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

[UCGal]

I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]But do we believe in private property rights, or do we not?

IMHO, once a property is bought and owned (no mortgage) by a person, that is his/her land. Nobody should have the right to take that land away from someone (and that includes their decendants).[/quote]

Of course I believe in private property rights, CAR. I’m not advocating land-taking. I’m saying that if the benefits of Prop 58 (“progeny” of Prop 13) were not available to these heirs, many more of them would CHOOSE to sell out and move to a cheaper area, instead of take title and occupy.

The market-rate taxpayers are in essence supporting the services used by these often young, able-bodied “heirs.”

The Legislature’s original intent upon introducing Prop 13 to the voters was to keep seniors who were on a fixed income in their original homes as long as possible.

Prop 58, which rode Prop 13’s coattails a few years later, expanded on that “original intent.” It had the effect of causing these “senior benefits” to last beyond their deaths and into perpetuity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]But do we believe in private property rights, or do we not?

IMHO, once a property is bought and owned (no mortgage) by a person, that is his/her land. Nobody should have the right to take that land away from someone (and that includes their decendants).[/quote]

Of course I believe in private property rights, CAR. I’m not advocating land-taking. I’m saying that if the benefits of Prop 58 (“progeny” of Prop 13) were not available to these heirs, many more of them would CHOOSE to sell out and move to a cheaper area, instead of take title and occupy.

The market-rate taxpayers are in essence supporting the services used by these often young, able-bodied “heirs.”

The Legislature’s original intent upon introducing Prop 13 to the voters was to keep seniors who were on a fixed income in their original homes as long as possible.

Prop 58, which rode Prop 13’s coattails a few years later, expanded on that “original intent.” It had the effect of causing these “senior benefits” to last beyond their deaths and into perpetuity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]But do we believe in private property rights, or do we not?

IMHO, once a property is bought and owned (no mortgage) by a person, that is his/her land. Nobody should have the right to take that land away from someone (and that includes their decendants).[/quote]

Of course I believe in private property rights, CAR. I’m not advocating land-taking. I’m saying that if the benefits of Prop 58 (“progeny” of Prop 13) were not available to these heirs, many more of them would CHOOSE to sell out and move to a cheaper area, instead of take title and occupy.

The market-rate taxpayers are in essence supporting the services used by these often young, able-bodied “heirs.”

The Legislature’s original intent upon introducing Prop 13 to the voters was to keep seniors who were on a fixed income in their original homes as long as possible.

Prop 58, which rode Prop 13’s coattails a few years later, expanded on that “original intent.” It had the effect of causing these “senior benefits” to last beyond their deaths and into perpetuity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]But do we believe in private property rights, or do we not?

IMHO, once a property is bought and owned (no mortgage) by a person, that is his/her land. Nobody should have the right to take that land away from someone (and that includes their decendants).[/quote]

Of course I believe in private property rights, CAR. I’m not advocating land-taking. I’m saying that if the benefits of Prop 58 (“progeny” of Prop 13) were not available to these heirs, many more of them would CHOOSE to sell out and move to a cheaper area, instead of take title and occupy.

The market-rate taxpayers are in essence supporting the services used by these often young, able-bodied “heirs.”

The Legislature’s original intent upon introducing Prop 13 to the voters was to keep seniors who were on a fixed income in their original homes as long as possible.

Prop 58, which rode Prop 13’s coattails a few years later, expanded on that “original intent.” It had the effect of causing these “senior benefits” to last beyond their deaths and into perpetuity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]But do we believe in private property rights, or do we not?

IMHO, once a property is bought and owned (no mortgage) by a person, that is his/her land. Nobody should have the right to take that land away from someone (and that includes their decendants).[/quote]

Of course I believe in private property rights, CAR. I’m not advocating land-taking. I’m saying that if the benefits of Prop 58 (“progeny” of Prop 13) were not available to these heirs, many more of them would CHOOSE to sell out and move to a cheaper area, instead of take title and occupy.

The market-rate taxpayers are in essence supporting the services used by these often young, able-bodied “heirs.”

The Legislature’s original intent upon introducing Prop 13 to the voters was to keep seniors who were on a fixed income in their original homes as long as possible.

Prop 58, which rode Prop 13’s coattails a few years later, expanded on that “original intent.” It had the effect of causing these “senior benefits” to last beyond their deaths and into perpetuity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.[/quote]

Thank you for this clarification, UCGal, but HOW did you fill out the Assessor COO form (used to be yellow, don’t know about now). Did you claim on it that the transaction was a intra-family transfer?

Did your parents sign a form of a familial transfer deed or quitclaim deed when you signed your trust deed? And even though you took out a mortgage loan, did you indicate tax stamps on your deed in excess of the property’s current assessed value at the time??

If these questions are too personal, I understand.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.[/quote]

Thank you for this clarification, UCGal, but HOW did you fill out the Assessor COO form (used to be yellow, don’t know about now). Did you claim on it that the transaction was a intra-family transfer?

Did your parents sign a form of a familial transfer deed or quitclaim deed when you signed your trust deed? And even though you took out a mortgage loan, did you indicate tax stamps on your deed in excess of the property’s current assessed value at the time??

If these questions are too personal, I understand.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.[/quote]

Thank you for this clarification, UCGal, but HOW did you fill out the Assessor COO form (used to be yellow, don’t know about now). Did you claim on it that the transaction was a intra-family transfer?

Did your parents sign a form of a familial transfer deed or quitclaim deed when you signed your trust deed? And even though you took out a mortgage loan, did you indicate tax stamps on your deed in excess of the property’s current assessed value at the time??

If these questions are too personal, I understand.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.[/quote]

Thank you for this clarification, UCGal, but HOW did you fill out the Assessor COO form (used to be yellow, don’t know about now). Did you claim on it that the transaction was a intra-family transfer?

Did your parents sign a form of a familial transfer deed or quitclaim deed when you signed your trust deed? And even though you took out a mortgage loan, did you indicate tax stamps on your deed in excess of the property’s current assessed value at the time??

If these questions are too personal, I understand.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]I want to correct something since I know something about this.

[quote=bearishgurl]In addition, I believe the familial transfer deed should indicate -$0- in tax stamps (no money exchanged hands) or an amt in tax stamps <=to the current assessed value of the property. The Assessor Change of Ownership form should indicate that the transaction was a familial transfer. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and this post should not be construed as legal advice.[/quote]
Wrong. Ours was a traditional purchase with escrow and title company, mortgage, etc. It did NOT affect the transfer of the tax rate. We submitted all paperwork required to the county tax assessor – and if I recall correctly it included our (large) purchase price.

This is confirmed by the state website.
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/faqs/propositions58.htm

6.To qualify for the exclusion, must the transfer be only a result of a gift?
No. Transfers may be result of a sale, gift, or inheritance.

It should be noted that you are not required to apply the family transfer rate. If your parents bought at peak, then you inherit and the property is worth less – you can claim the current rate. And you’d be foolish not to claim the current rate.[/quote]

Thank you for this clarification, UCGal, but HOW did you fill out the Assessor COO form (used to be yellow, don’t know about now). Did you claim on it that the transaction was a intra-family transfer?

Did your parents sign a form of a familial transfer deed or quitclaim deed when you signed your trust deed? And even though you took out a mortgage loan, did you indicate tax stamps on your deed in excess of the property’s current assessed value at the time??

If these questions are too personal, I understand.

[sdrealtor]

Thanks for clarifying and it is as I beleived. Question wasnt for clients but rather for my primary which I expect to pass onto my children at some point in the future. Later than sooner hopefully.

[sdrealtor]

Thanks for clarifying and it is as I beleived. Question wasnt for clients but rather for my primary which I expect to pass onto my children at some point in the future. Later than sooner hopefully.

[sdrealtor]

Thanks for clarifying and it is as I beleived. Question wasnt for clients but rather for my primary which I expect to pass onto my children at some point in the future. Later than sooner hopefully.

[sdrealtor]

Thanks for clarifying and it is as I beleived. Question wasnt for clients but rather for my primary which I expect to pass onto my children at some point in the future. Later than sooner hopefully.

[Author]

Posts