Prescott satellite to spy on your home.

Hi-tech cameras brought in to police home improvements and council tax
dodgers

By Marie Woolf, Political Editor
Published: 01 January 2006

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.

Last night the Tories accused the Deputy Prime Minister of laying the
ground for a "new stealth tax on home improvements".

Houses in the country will be particularly targeted. "Aerial
photographs are very effective in rural areas where improvements are
hard to see from the road," a handbook for property inspectors says.

The Tories warned of a Big Brother-style inspection regime which could
see householders forced to reveal every detail of their homes,
including the finish of a children's playroom or the type of central
heating.

They accused the Government of using satellite technology to spy on
families so they can levy stealth taxes.

Caroline Spelman, shadow Secretary of State for Local Government,
accused Mr Prescott of invading people's privacy.

"The public have already expressed concern at the prospect of
inspectors with cameras entering their homes. Now it appears that the
Government will also be using aerial photography to invade people's
privacy and lay the ground for a new stealth tax on home
improvements," she said. "For many people who need more space but
can't afford to move to a bigger house, the answer is to make
improvements to their existing home, but it now seems they are going
to be penalised for this through council tax hikes. It is catch-22,
with home-owners being taxed if they move and taxed if they don't."

The Government is planning to compile a database of every home in
Britain, which will include details of how many bedrooms each house
has and what kind of roof it has.

Inspectors will look at whether garden sheds have been converted into
offices or studios and whether kitchens or porches have been extended.
They will even be able to see if a drive has been Tarmacked or a
shrubbery extended. The computer system will be used to assess council
tax, inheritance tax and capital gains tax.

A re-evaluation of property values will take into account home
improvements, including extensions and conservatories to assess how
much council tax a property should pay.

The Government has delayed re-evaluating property values after
widespread concern that it could lead to a massive rise in council tax
bills, which would particularly hit pensioners.

But the Government's Valuation Office Agency is still rolling out a
"Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal" database across England. So far
almost two million homes in England have had "value significant codes"
recorded.

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.

Last night the Tories accused the Deputy Prime Minister of laying the
ground for a "new stealth tax on home improvements".

Houses in the country will be particularly targeted. "Aerial
photographs are very effective in rural areas where improvements are
hard to see from the road," a handbook for property inspectors says.

The Tories warned of a Big Brother-style inspection regime which could
see householders forced to reveal every detail of their homes,
including the finish of a children's playroom or the type of central
heating.

They accused the Government of using satellite technology to spy on
families so they can levy stealth taxes.

Caroline Spelman, shadow Secretary of State for Local Government,
accused Mr Prescott of invading people's privacy.

"The public have already expressed concern at the prospect of
inspectors with cameras entering their homes. Now it appears that the
Government will also be using aerial photography to invade people's
privacy and lay the ground for a new stealth tax on home
improvements," she said. "For many people who need more space but
can't afford to move to a bigger house, the answer is to make
improvements to their existing home, but it now seems they are going
to be penalised for this through council tax hikes. It is catch-22,
with home-owners being taxed if they move and taxed if they don't

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/pol...icle335970.ece

"EC-10" wrote in message
On the other hand, the best way to defeat such a scheme would simply be to
make sure you apply for all the right planning permissions and declare all
the stuff you're supposed to declare.

It's a bit like the single foolproof way to beat speed cameras...

Camo netting over your property.

Actually, this sounds more like something that would be posted on April 1.

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
t...

"EC-10" wrote in message
On the other hand, the best way to defeat such a scheme would simply be
to
make sure you apply for all the right planning permissions and declare
all
the stuff you're supposed to declare.

It's a bit like the single foolproof way to beat speed cameras...

Camo netting over your property.

Actually, this sounds more like something that would be posted on April 1.

Unfortunately, these days, that's not an April Fool's joke. The government
(pick one; pick a country, even) believes that what you get is what you owe,
and they want their tax/rental shot at everything we think we own.

"EC-10" wrote in message
. 234...
Andy wrote:

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

If the government's got the money spare to indulge in this sort of
nonsense
then the British electorate has a lot to answer for.

On the other hand, the best way to defeat such a scheme would simply be to
make sure you apply for all the right planning permissions and declare all
the stuff you're supposed to declare.

It's a bit like the single foolproof way to beat speed cameras...

In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine square
footage for tax reasons.

"Charles Self" wrote in message
...
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
t...

"EC-10" wrote in message
On the other hand, the best way to defeat such a scheme would simply be
to
make sure you apply for all the right planning permissions and declare
all
the stuff you're supposed to declare.

It's a bit like the single foolproof way to beat speed cameras...

Camo netting over your property.

Actually, this sounds more like something that would be posted on April
1.

Unfortunately, these days, that's not an April Fool's joke. The government
(pick one; pick a country, even) believes that what you get is what you
owe,
and they want their tax/rental shot at everything we think we own.


I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of office, we
will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window tax!

"Ivan" wrote in message

I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of office, we
will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window tax!

I am surprised that they even need surveillance of any kind. When I was
living in England you had to have your TV license plainly visible in a front
window and there was no shortage of private citizen busybodies who would
walk around looking for people to report ... and that was 40 years ago.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
"Ivan" wrote in message

I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of office,
we
will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window tax!

I am surprised that they even need surveillance of any kind. When I was
living in England you had to have your TV license plainly visible in a
front
window and there was no shortage of private citizen busybodies who would
walk around looking for people to report ... and that was 40 years ago.

And if one lived at the top of a three-storey apartment block, they used to
come round with a ladder and a pair of binoculars, try telling that to the
kids today....


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

Sounds like a good reason for having an anti aircraft gun.

"Leon" wrote in message
t...


In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine
square
footage for tax reasons.

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 15:27:38 GMT, "Leon"
wrote:


In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine square
footage for tax reasons.


Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......

On 1/2/2006 3:02 PM Swingman mumbled something about the following:
"George Max" wrote in message
"Leon" wrote:

In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine
square
footage for tax reasons.

Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......

You've misunderstood the scope of the situation ... it's when the 'back
yard' is 80,000 acres.


Proper overhead covering (tall trees) fixes that

--
Odinn - satellite pictures show so little of what's on my property.

"George Max" wrote in message
"Leon" wrote:


In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine
square
footage for tax reasons.


Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......

You've misunderstood the scope of the situation ... it's when the 'back
yard' is 80,000 acres.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.


Err... it's Google isn't it.

Google Earth, Google Maps - keep it quiet.

While they concentrate on ways of putting up Council Tax they seem to
be ignoring the fact that an ever increasing number or people are
refusing point blank to pay up. Just how many pensioners do you think
they can send to prison.

Remember the fuel protests they'll **** themselves if something similar
starts over the Council Tax, if it hasn't already.

It all just goes to show how right Maggie was all along with the Poll
Tax. If they could have worked out a better way to collect it
(payroll?) then I still think it would be a winner.

"Andy" wrote in message
...
Prescott satellite to spy on your home.

Hi-tech cameras brought in to police home improvements and council
tax
dodgers

By Marie Woolf, Political Editor
Published: 01 January 2006

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be
used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official
guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.

Last night the Tories accused the Deputy Prime Minister of laying
the
ground for a "new stealth tax on home improvements".

Houses in the country will be particularly targeted. "Aerial
photographs are very effective in rural areas where improvements are
hard to see from the road," a handbook for property inspectors says.

The Tories warned of a Big Brother-style inspection regime which
could
see householders forced to reveal every detail of their homes,
including the finish of a children's playroom or the type of central
heating.

They accused the Government of using satellite technology to spy on
families so they can levy stealth taxes.

Caroline Spelman, shadow Secretary of State for Local Government,
accused Mr Prescott of invading people's privacy.

"The public have already expressed concern at the prospect of
inspectors with cameras entering their homes. Now it appears that
the
Government will also be using aerial photography to invade people's
privacy and lay the ground for a new stealth tax on home
improvements," she said. "For many people who need more space but
can't afford to move to a bigger house, the answer is to make
improvements to their existing home, but it now seems they are going
to be penalised for this through council tax hikes. It is catch-22,
with home-owners being taxed if they move and taxed if they don't."

The Government is planning to compile a database of every home in
Britain, which will include details of how many bedrooms each house
has and what kind of roof it has.

Inspectors will look at whether garden sheds have been converted
into
offices or studios and whether kitchens or porches have been
extended.
They will even be able to see if a drive has been Tarmacked or a
shrubbery extended. The computer system will be used to assess
council
tax, inheritance tax and capital gains tax.

A re-evaluation of property values will take into account home
improvements, including extensions and conservatories to assess how
much council tax a property should pay.

The Government has delayed re-evaluating property values after
widespread concern that it could lead to a massive rise in council
tax
bills, which would particularly hit pensioners.

But the Government's Valuation Office Agency is still rolling out a
"Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal" database across England. So far
almost two million homes in England have had "value significant
codes"
recorded.

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be
used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official
guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.

Last night the Tories accused the Deputy Prime Minister of laying
the
ground for a "new stealth tax on home improvements".

Houses in the country will be particularly targeted. "Aerial
photographs are very effective in rural areas where improvements are
hard to see from the road," a handbook for property inspectors says.

The Tories warned of a Big Brother-style inspection regime which
could
see householders forced to reveal every detail of their homes,
including the finish of a children's playroom or the type of central
heating.

They accused the Government of using satellite technology to spy on
families so they can levy stealth taxes.

Caroline Spelman, shadow Secretary of State for Local Government,
accused Mr Prescott of invading people's privacy.

"The public have already expressed concern at the prospect of
inspectors with cameras entering their homes. Now it appears that
the
Government will also be using aerial photography to invade people's
privacy and lay the ground for a new stealth tax on home
improvements," she said. "For many people who need more space but
can't afford to move to a bigger house, the answer is to make
improvements to their existing home, but it now seems they are going
to be penalised for this through council tax hikes. It is catch-22,
with home-owners being taxed if they move and taxed if they don't

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/pol...icle335970.ece

Perhaps people should start building underground, away from prying
eyes. But of course, the goverment might then impose a tax on piles of
dirt left in the garden. :-)

"allan tracy" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.


Err... it's Google isn't it.

Google Earth, Google Maps - keep it quiet.

While they concentrate on ways of putting up Council Tax they seem to
be ignoring the fact that an ever increasing number or people are
refusing point blank to pay up. Just how many pensioners do you think
they can send to prison.

Remember the fuel protests they'll **** themselves if something similar
starts over the Council Tax, if it hasn't already.

It all just goes to show how right Maggie was all along with the Poll
Tax. If they could have worked out a better way to collect it
(payroll?) then I still think it would be a winner.

About the only thing the LibDems have ever got right, a Local Income Tax.
Young earners living at home find themselves minus a few quid from their
wage packet every week, which goes towards providing local services and
leaving them a few pounds less to spend down the pub, all in all a win-win
situation.

"Borked Pseudo Mailed" wrote in message
d.net...
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 13:53:59 +0000, EC-10 wrote:

Andy wrote:

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

If the government's got the money spare to indulge in this sort of
nonsense then the British electorate has a lot to answer for.

On the other hand, the best way to defeat such a scheme would simply be
to make sure you apply for all the right planning permissions and
declare all the stuff you're supposed to declare.

What would the result be?

more taxes collected, which is good for the public -
better upkeep of streets, public buildings; more money for
libraries, schools.

more expensive to improve one's home because of the
resulting higher taxes on it; therefore less work for contractors;
fewer sales of building materials.

Who knows what the bottom line is, except that it is
achieved by moving money from individuals to the public
treasury.

Why not do away with the satellite surveillance and the
army of tax snoops and impose a tax on all retail purchases,
with partial or full quarterly rebates for people whose
income was below some amount?


I guess I am just tired on the various governments wanting more and more
taxes .It is about time they were limited to what they currently get and no
more . I am on a fixed income so every additional tax really hurts me in the
pocketbook ,Never yet have they asked me if I can afford additional taxes .
What do they do with the additional taxes and federal [Taxpayer] handouts ,
Blanko the Louisana governor just finished paying for renovation of one of
her office floors ,Italian marble countertops and all, a little over 1/2
million, just makes my blood boil....

"Ivan" wrote in message
...

"allan tracy" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.


Err... it's Google isn't it.

Google Earth, Google Maps - keep it quiet.

While they concentrate on ways of putting up Council Tax they seem to
be ignoring the fact that an ever increasing number or people are
refusing point blank to pay up. Just how many pensioners do you think
they can send to prison.

Remember the fuel protests they'll **** themselves if something similar
starts over the Council Tax, if it hasn't already.

It all just goes to show how right Maggie was all along with the Poll
Tax. If they could have worked out a better way to collect it
(payroll?) then I still think it would be a winner.

About the only thing the LibDems have ever got right, a Local Income Tax.
Young earners living at home find themselves minus a few quid from their
wage packet every week, which goes towards providing local services and
leaving them a few pounds less to spend down the pub, all in all a win-win
situation.

That just about sums it up doesn't it . whoever earns the money in my book
has the right to spend it wherever he wants to , the pub or elsewhere. All
earners should share the burden of community services . If I recall the
London bombers had milked the government for well over a half million quid,
and many have become citizens illegally, if the government wasn't so
corrupted it would have sorted this lot out and would not need more taxes

"mike hide" wrote in message
...

"Ivan" wrote in message
...

"allan tracy" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.

Images of new conservatories and garages taken from space will be
used
to hike up council taxes and other property levies, official guidance
obtained by The Independent on Sunday reveals.

Mr Prescott's department is overseeing the creation of a database
containing the details of every house in Britain to help tax
inspectors to assess new charges.

Even minor improvements, invisible from the road, will be caught by
"spy in the sky" technology that uses a mix of aerial and satellite
images taken over time to spot changes.


Err... it's Google isn't it.

Google Earth, Google Maps - keep it quiet.

While they concentrate on ways of putting up Council Tax they seem to
be ignoring the fact that an ever increasing number or people are
refusing point blank to pay up. Just how many pensioners do you think
they can send to prison.

Remember the fuel protests they'll **** themselves if something similar
starts over the Council Tax, if it hasn't already.

It all just goes to show how right Maggie was all along with the Poll
Tax. If they could have worked out a better way to collect it
(payroll?) then I still think it would be a winner.

About the only thing the LibDems have ever got right, a Local Income
Tax.
Young earners living at home find themselves minus a few quid from their
wage packet every week, which goes towards providing local services and
leaving them a few pounds less to spend down the pub, all in all a
win-win
situation.

That just about sums it up doesn't it . whoever earns the money in my
book
has the right to spend it wherever he wants to , the pub or elsewhere. All
earners should share the burden of community services . If I recall the
London bombers had milked the government for well over a half million
quid,
and many have become citizens illegally, if the government wasn't so
corrupted it would have sorted this lot out and would not need more taxes.


Governments and police tend to target the older law-abiding citizens who
have worked hard all their life and pay their dues, simply because they're a
soft and easy target.

They certainly don't want to get involved with young **** heads who are
liable to turn nasty, give them plenty of aggro and may start torching cars
and buildings.

"CW" wrote in message
ink.net...
Sounds like a good reason for having an anti aircraft gun.


LOL No kidding.

"George Max" wrote in message
...

Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......


LOL. The permits do not seem to have any weight with them. They want to
raise my taxes in Houston so suddenly my house is larger than it was when it
was built and nothing has been added. Suddenly my house got bigger and my
garage got smaller. Down here it is the air conditioned space that counts
as the square footage that determines the tax bill. I pointed out the
problem and they changed my garage size back to the real dimensions.

"EC-10" writes:


If the government's got the money spare to indulge in this sort of nonsense
then the British electorate has a lot to answer for.

Presumably they expect to take in more in new taxes than they will spend
on the project.

Brian Elfert

"Edwin Pawlowski" writes:


Camo netting over your property.

Actually, this sounds more like something that would be posted on April 1.

This is not new. The local county here started to use satellite imagery
to spot unreported home improvements a number of years ago.

I'm not sure why they are doing this as I think the tax assessor has to
revisit every house every five years or so.

Brian Elfert

"Leon" writes:

LOL. The permits do not seem to have any weight with them. They want to
raise my taxes in Houston so suddenly my house is larger than it was when it
was built and nothing has been added. Suddenly my house got bigger and my
garage got smaller. Down here it is the air conditioned space that counts
as the square footage that determines the tax bill. I pointed out the
problem and they changed my garage size back to the real dimensions.

I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property. If you think tbe assessor has assigned too
high a value you can pay an appraiser to do a formal appraisal.

In your case, it sounds like someone with a large lot or large garage
would pay the same as someone with a small lot/garage but the same size
living space.

Personally, I would do a local income tax with a flat fee for services for
every house. A larger house doesn't usually mean more city services
except maybe if it starts on fire. An eldery couple living on social
security sometimes can't afford to stay in their house because the
property taxes get so high.

Brian Elfert

"Swingman" wrote:

"Ivan" wrote in message

I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of
office, we will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window
tax!

I am surprised that they even need surveillance of any kind. When I
was living in England you had to have your TV license plainly visible
in a front window and there was no shortage of private citizen
busybodies who would walk around looking for people to report ... and
that was 40 years ago.


I was living there 40 years ago. Those were the days! Had to have your
parking lights on when you parked in the street. My car had a dead battery
for about six months and I collected about five pounds of tickets. Buggers
sent two plain clothes cops up to the base to collect me for unpaid fines.
Hauled me into town and then told me to find my own way home.

On 1/2/2006 9:33 PM Texas Tommy mumbled something about the following:
In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine
square
footage for tax reasons.

Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......
You've misunderstood the scope of the situation ... it's when the 'back
yard' is 80,000 acres.

Proper overhead covering (tall trees) fixes that

Proper application of a semi-automatic rifle in .308 does the same thing.

The sign near the top of my driveway says "I'ld turn back if I were
you". The next one a little further down (with a couple of .45 holes
through the edges) says "If you can read this, you're in range".

--
Odinn - don't get many unwanted visitors

[snip]
John Prescott has told tax inspectors to use satellites to snoop on
householders' attempts to improve their homes.


So what? It's less expensive, easier and more thorough than driving around
town, Satellite photos are routinely used by every planning/zoning/tax
assessor office in the U.S. that I've come into contact with, and either
replace or supplement the aerial photography that had been used. I guess
this means that Britain is bringing their procedures up to the 20th
Century --

Odinn said:

On 1/2/2006 3:02 PM Swingman mumbled something about the following:

You've misunderstood the scope of the situation ... it's when the 'back
yard' is 80,000 acres.


Proper overhead covering (tall trees) fixes that

Same here - and I plan to keep it that way.


Greg G.

"Brian Elfert" wrote in message
...
"Leon" writes:

I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property. If you think tbe assessor has assigned too
high a value you can pay an appraiser to do a formal appraisal.


Yeah and that eats up your savings. They have raised the balue of my house
5 years in a row now. Just enough to cost me a hundred or 2 extra each
time.


In your case, it sounds like someone with a large lot or large garage
would pay the same as someone with a small lot/garage but the same size
living space.

Yup. And oddly regardless of the size of the house, the price per square
food differs from one house to the next. A house 5 doors down from me is
twice as large as mine and a single story home and his $ per square foot is
$15 less.


Personally, I would do a local income tax with a flat fee for services for
every house. A larger house doesn't usually mean more city services
except maybe if it starts on fire. An eldery couple living on social
security sometimes can't afford to stay in their house because the
property taxes get so high.

Personally I think all houses in a neighborhood should pay the same per
square foot of living space.

in 1261666 20060102 165102 "Swingman" wrote:
"Ivan" wrote in message

I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of office, we
will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window tax!

I am surprised that they even need surveillance of any kind. When I was
living in England you had to have your TV license plainly visible in a front
window and there was no shortage of private citizen busybodies who would
walk around looking for people to report ... and that was 40 years ago.

Sorry, but this is nonsense.
I've had a TV licence for 50 years and I have never heard of such a thing!!

Andy wrote:

Prescott satellite to spy on your home.

Hi-tech cameras brought in to police home improvements and council tax
dodgers

By Marie Woolf, Political Editor
Published: 01 January 2006

SNIP

Methinks Europe (especially the Continent) has much bigger problems
to worry about (if this guy has his numbers right):

http://www.newcriterion.com/archives...he-demography/

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On 1/3/2006 1:10 AM Leon mumbled something about the following:
"Brian Elfert" wrote in message
...
"Leon" writes:

I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property. If you think tbe assessor has assigned too
high a value you can pay an appraiser to do a formal appraisal.


Yeah and that eats up your savings. They have raised the balue of my house
5 years in a row now. Just enough to cost me a hundred or 2 extra each
time.


In your case, it sounds like someone with a large lot or large garage
would pay the same as someone with a small lot/garage but the same size
living space.

Yup. And oddly regardless of the size of the house, the price per square
food differs from one house to the next. A house 5 doors down from me is
twice as large as mine and a single story home and his $ per square foot is
$15 less.

Personally, I would do a local income tax with a flat fee for services for
every house. A larger house doesn't usually mean more city services
except maybe if it starts on fire. An eldery couple living on social
security sometimes can't afford to stay in their house because the
property taxes get so high.

Personally I think all houses in a neighborhood should pay the same per
square foot of living space.

So my doublewide trailer should appraise the same as my neighbors brick
home, or the other neighbor's stick-frame home, even tho we are all
about the same floorspace and about the same acreage? Sorry, I don't
think so.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7 SENS BS ???

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshiped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property.

It starts out just fine in theory, but it seems to end up being taxation
without representation, fostering inequities in the amount of taxes paid for
government services rendered, and ultimately encourages governmental theft
of private property with devices like the use of eminent domain for private
purposes.

The elected *******s in office don't have to raise the tax rate to increase
revenues (for which you would vote them out of office), but instead of being
accountable to the taxpayer, rely on inflated appraisal values brought to
you in part by third party influences ... like a greedy real estate industry
(note the difference between a house sold/rented "by owner", versus one
"listed" and sold/rented by a real estate firm).

The appraisal districts set the price and have the final word, but the
burden of proof is upon the taxpayer. Retirees in many areas of the US are
having to leave homes they bought and paid for because they can no longer
pay the property tax bill based on rising appraisal values, and the late
fees on tax bills which have become such a burden are usurious and benefit
an army of lawyers instead of the public.

If that doesn't answer the question, then give me a good, logical reason why
a 1500 sf, _primary_ residence for a family of four in Waco, TX pays only
$900/year, while the same house on a comparable lot in a comparable
neighborhood in the Houston area pays $7000+/year for the EXACT same amount
of government services/public school/streets/etc?

In short, under the current "appraised valuation" system for home owners in
Texas, many pay more and get the same/fewer government services for their
money ... that's "inequity" by any definition.

It'll never happen because the local governments are now in the mode of
protecting their turf/benefits (and bent on increasing the "tax base" in
order to do so), but IMO, a homeowner should pay a state wide rate, based on
square footage, for a _primary_ residence and NOT appraised value.

It's time to put the "appraisal districts" out of business and make our
elected representative accountable for the amount of taxes being paid by the
home owner.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

"Odinn" wrote in message

Personally I think all houses in a neighborhood should pay the same per
square foot of living space.

So my doublewide trailer should appraise the same as my neighbors brick
home, or the other neighbor's stick-frame home, even tho we are all
about the same floorspace and about the same acreage? Sorry, I don't
think so.

IMO, that's the kind of thinking that's got us into trouble.

You're not paying taxes for the kind of house you live in, you're paying
them for government services, REGARDLESS of the kind of house you live in.

Why should the guy with the brick house on your street pay more of his use
of the street than you?

.... think about it.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

"Charles Self" wrote
[snip]
I halfway regret not getting a half dozen chickens, thus
being able to skip the permit process when I built my shop. Halfway.


You could have gotten half a dozen eggs and put them in the shop ...


.... just waiting for them to hatch!


Regards,


Rick

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property.


If that doesn't answer the question, then give me a good, logical reason
why
a 1500 sf, _primary_ residence for a family of four in Waco, TX pays only
$900/year, while the same house on a comparable lot in a comparable
neighborhood in the Houston area pays $7000+/year for the EXACT same
amount
of government services/public school/streets/etc?

In short, under the current "appraised valuation" system for home owners
in
Texas, many pay more and get the same/fewer government services for their
money ... that's "inequity" by any definition.

It'll never happen because the local governments are now in the mode of
protecting their turf/benefits (and bent on increasing the "tax base" in
order to do so), but IMO, a homeowner should pay a state wide rate, based
on
square footage, for a _primary_ residence and NOT appraised value.

It's time to put the "appraisal districts" out of business and make our
elected representative accountable for the amount of taxes being paid by
the
home owner.

Speaking as a Brit all of this is a bit of an eye-opener for me, as call it
what you will, Property tax, Council tax, Rates, it appears to be a topic
which generates is much 'anger and argument' on your side of the pond as it
does on ours, in fact I wasn't even aware that Americans were cursed with a
similar (in many people's eyes, unfair) annual property tax as we have over
here.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:02:25 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

"George Max" wrote in message
"Leon" wrote:


In Texas aerial photographs from an air plane are used to determine
square
footage for tax reasons.


Why? Doesn't the permit that allowed construction in the first place
have all that information already? They don't let you build houses
around here without any number of permits. And the lot size is
already known just from subdividing the neighborhood.

What's to hide in terms of additions and outbuildings? Internal
features are 'nother subject......

You've misunderstood the scope of the situation ... it's when the 'back
yard' is 80,000 acres.

Ahh - understood.

Still, it's a damn shame.

"Ivan" wrote in message

Speaking as a Brit all of this is a bit of an eye-opener for me, as call
it
what you will, Property tax, Council tax, Rates, it appears to be a topic
which generates is much 'anger and argument' on your side of the pond as
it
does on ours, in fact I wasn't even aware that Americans were cursed with
a
similar (in many people's eyes, unfair) annual property tax as we have
over
here.

Where the hell do you think we/our forefather's/current tax spenders got/get
their "ideas"?

Hell, we're still two or three years behind your curve ... that's about how
long it takes to get our versions of your taxes/government
edicts/intrusions/TV sitcoms/social ills/ad infinitum, up and running.

Maybe if you guys would dump some damn tea in the river and refresh our
memories of how it was done ....

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
in 1261666 20060102 165102 "Swingman" wrote:
"Ivan" wrote in message

I expect that by the time this lot is eventually kicked out of office,
we
will be bricking in our windows to avoid paying window tax!

I am surprised that they even need surveillance of any kind. When I was
living in England you had to have your TV license plainly visible in a
front
window and there was no shortage of private citizen busybodies who would
walk around looking for people to report ... and that was 40 years ago.

Sorry, but this is nonsense.
I've had a TV licence for 50 years and I have never heard of such a
thing!!

"Nonsense"? Must be nice to have been so blissfully unaware of what was a
notable, ubiquitous practice ... or else you just lived in a more genteel
town than Hounslow in the mid 60's.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

Odinn writes:

So my doublewide trailer should appraise the same as my neighbors brick
home, or the other neighbor's stick-frame home, even tho we are all
about the same floorspace and about the same acreage? Sorry, I don't
think so.

He is talking about the property taxes for the house, not the price paid
for the house.

Brian Elfert

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:11:16 -0000, "Ivan"
wrote:


"Swingman" wrote in message
...
I don't understand why property taxes are ever based on anything besides
the value of your property.


If that doesn't answer the question, then give me a good, logical reason
why
a 1500 sf, _primary_ residence for a family of four in Waco, TX pays only
$900/year, while the same house on a comparable lot in a comparable
neighborhood in the Houston area pays $7000+/year for the EXACT same
amount
of government services/public school/streets/etc?

In short, under the current "appraised valuation" system for home owners
in
Texas, many pay more and get the same/fewer government services for their
money ... that's "inequity" by any definition.

It'll never happen because the local governments are now in the mode of
protecting their turf/benefits (and bent on increasing the "tax base" in
order to do so), but IMO, a homeowner should pay a state wide rate, based
on
square footage, for a _primary_ residence and NOT appraised value.

It's time to put the "appraisal districts" out of business and make our
elected representative accountable for the amount of taxes being paid by
the
home owner.

Speaking as a Brit all of this is a bit of an eye-opener for me, as call it
what you will, Property tax, Council tax, Rates, it appears to be a topic
which generates is much 'anger and argument' on your side of the pond as it
does on ours, in fact I wasn't even aware that Americans were cursed with a
similar (in many people's eyes, unfair) annual property tax as we have over
here.



AIUI some US states are even worse with families on hard times being
thrown onto the street and having their homes seized by the state for
taxes.

In this country I've always advocated a local income tax collected
through general taxation and distributed to LAs under a formula based
on voter numbers and area. Property taxation should only happen when
the property changes hands either at sale or inheritance.

"AlanG" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:11:16 -0000, "Ivan"
wrote:

Speaking as a Brit all of this is a bit of an eye-opener for me, as call
it
what you will, Property tax, Council tax, Rates, it appears to be a topic
which generates is much 'anger and argument' on your side of the pond as
it
does on ours, in fact I wasn't even aware that Americans were cursed with
a
similar (in many people's eyes, unfair) annual property tax as we have
over
here.



AIUI some US states are even worse with families on hard times being
thrown onto the street and having their homes seized by the state for
taxes.

However, only today I read in our local shopper that due to an alleged mix
up over a missed payment in 2003, a woman has been threatened with the
bailiffs, or even prison. Threats which we know that local councils are not
averse to carrying out, as a couple of elderly pensioners who have recently
wound up in prison have found out.


In this country I've always advocated a local income tax collected
through general taxation and distributed to LAs under a formula based
on voter numbers and area. Property taxation should only happen when
the property changes hands either at sale or inheritance.