Skip to main content

View Diary: The Mayor of Lansing, Michigan hilariously trolls Tennessee over UAW crackdown (238 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He's a lying idiot. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    samanthab, Alumbrados

    The purchase price of the house becomes the basis for the SEV.

    But, even taking his "facts," at face value an SEV of $28,500 translates to an annual property tax rate of $1,282.50.

    •  I take offense to your name calling. (0+ / 0-)

      Eventually I'll figure out how to "HR" your comment, or whatever they call it here.

      You need to go to the assessor's on-line service and look at some sale prices vs. assessed values to get a reality check. The sales price has no relationship to the assessed value. The assessor uses "comparables", which, from the comparables he sent me that he used for this particular property, means anything within a three mile radius that can be used to justify the value given. None of them were nearby, although a number of houses on the block (real comparables) had sold recently for less.

      I know how it should work. But I'm discussing how it actually works, in the real world.

      •  You are a liar. (0+ / 0-)

        You are also leaving out a lot of information from your account.

        You implied that you purchased the house on the open market, but in actuality it sounds like you bought a distressed property at a tax auction or a forced sale.

        "True Cash Value" is defined by State Law, and does not include the price of a property sold at auction or forced sale.

        But, as I said, even if we assume the SEX for the property was what you claimed, the rate per $1000 of SEV in Lansing is $45. That means, your claim was vastly exagerated, even on its own terms.

        •  No, it was purchased off the MLS (0+ / 0-)
          •  MLS doesn't mean anything (0+ / 0-)

            You can buy foreclosed and shortsale homes off the MLS, both of which are sold (usaully) at far below their value...

            Republicanism: the political theory that the poor have too much money and the rich do not have enough.

            by bacchae1999 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 12:45:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, the bank lists the property through a broker (0+ / 0-)

              just like any other owner, and waits for the offers to come in. In this case no offers were forthcoming at the original price, and it was reduced twice. After well over a month on the MLS, my offer was the best they got, so they finally took it.

              "Fair Market Value" is defined as what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller in an arm's length transaction with adequate exposure to the market. Over a month on the MLS certainly qualifies as adequate exposure. Anyone had the opportunity to buy that property for a dollar more, but no one wanted it. I paid exactly what it was worth, if not more.

              •  Lol... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                You are missing the "willing seller" part of the equation. The bank (or the home owner who is party to a short sale), is not considered a willing seller in a foreclosure/short sale. This is why comps on appraisals using short sales or foreclosures will be (should be at least) adjusted to reflect the seller isn't willing.

                Just being on the open market isn't enough to satisfy fair market value requirements.

                Republicanism: the political theory that the poor have too much money and the rich do not have enough.

                by bacchae1999 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 01:01:47 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  An arguable point, (0+ / 0-)

                  but at least I'll give you credit (and a rec) for making a reasonable argument, rather than just calling me a liar like some.

                  This particular case was actually the only foreclosed home I purchased; generally they get trashed and aren't even worth what the bank is asking for them. And those that are never make it to the MLS. Although this was the most extreme example of what I consider unfair taxation, the others aren't that much better. And everything I have said still is applicable to them. I just use this one as the example because I like the way it sounds when I state the TRUTH: I pay more taxes on a house I paid $28,000 for (plus about $2000 in various purchase expenses) in Lansing than I pay on 2600 acres (rounded so as not to identify the exact parcel) of oceanfront land in Hawai'i.

                  •   (4+ / 0-)

                    It's not a reasonable arguement, it's a factual statement. I work in a field which intersects with real estate sales and knowing willing buyer/willing seller is a part of my job.

                    Of course, dude, you have a home that you purchased for way less than I've paid in property taxes on my CONDO since I bought it eight years ago.  In fact, it's half what my 10% downpayment was.

                    I wouldn't complain too much ;)

                    (However, schools need to be funded. The funding needs don't change with property values. High tax bills relative to property values, underfunded schools in poor areas, unfairly advantaged schools in rich areas.... I don't think schools should be dependent on local property taxes.)

                    Republicanism: the political theory that the poor have too much money and the rich do not have enough.

                    by bacchae1999 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 01:57:17 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  In some cases it would be correct (0+ / 0-)

                      to assume that the sale of a foreclosed property wouldn't fetch fair market value. But in may cases, and certainly in this case, the home does sell for the same amount as it would have sold for if it had been put on the market by an individual.

                      The only way I can think of that an MLS listed house wouldn't have sold at fair market value is if it was snatched up immediately. When the house sits there, week in and week out, then it gets reduced and sits there some more, then reduced a third time and finally, after thirty five days at that price they accept your offer, it is pretty clear that the price paid was what the market would bear.

                      I'm not complaining about what I paid for the house, but honestly, wouldn't you think that when you can buy houses so cheaply you would be able to make some money renting them out? Unfortunately, the burden on landlords is so heavy in Lansing that you can't. Which is why the houses go so cheaply. Can't the other homeowners see how this affects their own property values?

      •  Frankly.... (4+ / 0-)

        ...I get the impression that you're one of those unscrupulous property flipper Ayn ran types.

        Go hire a good tax lawyer, next time.

      •  I don't think (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LakeSuperior, ypochris

        you have enough "mojo" to qualify for Trusted User status, which confers the ability to hide rate comments.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (123)
  • Community (60)
  • Elections (31)
  • Media (31)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Environment (27)
  • Law (26)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Culture (23)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (23)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Science (21)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site