’ll never convince the ‘free market’ crowd to give up their government subsidies.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=bearishgurl]
It’s patently unfair for “heirs” to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.[/quote]

You make very sound arguments, but you’ll never convince the ‘free market’ crowd to give up their government subsidies.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=bearishgurl]
It’s patently unfair for “heirs” to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.[/quote]

You make very sound arguments, but you’ll never convince the ‘free market’ crowd to give up their government subsidies.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=bearishgurl]
It’s patently unfair for “heirs” to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.[/quote]

You make very sound arguments, but you’ll never convince the ‘free market’ crowd to give up their government subsidies.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=bearishgurl]
It’s patently unfair for “heirs” to enjoy this perk while incoming purchasers carry them with market-rate property tax payments.[/quote]

You make very sound arguments, but you’ll never convince the ‘free market’ crowd to give up their government subsidies.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]BG – you do live in an older neighborhood, as I gather from your posts, I think down in Chula Vista area?

Now think about San Diego county in general. Then think about all of California.

Do you realize how much new construction we’ve had in the past 10 years? People that purchased w/in the past 10 years are not paying low property taxes.

I think those people far outweigh many of the few people who are paying low property taxes.

Now let’s address some of the heirs of these old properties. If they are smart, they will keep them. But so many of them have homes of their homes they purchased w/their own families. Brothers and sisters are likely to sell the outdated home of the parents so they can split the proceeds and use the money for their own struggling payments. So many people are not working or have less hours or cut pay.

I don’t have kids of my own and I still think we should not take away Prop 13. Do that and your taxes will be going up. Don’t like the amount you’re paying now. Stand by to stand by for it to be way higher.[/quote]

jp, I don’t agree that homeowners enjoying Prop 13 benefits (whether orig or “heirs”) outnumber owners of properties built in the last ten years. There are many, many zip codes in CA which have been impacted for 35 years or more, meaning there has been no land available for residential subdivisions in that zip code. A very LARGE portion of the properties lying within these zips enjoy “Prop 13” tax protection (even commercial properties). As I stated in the post above, while I am NOT opposed the “1% of assessed value (+ City/County svcs) part of Prop 13, I AM opposed to the <=1978 assessment (+2% per yr) being "passed down" to children or grandchildren. This provision provides for entire swaths of well-located extremely valuable property in CA to be assessed ultra-low into perpetuity.

Not only are these “heirs” not paying anywhere near their “fair share” of property taxes, their kids are attending the same schools as their neighbors who are paying market rate taxes and they are receiving the same services. How is CA and its cities/counties going to continue to provide these services when in many, many areas, local governments can’t get enough monies from property tax coffers to do so? Mello-Roos Bonds can only be spent within the CFD where the payors own property. As it stands, the RE purchasers within the last 20 years or so are virtually carrying ALL property owners with their property-tax payments.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]BG – you do live in an older neighborhood, as I gather from your posts, I think down in Chula Vista area?

Now think about San Diego county in general. Then think about all of California.

Do you realize how much new construction we’ve had in the past 10 years? People that purchased w/in the past 10 years are not paying low property taxes.

I think those people far outweigh many of the few people who are paying low property taxes.

Now let’s address some of the heirs of these old properties. If they are smart, they will keep them. But so many of them have homes of their homes they purchased w/their own families. Brothers and sisters are likely to sell the outdated home of the parents so they can split the proceeds and use the money for their own struggling payments. So many people are not working or have less hours or cut pay.

I don’t have kids of my own and I still think we should not take away Prop 13. Do that and your taxes will be going up. Don’t like the amount you’re paying now. Stand by to stand by for it to be way higher.[/quote]

jp, I don’t agree that homeowners enjoying Prop 13 benefits (whether orig or “heirs”) outnumber owners of properties built in the last ten years. There are many, many zip codes in CA which have been impacted for 35 years or more, meaning there has been no land available for residential subdivisions in that zip code. A very LARGE portion of the properties lying within these zips enjoy “Prop 13” tax protection (even commercial properties). As I stated in the post above, while I am NOT opposed the “1% of assessed value (+ City/County svcs) part of Prop 13, I AM opposed to the <=1978 assessment (+2% per yr) being "passed down" to children or grandchildren. This provision provides for entire swaths of well-located extremely valuable property in CA to be assessed ultra-low into perpetuity.

Not only are these “heirs” not paying anywhere near their “fair share” of property taxes, their kids are attending the same schools as their neighbors who are paying market rate taxes and they are receiving the same services. How is CA and its cities/counties going to continue to provide these services when in many, many areas, local governments can’t get enough monies from property tax coffers to do so? Mello-Roos Bonds can only be spent within the CFD where the payors own property. As it stands, the RE purchasers within the last 20 years or so are virtually carrying ALL property owners with their property-tax payments.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]BG – you do live in an older neighborhood, as I gather from your posts, I think down in Chula Vista area?

Now think about San Diego county in general. Then think about all of California.

Do you realize how much new construction we’ve had in the past 10 years? People that purchased w/in the past 10 years are not paying low property taxes.

I think those people far outweigh many of the few people who are paying low property taxes.

Now let’s address some of the heirs of these old properties. If they are smart, they will keep them. But so many of them have homes of their homes they purchased w/their own families. Brothers and sisters are likely to sell the outdated home of the parents so they can split the proceeds and use the money for their own struggling payments. So many people are not working or have less hours or cut pay.

I don’t have kids of my own and I still think we should not take away Prop 13. Do that and your taxes will be going up. Don’t like the amount you’re paying now. Stand by to stand by for it to be way higher.[/quote]

jp, I don’t agree that homeowners enjoying Prop 13 benefits (whether orig or “heirs”) outnumber owners of properties built in the last ten years. There are many, many zip codes in CA which have been impacted for 35 years or more, meaning there has been no land available for residential subdivisions in that zip code. A very LARGE portion of the properties lying within these zips enjoy “Prop 13” tax protection (even commercial properties). As I stated in the post above, while I am NOT opposed the “1% of assessed value (+ City/County svcs) part of Prop 13, I AM opposed to the <=1978 assessment (+2% per yr) being "passed down" to children or grandchildren. This provision provides for entire swaths of well-located extremely valuable property in CA to be assessed ultra-low into perpetuity.

Not only are these “heirs” not paying anywhere near their “fair share” of property taxes, their kids are attending the same schools as their neighbors who are paying market rate taxes and they are receiving the same services. How is CA and its cities/counties going to continue to provide these services when in many, many areas, local governments can’t get enough monies from property tax coffers to do so? Mello-Roos Bonds can only be spent within the CFD where the payors own property. As it stands, the RE purchasers within the last 20 years or so are virtually carrying ALL property owners with their property-tax payments.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]BG – you do live in an older neighborhood, as I gather from your posts, I think down in Chula Vista area?

Now think about San Diego county in general. Then think about all of California.

Do you realize how much new construction we’ve had in the past 10 years? People that purchased w/in the past 10 years are not paying low property taxes.

I think those people far outweigh many of the few people who are paying low property taxes.

Now let’s address some of the heirs of these old properties. If they are smart, they will keep them. But so many of them have homes of their homes they purchased w/their own families. Brothers and sisters are likely to sell the outdated home of the parents so they can split the proceeds and use the money for their own struggling payments. So many people are not working or have less hours or cut pay.

I don’t have kids of my own and I still think we should not take away Prop 13. Do that and your taxes will be going up. Don’t like the amount you’re paying now. Stand by to stand by for it to be way higher.[/quote]

jp, I don’t agree that homeowners enjoying Prop 13 benefits (whether orig or “heirs”) outnumber owners of properties built in the last ten years. There are many, many zip codes in CA which have been impacted for 35 years or more, meaning there has been no land available for residential subdivisions in that zip code. A very LARGE portion of the properties lying within these zips enjoy “Prop 13” tax protection (even commercial properties). As I stated in the post above, while I am NOT opposed the “1% of assessed value (+ City/County svcs) part of Prop 13, I AM opposed to the <=1978 assessment (+2% per yr) being "passed down" to children or grandchildren. This provision provides for entire swaths of well-located extremely valuable property in CA to be assessed ultra-low into perpetuity.

Not only are these “heirs” not paying anywhere near their “fair share” of property taxes, their kids are attending the same schools as their neighbors who are paying market rate taxes and they are receiving the same services. How is CA and its cities/counties going to continue to provide these services when in many, many areas, local governments can’t get enough monies from property tax coffers to do so? Mello-Roos Bonds can only be spent within the CFD where the payors own property. As it stands, the RE purchasers within the last 20 years or so are virtually carrying ALL property owners with their property-tax payments.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]BG – you do live in an older neighborhood, as I gather from your posts, I think down in Chula Vista area?

Now think about San Diego county in general. Then think about all of California.

Do you realize how much new construction we’ve had in the past 10 years? People that purchased w/in the past 10 years are not paying low property taxes.

I think those people far outweigh many of the few people who are paying low property taxes.

Now let’s address some of the heirs of these old properties. If they are smart, they will keep them. But so many of them have homes of their homes they purchased w/their own families. Brothers and sisters are likely to sell the outdated home of the parents so they can split the proceeds and use the money for their own struggling payments. So many people are not working or have less hours or cut pay.

I don’t have kids of my own and I still think we should not take away Prop 13. Do that and your taxes will be going up. Don’t like the amount you’re paying now. Stand by to stand by for it to be way higher.[/quote]

jp, I don’t agree that homeowners enjoying Prop 13 benefits (whether orig or “heirs”) outnumber owners of properties built in the last ten years. There are many, many zip codes in CA which have been impacted for 35 years or more, meaning there has been no land available for residential subdivisions in that zip code. A very LARGE portion of the properties lying within these zips enjoy “Prop 13” tax protection (even commercial properties). As I stated in the post above, while I am NOT opposed the “1% of assessed value (+ City/County svcs) part of Prop 13, I AM opposed to the <=1978 assessment (+2% per yr) being "passed down" to children or grandchildren. This provision provides for entire swaths of well-located extremely valuable property in CA to be assessed ultra-low into perpetuity.

Not only are these “heirs” not paying anywhere near their “fair share” of property taxes, their kids are attending the same schools as their neighbors who are paying market rate taxes and they are receiving the same services. How is CA and its cities/counties going to continue to provide these services when in many, many areas, local governments can’t get enough monies from property tax coffers to do so? Mello-Roos Bonds can only be spent within the CFD where the payors own property. As it stands, the RE purchasers within the last 20 years or so are virtually carrying ALL property owners with their property-tax payments.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=flu]
And if I were a landlord, I’d just pass the cost on to my tenant…Because everyone else would do it too… (what, you thought landlords would just eat the extra cost???)
[/quote]

You might as well be a landlord because you are as clueless as most of them. I know more than a few property managers who are managing properties for out-of-town landlords. Many of these landlords bought during the bubble, and there is no way they are ever going to recoup their costs. Most of them try to charge above-market rents and their rentals sit empty.

You see, there is this thing called the ‘market’ which has a major influence on rents. The market doesn’t care how much you pay in property tax it only cares what prospective renters can afford to pay in rent.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=flu]
And if I were a landlord, I’d just pass the cost on to my tenant…Because everyone else would do it too… (what, you thought landlords would just eat the extra cost???)
[/quote]

You might as well be a landlord because you are as clueless as most of them. I know more than a few property managers who are managing properties for out-of-town landlords. Many of these landlords bought during the bubble, and there is no way they are ever going to recoup their costs. Most of them try to charge above-market rents and their rentals sit empty.

You see, there is this thing called the ‘market’ which has a major influence on rents. The market doesn’t care how much you pay in property tax it only cares what prospective renters can afford to pay in rent.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=flu]
And if I were a landlord, I’d just pass the cost on to my tenant…Because everyone else would do it too… (what, you thought landlords would just eat the extra cost???)
[/quote]

You might as well be a landlord because you are as clueless as most of them. I know more than a few property managers who are managing properties for out-of-town landlords. Many of these landlords bought during the bubble, and there is no way they are ever going to recoup their costs. Most of them try to charge above-market rents and their rentals sit empty.

You see, there is this thing called the ‘market’ which has a major influence on rents. The market doesn’t care how much you pay in property tax it only cares what prospective renters can afford to pay in rent.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=flu]
And if I were a landlord, I’d just pass the cost on to my tenant…Because everyone else would do it too… (what, you thought landlords would just eat the extra cost???)
[/quote]

You might as well be a landlord because you are as clueless as most of them. I know more than a few property managers who are managing properties for out-of-town landlords. Many of these landlords bought during the bubble, and there is no way they are ever going to recoup their costs. Most of them try to charge above-market rents and their rentals sit empty.

You see, there is this thing called the ‘market’ which has a major influence on rents. The market doesn’t care how much you pay in property tax it only cares what prospective renters can afford to pay in rent.

[Author]

Posts