Skip to main content

View Diary: Wingnut stereotyped California versus wingnut stereotyped Texas (170 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  How is that going to work? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    With real estate values in places like the Inland Empire, the San Joaquin Valley, etc going down; how is it going to help to say that taxes can increase on appreciating home values?

    California doesn't have many places with appreciating property values.  Maybe that Minimart on the border with Nevada where they sell Powerball tickets.

    •  you raise an interesting point (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cali Scribe, Jay C

      did some research and this is at least part of what I came up with: (from ABC7 news on March 12)

      "But some critics believe commercial building- and land-owners are taking advantage of a loophole that lets their property taxes be re-assessed only when a new owner acquires more than a 50-percent stake, leaving schools and local governments struggling to pay for basic needs. They say closing that loophole would generate $9 billion a year.

      "What we do is we blind our eyes from looking at this hole right in the middle of our tax system," said Lenny Goldberg, executive director of the California Tax Reform Association.

      A new report by the California Tax Reform Association gives the example of Silicon Valley: how some longtime companies barely pay $1,000 an acre, while newer companies pay $58,000 an acre.

      "How could the richest corporations in the world be paying virtually nothing on some of the most valuable property in the world?" said Goldberg."

      so....and my original comment was mostly in reference to the decades long effect of prop 13...


      •  The initial impetus for Prop. 13 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Utahrd, Jay C

        was a noble one -- to keep older residents in their family homes rather than them having to sell and move to rental housing when they couldn't afford the property tax bills. Both my late mother and my in-laws were beneficiaries of that provision; if we'd been able to afford either house, we would have been allowed to take advantage of it as well.

        But the "loophole" (I put it in quotes because I think the writers put it in on purpose) granting similar protections to corporations should never have gone through -- that's been a major reason for California's budget woes.

        The optimist sees the glass as half-full. The pessimist sees the glass as half-empty. The realist just knows she's thirsty.

        by Cali Scribe on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 07:46:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  A good idea in theory (0+ / 0-)

          Yeah, income taxes should probably go up on places like movie studios.  Even if the people that work there are mostly Democrats.

          But for some businesses like distribution, manufacturing or even office buildings; a corporation can say "keep my property tax the same or I'll be paying property tax in Arizona, Nevada or Utah."  These businesses operate in places that need jobs the most like the Inland Empire.

          •  of course (0+ / 0-)

            the last thing I would want is to send jobs out of California.  If there are any changes, both the economy and competition should be taken into account.  I'm thinking that that legislators need to make sure the tax rates are still competitive and perhaps in some way tied to job creation and/or the unemployment rate in a particular area.

            And, frankly, I more than empathize with the idea of keeping older homeowners in their homes...but the heirs...well...not so much...

            And remember, some of these businesses may have been making enormous profits...and getting decades of an again enormous tax break.

            excellent point you made...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site