On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:52:39 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/16/2017 7:41 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:27:06 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/16/2017 6:14 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 23:19:11 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/15/2017 10:50 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 22:27:42 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

snipped to make some pussies happy, here.

Housing costs? Some of the new'ish homes that people could barely
afford to begin with need new roofs, fences and values are probably up
25% from pre crash days. We have a unique situation here.

25%? That's nothing. My house is up almost 100%, if the estimates
(and tax assessments) are to be believed. And, yes, my taxes have
doubled in that five years. That increase in __T_ is small compared
to PI_I.



Well 25% is nothing but you said you were paying .5% tax IIRC. So if
your home is valued at 200K now , it was 100k your tax went up a
thousand dollars?

Double those numbers but, yes.


We pay 3% and have had an increase of 25% to say only $250k., so 3% of
50K is 50% more, $1500 than your increase and that has been in the last
3 years.

What's the tax (T) increase as a percentage of PITI?

And these numbers are may be skewed.

But
Below is fact.


A home owner in our neighborhood that has a home valued at $250K pays
$7500 per year in property taxes. And many of those homes are $300k
plus. A 25 percent vlaue increase on a tax that is 3% is quite a chunk.

As a percentage of the Principle + Interest + Tax + Insurance costs?
It's only the tax part that's increasing.

OK, a 30-year mortgage on 250K, at 4%, is roughly $14K per year
(assuming no PMI). Add the tax ($7500), and insurance ($2K) and the
total is $23.5K. If the value of the home goes up 25%, the taxes
increase to $9375, or a little under $2K. This portion of owning the
house has gone up around 8.5%, surely less than a rental during the
same time (not only their taxes are going up but their value). If the
owner can't absorb this increase, over 3(?) years, they're in way over
their heads, even without tax increases. They'd probably be in worse
shape without the home.

That is what I have been trying to say, in over their heads because of
the guaranteed loans and as you mentioned "if" any were on an AGM to
qualify the situation of the house payments got worse.

But it's only 8.5% over three years. They'd surely be worse off
without the house.

They wold be better off in a home that they can afford.

They might be better of living (and working) elsewhere but that's not
the issue.


You were hinting $400K on your home and 5 years ago it was half on
taxes. If you are paying .5 percent on property taxes, I see a $1000
increase in annual taxes over the past 5 years.

Sorry, our current house is about 1%. Our previous house had about a
.5% tax rate.

Still your tax rate is 1/3 of ours and less than that on some of the
newer neighborhoods.

The tax rate shouldn't have anything to do with the neighborhood. The
point isn't the tax rate, or even the taxes paid, rather the
_increase_ in the cost of owning the home. I don't see how a 3%/year
increase could bankrupt anyone.


Now consider home values here went up a little between 3~6 years ago
but. BUT in the last 3 years they have gone up 30% playing catsup.
there is a 10% limit per year but if they do not use the full 10% they
can carry it over and add to the following year/s.

The home values here dropped in half during that time (the original
sale on my house was ~$360K.

So our house was around $165K 5 years ago and now it is at $217K
That increase has changed out tax liability from $4950 to $6510 per
year. That is over $1500 on a home about half the value of yours.
Homes in your range that are in our neighborhoods are looking in the
neighborhood of a $3000 increase in annual taxes, triple your increase.

But, using your previous examples, the diffrence is 8.5% over three
years. Not much.

It is a hell of a lot if 8.5% is a large number to begin with and your
pay has not gone up.

Deliver pizzas one night a week. Drive an Uber. Why aren't you
ragging on their food budget?

Given many of these residents were guaranteed a loan and many were way
in over their heads and clueless about what they were getting into,
they bought the pie in the sky with tax payments of approximately
$12,000 per year on top of P&I.

What do you mean "guaranteed a loan"?

Fanie May, CountryWide? or something like that. These lenders had
government guaranteed money to give out loans to any one. A great
number of these people would not qualify for these loans today, with the
same income.

Oh, I thought you meant that the borrowers were somehow guaranteed a
loan. The loans are guaranteed but there are still standards for the
underwriting of those loans. One of those is that the PITI, plus all
other credit, can't be above something like 30% of income.

If they're going bankrupt, the problem isn't the taxes on their home.

And then you have to add an increase on insurance as when the value of
the house goes so does your insurance premium, a requirement of the lender.

And one more little tid bit. Our homes started going up significantly
when our neighborhood was built out a few years ago. There is still a
lot of wide open spaces near us that is being developed and hardly any
of these houses are going for less than $250K for 1600 sq ft.

There are still developments here advertising "starting in the $140s".
They're all postage stamp lots but they look to be in that size range.
There are also many "starting in the $400s" (and, of course, higher
but they don't advertise the same way).