Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 8/3/2011 4:28 PM, Han wrote:
wrote in
:

That brings up a couple of good questions:

For property tax purposes, does a single family _primary residence_
that appraises at $500k derive correspondingly more benefit in
police, fire, roads, government, schools, etc. than one that costs
$250k?

If not, why should it pay proportionately higher property taxes for
the same amount of benefit?

Inquiring minds looking for a rationale

If you can afford a more expensive home,you can afford more
taxes.BIG GRIN

I'd assume (yesss) that a bigger home would have space for more kids,
more cars, more prisons, etc. So yes, a bigger home should pay more.

Property taxes are based on many things. Some may be the number of
plumbing fixtures, the amount of living space, etc.


First off property taxes are based on many things, none of them make
sense unless you are tax man paying the appraisal district.

I have personally experienced the appraisal based on square footage,
what other homes in the vicinity are selling for regardless of size,
and aerial photographs to up the value of you home because of a
storage shed. In a single home I have had the way to determine
taxable value change at leas 3 times. So obviously one of the methods
was not fair.

Now, concerning the notion that you should pay more tax because you
have a larger house can be read many ways.

1. As you mentioned, you can afford it and higher taxes. Maybe, maybe
not. Think about the housing bubble and all those people that cheated
the system to qualify for a big home loan and can't afford to pay for
them now. Should they pay more taxes?

What if some one saved and lived within their means and paid cash for
a more expensive home. Should they pay more taxes because they live
more frugally, handle their money better, and still make the same
money as those that poof off every cent they earn and live in an much
much smaller home but get the same services as the expensive home
buyer making the same money??


2. A bigger house affords you to raise you a larger family...Really?
It seems to me that those that have the largest families live in less
valuable homes and by in large pay the least amount of taxes. All
those deductions. Many don't know how to stop having kids, and they
ain't smart enough to earn a decent living any way so they get more
government help.

Now lets reconsider again why a more expensive home owner should pay
more taxes...

If assumptions are a valid point for determining taxability lets
explore other possible options.

1. Lets look at taxing those that did better in school and or those
that spend responsibly. Certainly they have the mental resources to
figure out how to pay more taxes. Seems fair, they have the
potential.

2. Lets look at taxing those that can afford to retire, hell they can
afford to retire, let them pay more taxes, they can afford it.

See any problems with any of this yet?

I still say every one is liable to pay the same amount of tax, period.
A single person pays "x". A married couple pays "2x". If they have a
child they pay "3x" until that child moves away from home or can
afford to pay his own tax. 3 kids, "5x".

Cant afford to pay taxes for 3 kids, you can afford to raise 3 kids.

That truly is the only fair method.

You can argue all you want. Just be glad you're not in Holland. Used
to be (maybe still is) that you get taxed on your money in the bank, and
your investments (capital or wealth tax). You get taxed for real estate
value, sewer, school, even ton the emount of money you savebecause you
don't have to rent!!! and someone from the city will figure it all out
for you.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid