Archive for Sunday, February 26, 2012

Credible appraisals

February 26, 2012


To the editor:

The Douglas County appraiser says that he still does not consider most distressed or foreclosure sales on residential property as indicative of fair market value. Banks, he argues, are unloading the properties quickly to get the properties off their books.

Welcome to the bureaucratic world of magical thinking. It helps explain the jiggering, up or down a percentage point, in Douglas County assessments during the recession, even though home prices nationally are down 30 percent from their pre-recession highs.

A homeowner may like a high appraisal because it confirms his optimistic view of a property’s worth. But a home seller must compete in a brutal market where “fair market value” is trumped by real bids. 

Meantime, the Douglas County administrator is quoted as saying that compared with the rest of the nation, real estate values “have held up remarkably well here.” He is applying the county appraiser’s ambrosia, a mutually enforcing illusion that suits public officials who find it expedient to live in denial. It would be better to ‘fess up to reality and, if necessary, raise the property tax rate while restoring the credibility and integrity of the appraisal process.


SinoHawk 6 years ago

What, you expect the government to willingly limit their income (or takings)? When has that ever happened?

Armstrong 6 years ago

I have looked at rental propoerty recently. I was told by the banks regarding the forclosed"properties " make an offer we can't sell " $200'K homes selling for almost half.

Brock Masters 6 years ago

One of the best LTE I've read here.

jafs 6 years ago

According to a post on another thread, "fair market value" refers to sales wherein neither party is under pressure.

That might not apply to foreclosures, I would think.

How do other communities treat this question, if anybody knows?

Brock Masters 6 years ago

Statute 79-503a: Fair market value defined; allowable variance; factors to be considered in determining fair market value; generally accepted appraisal procedures to be utilized. "Fair market value" means the amount in terms of money that a well informed buyer is justified in paying and a well informed seller is justified in accepting for property in an open and competitive market, assuming that the parties are acting without undue compulsion. In the determination of fair market value of any real property which is subject to any special assessment, such value shall not be determined by adding the present value of the special assessment to the sales price. For the purposes of this definition it will be assumed that consummation of a sale occurs as of January 1.

Brock Masters 6 years ago

Sales in and of themselves shall not be the sole criteria of fair market value but shall be used in connection with cost, income and other factors including but not by way of exclusion:

  (a)   The proper classification of lands and improvements; 
  (b)   the size thereof; 
  (c)   the effect of location on value; 
  (d)   depreciation, including physical deterioration or functional, economic or social obsolescence;
   (e)   cost of reproduction of improvements; 
  (f)   productivity taking into account all restrictions imposed by the state or federal government and local governing bodies, including, but not limited to, restrictions on property rented or leased to low income individuals and families as authorized by section 42 of the federal internal revenue code of 1986, as amended;
   (g)   earning capacity as indicated by lease price, by capitalization of net income or by absorption or sell-out period;
   (h)   rental or reasonable rental values or rental values restricted by the state or federal government or local governing bodies, including, but not limited to, restrictions on property rented or leased to low income individuals and families, as authorized by section 42 of the federal internal revenue code of 1986, as amended;
   (i)   sale value on open market with due allowance to abnormal inflationary factors influencing such values;
   (j)   restrictions or requirements imposed upon the use of real estate by the state or federal government or local governing bodies, including zoning and planning boards or commissions, and including, but not limited to, restrictions or requirements imposed upon the use of real estate rented or leased to low income individuals and families, as authorized by section 42 of the federal internal revenue code of 1986, as amended; and
   (k)   comparison with values of other property of known or recognized value. The assessment-sales ratio study shall not be used as an appraisal for appraisal purposes.
   The appraisal process utilized in the valuation of all real and tangible personal property for ad valorem tax purposes shall conform to generally accepted appraisal procedures which are adaptable to mass appraisal and consistent with the definition of fair market value unless otherwise specified by law.

jafs 6 years ago


So does the sale of foreclosed properties by banks count as fair market value or not?

If so, watch all of our property values decline precipitously, which might be helpful for tax purposes, but not so much when we want to sell our houses.

Obviously, a bank that's just looking to get rid of a remaining part of a mortgage can sell a house much more cheaply than a seller who needs to recover what they've put into the house.

Brock Masters 6 years ago

As I read the statute I don't see where you wouldn't include foreclosures. Regardless, tax valuation means little when it comes to selling your property. Even if the tax appraisal for your home is 100,000, but homes including foreclosed ones are selling for 50,000 you're not going to get 100,000 for your home.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

When we bought our home we paid a competitive rate as it had been on the market for more than a year. The county did not use the fair market value as determined by a willing seller and a willing buyer. The county did some hocus pocus and came up with a value about 10% higher than what we actually paid. They continued that until presented with a series (more than one) commercial appraisals that showed that their number was at least 10% high.

For those of you that think 10% is nothing how about we increase all your taxes by 10% because we need more money. Those not paying at least $2000 in property taxes as assessed by the county need not comment as they have no skin in the game. Moochers and Nair do wells love to inject their notion that everybody else should be fleeced to their benefit.

When governmental agencies routinely take actions that are perceived by property owners as consistently overvaluing their properties the action ultimately undermines respect for law.

bad_dog 6 years ago

"Nair do wells" must have nice, smooth, hair-free legs...

Ragingbear 6 years ago

I am still waiting for a massive lawsuit against the city over property values. The actual value of a property may be $200,000. But the government appraiser will wander along and say it's 850,000, just so they can charge you more in property taxes.

jafs 6 years ago

What a bizarre idea - that people who aren't paying at least $2000 in property taxes have "no skin in the game" - of course they do.

But it's the clear direction of these sorts of arguments - first, everybody should pay something, then even when they do, it's not enough to count.

Katara 6 years ago

I'm thinking the person who made that comment is not very good with money. They claimed they had more than one commercial appraisal done on their property. Given that an actual commercial appraisal runs about $400 to be done, they most likely spent more money on having appraisals done than they saved on property tax when they appealed their county valuation.

Also, they don't seem to realize that the lowered county valuation is only good for 3 years and then you have to go through the process again. Which, of course, means another appraisal to prove the lowered value of their property tax and another $400 spent.

jafs 6 years ago

I hadn't thought of that :-)

Katara 6 years ago

Well, when you think about the fact that this same person, who has argued in the past that they have paid into the system all their life and are therefore entitled to the benefits, is now making an argument that the population who does not pay $2000 or more in property tax have no skin in the game.

Who is most likely not to pay that much in property tax? The elderly. The folks that most likely have paid off their mortgages and have paid property tax all their lives now have no skin in the game because of this arbitrary number this person has selected.

Way to disenfranchise the elderly!

Brock Masters 6 years ago

You don't stop paying property tax because you hit 65 or because you pay off your mortgage so you can't conclude that the elderly pay less than 2000 in property taxes.

Katara 6 years ago

You are absolutely correct that property tax doesn't stop at 65 (although there are quite a few who believe the elderly should get a tax break on that). However, these are folks who bought a modest house & paid on it all their lives.

In order to pay $2000 in property tax, one must have a house that is valued at $150,000 or above. Many who bought a modest house in their younger years are not getting those types of values.

Cant_have_it_both_ways 6 years ago

You can pay for an appraisal if you choose to, or you can contact a realitor and ask for a compairson of the homes like yours that have sold in the very recient past and the amounts which accomplishes the same thing for a heck of a lot less, usually free.

Katara 6 years ago

An independent commercial appraisal is more likely to allow you to be successful in a property valuation appeal.

The 2nd option is the same way that property is currently valued now. And less likely to be successful in an appeal. Especially considering that the county appraiser already doesn't count distressed or foreclosed properties to be part of fair market value.

Katara 6 years ago

And the 2nd option also assumes that there are houses similar to yours that have been sold in the recent past (pre-housing collapse).

You are SOL if there are none.

Cant_have_it_both_ways 6 years ago

Have done it 3 times in the last 5 years with no problems. I stated that you can use comparative properties in your area as a basis as fact, and that it is.

Katara 6 years ago

Had an appraisal done that way? Or had an appraisal done that way & successfully appealed your property valuation in the last 5 years?

You can certainly use them but that doesn't mean you are successful in your appeal.

But if you were, if you don't mind my asking, by what percentage did you property value decrease?

And do you believe that your results are typical results in DG County?

Katara 6 years ago


I am rethinking what you said and it seems to me that if you are doing this through the informal hearing, then this LTE is making much ado about nothing since it would be pretty easy to appeal.

However, if there are no recent sales in your area, you still would end up having to have a commercial appraisal done which may or may not work in your favor.

The LTE makes the assumption that because some properties may be overvalued that most properties are also overvalued.

He also makes the assumption that because, on average, nationally house values are down 30% that means that house values in DG County are also down 30%.

People have trouble understanding what average means when they are discussing figures.

Cant_have_it_both_ways 6 years ago

Then let me add this. It matters not what the value that is agreed on is for the current year. You are still on the hook for the taxes your assigned valuation is. Any movement in value will be awarded next year. So, if you think your valuation is excessive, better get on it now as it can only get worse. Remember, they package property taxes two ways, one year they raise the value of your property, the next year they raise the mill levy. The city, county and schools all take hacks at this. Watch your back because these three entities have their best interests at heart and not yours.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

The liberal mind at work. Did it ever occur to you that one might get an appraisal for other reasons - like refinancing or firing your primary mortgage holder?

Any substantive comments or are we once again going to make the issue about me rather than the county??

if you paid at least $2000 in property taxes a ten percent deduction in your property tax would save you $200 a year. Two year payoff on an appraisal that you might have purchased for other reasons - shorter if they keep raising property taxes.

By the by the $2000 is about the tax levy on an average home in Lawrence.

Liberal understanding of economics strikes again!! Maybe the two of you should stay off here until you take a basic economics course

Katara 6 years ago

Someone should check their refinance paperwork. Banks don't do appraisals for free. It will be listed in the fees you paid, assuming that you actually read your paperwork thoroughly before signing it.

As for basics economics, one must understand basic math first. Averages are not an accurate way to tell who has skin in the game & who does not.

One can have 1 appraised $500,000 house for approximately every 10 houses in a town appraised at $120,000 & still get an average of $150,000. This, of course, does not mean that every one is paying the $2000 in property taxes. So out of the 11 households, only 1 gets a say in what happens.

Katara 6 years ago

It is also very odd that one would make this a liberal vs. conservative issue.

Additionally, with an appraisal & using your 10% figure, you only come out ahead $200 over a 3 year period. And then you have to start the process over in order to continue the lower property valuation. This would mean another appraisal (which you would most likely have to pay directly out of pocket rather than have it rolled into the fees on your refinance) and you still only come out ahead $200 (assuming, of course, that your lowered valuation stayed the same).

You've spent $400 to save $200! Congrats on your awesome financial sense!

Katara 6 years ago

Additionally on your average tax levy, it would include more than just Lawrence (still would like a source for your figure) as we are talking county appraisals. You would also have to factor in those billed at agricultural rates. You don't have to live on a farm to be assessed that way.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

Katara, I can see Math is not your long suit and that you apparently do not pay property taxes directly.

The issue – just to remind you – is overvaluation not the weighted distribution of property valuations or the physical location of the property. I picked $2000 as the comment threshold (never expecting anybody in this space would be influenced by it as you clearly were not). That is still the average. The rest of your comments are not germane to over valuation. By the by, the $120K property tax player paid $1800 and probably could use the $180 saved if his/her valuation was off by 10% high.

Do you have anything useful to say on the substance of the letter or my comment?

headdoctor 6 years ago

Yup vertigo, I think you have it correct about moderate's statement. I used the property tax calculator on the Cities website. If your house was $141,000.00 or less, you wouldn't have a say($1999.68). Guess that would mean a sizable group of people would not be allowed any input. That group would be even bigger because I am sure if moderate had his way rental houses would be added to the mix.

headdoctor 6 years ago

Funny. There use to be a poster here that was always defending himself from the mob. Which I assume is the "Moochers and Nair do wells that love to inject their notion that everybody else should be fleeced to their benefit." Guess Moderate is all good with a mob made up of a small number of owners of more expensive property ruling everyone else.

jafs 6 years ago

I know - it's absurd.

I'm sure that much richer people would move that bar up so high that Moderate wouldn't get a say.

How did this idea ever get such traction, that how much money we make/spend/pay in taxes should define our participation in discussions and the political process? It's clearly not a democratic idea, much more like an aristocratic one.

headdoctor 6 years ago

It is really pretty simple jafs. The moderate follows the non biblical golden rule. That being the ones with the gold make the rules. Moderate can't stand those who he believes are getting a free or reduced ride yet in his perfect world that is exactly what he wants for himself. Moderate's sense of his entitlement is beyond any rational thought.

jafs 6 years ago

Ah - thanks for the clarification.

Katara 6 years ago

It is interesting that you don't find my comments useful and rather than refute them, prefer to insult me instead. Are you not able to refute what I said? I noticed that you don't have any actual data or facts to back up the figures you quote ($2000 being the average tax levy in Lawrence).

You used your "overvaluation" by 10% as an example. You really didn't gain much by it. You demonstrated that you lack fiscal sense instead.

Saving $180/year on property tax (for 3 years only, mind you) is not that much of a savings given the fact that the current appraisal price is $400. You end up spending $400 to save $180. Not much of a bargain and certainly is very short-sighted financial sense, especially since you will have to repeat the process after those 3 years. I don't think you have a very good grasp on how the valuation appeal process works in DG county.

Additionally, having an appraisal done that shows your property value has decreased does not help your case much in refinancing as now you've demonstrated you have lost equity.

And using the "average" still doesn't make your case as to who has skin in the game. As jafs pointed out, using the average leaves 50% of the population without skin in the game.

By the way, the Midwest has actually fared better when it came to property values in the last few years so the county appraiser is correct when stating that. The LTE write doesn't seem to actually want to show any proof that the county appraiser is incorrect in saying that, preferring instead just to grip about it.

jafs 6 years ago

Picking the "average" property tax bill as the threshold means that approximately 1/2 of property owners don't get a "say" by those standards.

That would include me, so I find the idea objectionable.

The bar seems to have been raised from having "skin in the game" to being in the top half of property ownership by value.

This is one of the problems with making certain levels of money or contribution a prerequisite for comments, or political involvement - one can always simply shift the bar upwards.

Perhaps by some standards, the original commenter isn't paying "enough" property tax to qualify as having a legitimate opinion on the subject.

Katara 6 years ago

Moderate (anonymous) says…Any substantive comments or are we once again going to make the issue about me rather than the county?? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Has anyone else wondered why people, who use their personal experiences as a way to illustrate their point, often get upset when others question it and then claim everyone else is making it about them?

It seems to me to be very similar to the same types of folks who post a link that doesn't say what they claim it says and then get upset when you point that out.

Go figure.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

jafs (anonymous) says…

Picking the "average" property tax bill as the threshold means that approximately 1/2 of property owners don't get a "say" by those standards.

Katara says: Has anyone else wondered why people, who use their personal experiences as a way to illustrate their point, often get upset when others question it and then claim everyone else is making it about them?

Moderate responds

Anybody have anything to say about overvaluation? I provided a personal experience. I cannot generalize and did not.

Thank you for making my point. It is not surprisingly those who pay little that raise the most unrelated fuss when somebody suggest that some may be overcharged (even the property tax owner with the $120K home). Why not limit speech (as if I could) to those with meaningful comments about the topic.

Sure got a subset of the local liberals excited. How come you are commenting if I limited speech??

Katara 6 years ago

It is interesting that you make many assumptions about people who question your opinion. This is not a liberal or conservative issue and I am not sure why you wish to frame the discussion in that manner. Nor do I understand why you seem to think that those who question your comments don't pay anything. It is simply an attempt at smearing the person rather than actually refuting their arguments.

You provided your example of overvaluation. You claim this is a problem but using your own figures, the overvaluation of your property has little, if any, impact on your overall finances. Additionally, it is certainly not feasible for everyone to purchase an appraisal to appeal their property valuations especially since it may not bring about that significant of a difference in the amount of taxes you pay. This is called penny-wise, pound foolish.

You use $200/year as the savings on taxes in your example but you don't include the cost of an appraisal (there are no free appraisals - you either pay directly out of pocket or it is billed as one of the fees a bank charges you, if for refinance purposes.).

You also ignore the fact that appealing your valuation can hurt your chances for a refi as you lose the equity you have built up. In other words, you traded $20,000 potential equity for $200/yr savings (minus the cost of the appraisal). Even at the $120,000 amount, you lost $12,000 to save $120/yr on property taxes according to your example.

Also, you do understand that you are complaining about those you feel don't pay enough in property tax while you, yourself, are trying to lower your tax burden. It seems to me that you are striving to get to the position of the people you are so contemptuous of. Ironic, no?

Katara 6 years ago

You also don't factor in PMI/MIP which many lenders require if you take out more than 80% of the value of the property with your mortgage. If you have reached or are close the threshold for being able to continue your loan without paying PMI and your property value drops, you can't cancel it. Being able to cancel PMI/MIP has a much bigger impact on saving you money over the long run than getting your property taxes lowered.

Katara 6 years ago

Bottomline, there are many ways overvaluation can work in your favor and there are many ways it can work against you.


Carol Bowen 6 years ago

Mathematically, we really would not want all the foreclosed houses used to determine assessment. While, house assessments were inflated, using the closures would drastically deflate them. Millage would have to be increased to retain revenue levels. Many foreclosed houses are stripped of appliances and plumbing fixtures, then neglected by the banks. The other extreme. Maybe, we could adjust assessments by counting one in five foreclosed houses.


Carol Bowen 6 years ago

Moderate, we had the same experience with the assessment being higher than what we paid for the house. We protested and they matched the assessment price to the sale price. On another occasion, we unsuccessfully listed a house. The county appraiser used the asking price to assess the house. The algorithms are developed using specific criteria. The devil is in the interpretation

Katara 6 years ago

Did you do the informal hearing or did you have to appeal higher?

Because if you did the informal hearing then it sounds like the county appraiser is fairly lenient (for the lack of a better word) and that seems to contradict what the LTE is saying.

Carol Bowen 6 years ago

In the first instance,, we met with the panel. The second time, we worked with our state representative. There were a few appraisers in the state who were using the asking price as the assessed value. Several people spoke to some committee. The law was changed.

There's a difference between leniency and faulty math. Our premise was always faulty math. Different appraiser, by the way.

Katara 6 years ago

So, your experience wasn't recent? How long ago did that happen? Before or after the housing collapse? And in what way was the law changed? I'm not interested in your personal specifics, just in the changes overall so I can take a look at them.

My first thought with anything that seems off is usually because of faulty math. I don't think that there is any type of plot to fleece the masses or any conspiracy to take stuff from others as some seem to think.

Faulty math happens but I don't think that is the case with the LTE or with Moderate's experience.

And thanks for answering my questions. :)

Carol Bowen 6 years ago

We have challenged assessments four times. Twice in Kansas and twice in Michigan. It was easier to find the selling prices of comparable houses in Michigan. It's not public information here. None of the challenges is recent.

I think the issue of not including foreclosures in the assessment scheme should be challenged. It would take some work, but it's not impossible.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

Amen. There is that little factor they use to adjust there own evaluation over time - hard to justify mathematically

George Lippencott 6 years ago


There seems to be some thought in your comments this round. I will read and respond

jafs 6 years ago

"Why not limit those with meaningful comments about the topic"

The idea that only people in the top 50% of property ownership by value have anything meaningful to say about the topic is blatantly absurd.

Let's move that up a bit, until Moderate's tax burden isn't sufficient to qualify him (I'm sure that many rich people might like that, to limit speech to other rich folks), and see how he might like that.

Don't insult people, and then act surprised when they object to it.

jafs 6 years ago

Just for fun, I did a little math.

Let's take two property owners, one of whom pays $1800/yr and the other one $2000/yr in property taxes.

Owner A pays $150/month in property taxes. Owner B pays $166.67/month in property taxes.

A 10% increase in property taxes would result in:

Owner A - $15/month more. Owner B- $16.67/month more.

So, for a whopping $1.67 more ($16.67-$15)/month, owner B gets to have a legitimate opinion on the topic of property taxes.

On a more serious note, the idea that only those who pay a certain amount of money should have a legitimate say is a profoundly un/anti-democratic idea, one that harks back to the days of landed gentry/peasants.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

I would have done well back then. Flog those peasants

George Lippencott 6 years ago


Now to deal with your comments. Liberals etc will follow.

  1. Appealing a county valuation has no effect on refinancing your home except see 2.
  2. To accept an overvaluation is to essentially defraud the individuals to whom you sell your home. I would think we are better than that. The bank financing the buyers loan or your refi will generally do an appraisal and well that is where we entered this discussion.
  3. I frankly know of no other way to address overvaluation except to get an appraisal or be able to show that equivalent properties in your immediate area are undervalued compared to your property (the latter might not get you any relief but get their valuations increased). Of course if one has the juice one can go political.
  4. Somebody priced commercial appraisals at close to $400. I used that number. Mine cost less.

Katara 6 years ago

I am still not understanding why you want to frame this discussion as a liberal v. conservatives. Believing your property is overvalued is not a political issue.

  1. When you demonstrate that your property has lost value, it will hurt you on a refinance. Particularly if the value of your property falls below the amount on your mortgage.

  2. There is no defraud. Buyers will place their bids on what they feel the value of the property is. There was a period of time in Lawrence where many prospective buyers were placing bids for more than the asking amount of the property. If you go by comparable properties in which people paid more than the asking price, is your overvaluation fraud?

  3. I can't think of another way to address over or under valuation without some form of appraisal. What's your point?

  4. So what? You lost equity by more than you gained in reduced property taxes. And it still took you more than a year to break even on the amount you spent on an appraisal.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

Now the second part liberals etc.

  1. I made no comparison in this blog about lower or higher valued properties and tax amounts – period. You are reading into previous blogs which were not complaining about property taxes but federal income taxes.
  2. I have not made IMHO previous issues with those property owners who pay their property taxes. I do not have a problem with the property tax except as Republicans use it to avoid higher income taxes. I do have a problem with ever growing property taxes. I do not think I am alone there
  3. I have argued that renters (JAFS accepted) pay less because the tax costs are divided by the number of renters.
  4. I do not know if this is a general problem but past blogs and letters by others suggest that it might be.

My reference to liberals was to Katara and JAFS. You were the two initial responders that drew that comment. I know from past postings that you two are more liberal than I. After all it is my reference. As you pointed out it has no relationship to overvaluation and property owners - unless.

If the overvaluation is systemic than there may be a broader confluence between “liberals” and it

Once again I am baffled by arguments that I should willingly pay more than I owe because it is small. Paying 10% extra for ten years with an average mortgage here in Lawrence yields $2000. That is not small.

Once you refi you have the appraisal – might as well use it. In the example case it would even be cost effective to buy the appraisal as the reduction in tax would pay for it in two years.

Katara 6 years ago

You lost $20,000 in equity (and possibly more over a 10 year period) to gain $2000 in your pocket over 10 years. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Moderate (anonymous) says… "If the overvaluation is systemic than there may be a broader confluence between “liberals” and it"


Are you seriously trying to go conspiracy theorist here?

jafs 6 years ago

"Those not paying at least $2000 in property taxes as assessed by the county need not comment as they have no skin in the game"

I lost most interest in the other arguments once I read that part.

Generally speaking, I have little sympathy for those who buy big expensive houses and then complain about high costs of heating/cooling/property taxes/painting/carpeting, etc.

The obvious way for one to keep costs like that lower is to buy smaller, less expensive houses, which allows for a "cushion" in case costs rise (inflation, etc.)

I believe one of the questions was about a 10% increase in property taxes - for me, that would depend on what the increase is for, and whether or not I agree with how it's spent, in addition to whether or not it was a burden for me financially.

Overvaluation of property is an issue, but so is undervaluation - of course you never hear anybody complain about the latter.

In my various experiences with real estate (more than I ever thought I would have), my overall conclusion is that most of the people involved are either incompetent or crooked, with a few notable exceptions.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

Well I tend to believe that whatever the tax is it should be lawfully calculated.

I am not complaining about the costs to operate the house or even the magnitude of the tax - although I do complain at the rate of increase

Perhaps immoral sums them up

jafs 6 years ago

Also, I appreciate the "exception" for me, but I'm not the only one who rents single family houses - anybody who does so pays the full amount of property taxes on those properties.

And, I don't think there's a "liberal" conspiracy to overvalue houses, but there are distinct differences between liberals and conservatives on tax policy - liberals generally don't mind paying taxes in order to provide a wide range of services, whereas conservatives seem to focus more narrowly on keeping more of their money.

jafs 6 years ago

Also, I appreciate the "exception" for me, but I'm not the only one who rents single family houses - anybody who does so pays the full amount of property taxes on those properties.

And, I don't think there's a "liberal" conspiracy to overvalue houses, but there are distinct differences between liberals and conservatives on tax policy - liberals generally don't mind paying taxes in order to provide a wide range of services, whereas conservatives seem to focus more narrowly on keeping more of their money.

George Lippencott 6 years ago

No, two adjacent house are rentals - you represent a class

Well there might be a third set of taxpayers that

  1. Want a return on investment (good stewardship)
  2. Want increases to be more related to income increases (ability to pay)
  3. Responsible (why do we pay more as a percent of our income than many elites)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.