Retirement

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Your statement is incorrect on many levels. #1, I don't own a house in California. #2, you still are covered by Prop 13. Taxes are limited to 1% of your purchase price, plus fees, an inflation factor, bonds, etc.
Now, if you happened to buy before the market crashed around 2008, and they lowered your taxes because the value of your house dropped a lot in the following years, now they are raising them up based upon recent increased value until they reach the 2008 level, plus the inflation factor. It is what you signed up for when you bought the house.
Prop 13 passed because the citizens of the state were literally being taxed to the point of having to sell their property. Now, you know what your taxes will be when you buy, and they can't be raised an unreasonable amount while you still own the home. If you don't like the fact the neighbor who has lived there for 20 years pays less than you, don't buy a house there.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
Your statement is incorrect on many levels. #1, I don't own a house in California. #2, you still are covered by Prop 13. Taxes are limited to 1% of your purchase price, plus fees, an inflation factor, bonds, etc.
Now, if you happened to buy before the market crashed around 2008, and they lowered your taxes because the value of your house dropped a lot in the following years, now they are raising them up based upon recent increased value until they reach the 2008 level, plus the inflation factor. It is what you signed up for when you bought the house.
Prop 13 passed because the citizens of the state were literally being taxed to the point of having to sell their property. Now, you know what your taxes will be when you buy, and they can't be raised an unreasonable amount while you still own the home. If you don't like the fact the neighbor who has lived there for 20 years pays less than you, don't buy a house there.


I really think what the previous poster is saying is that if you have been in your home for 30 years-and now it's worth 500,000. A new owner would pay the new tax on the $500,000.00-not what you are paying. It IS TRUE that those who have been in their houses for decades in California benefit much more than new buyers-although there are aspects to Prop 13 (the non-ability of state government to raise taxes past the 1ish per-cent) that benefit everybody. As an ex-Southern Californian I can tell you there are now plenty of ways that they are getting around Prop 13 in many areas. These "special assessments" (i.e. taxes) are called "mello roos districts", "lighting and landscaping districts" and a myriad of other names that have basically taxes that need to be paid.

 

[funflyer]

Originally Posted by CKN

I really think what the previous poster is saying is that if you have been in your home for 30 years-and now it's worth 500,000. A new owner would pay the new tax on the $500,000.00-not what you are paying. It IS TRUE that those who have been in their houses for decades in California benefit much more than new buyers-although there are aspects to Prop 13 (the non-ability of state government to raise taxes past the 1ish per-cent) that benefit everybody. As an ex-Southern Californian I can tell you there are now plenty of ways that they are getting around Prop 13 in many areas. These "special assessments" (i.e. taxes) are called "mello roos districts", "lighting and landscaping districts" and a myriad of other names that have basically taxes that need to be paid.



Yep. I was in my Socal home for 21 years, and in that time, the taxes trippled from all the new assessments the county kept adding. I just checked the county website and see the new owners are paying an additional 25% higer taxes in just 4 years. Retiring to Arizona was like getting a big pay raise for us.

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

300% in 21 years and a 25% increase in 4 years, and the county is still complaining Prop 13 is bankrupting them, right? I was in LA County in the early 70s and saw a friend's property taxes on a ranch in Canyon Country increase in successive years 40%, 300%, then 1250%. After the last increase they were forced to sell the property because the taxes were more than the annual income of the ranch. Most people didn't see this much in the way of increases, but year over year assessment increases of 100% weren't uncommon, and the counties weren't adjusting their mill levies to prevent collecting amounts well above their legitimate needs. They just looked for more and more ways to spend their windfalls. Californians were outraged at the local governments unrestricted over taxation and lack of fiscal restraint and passed the proposition as a means of self preservation.
Yes, long term residents pay less than new buyers. But the problem isn't the long term residents paying too little. It's the government wanting to take too much. One of the reasons the middle class is leaving The Golden State in droves.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
300% in 21 years and a 25% increase in 4 years, and the county is still complaining Prop 13 is bankrupting them, right? I was in LA County in the early 70s and saw a friend's property taxes on a ranch in Canyon Country increase in successive years 40%, 300%, then 1250%. After the last increase they were forced to sell the property because the taxes were more than the annual income of the ranch. Most people didn't see this much in the way of increases, but year over year assessment increases of 100% weren't uncommon, and the counties weren't adjusting their mill levies to prevent collecting amounts well above their legitimate needs. They just looked for more and more ways to spend their windfalls. Californians were outraged at the local governments unrestricted over taxation and lack of fiscal restraint and passed the proposition as a means of self preservation.
Yes, long term residents pay less than new buyers. But the problem isn't the long term residents paying too little. It's the government wanting to take too much. One of the reasons the middle class is leaving The Golden State in droves.


Did they sell to developers? If they did they made a killing. There still are a few "hold outs" in farm/ranches in So. Cal. Why one would want to get up at 5 a.m. and milk cows-instead of walking away with millions is hard for me to fathom. Just sayin......

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Canyon Country in the 70s, you nailed it, but it wasn't millions. Being forced out was not their choice. They raised specialized poultry for premium restaurants, donated some of their land for little league field use, etc. They didn't walk away, but bought land further out and continued the business.

Just because land and home prices increased dramatically doesn't mean the county should be able to increase their spending year over year at a rate of over 5 times the inflation rate. They were blowing through taxpayer money like it was nothing. Anyboby complained taxes left them no money for bread, their response was "Let them eat cake". Prop 13 was nothing less than a revolt.

 

[Donald]

There are retirement guides that show how retirement friendly various states are. Consider that. Some of the points are state income tax rate and is it on pensions and,/or SS. What about sales tax? Property tax?

We are planning on retiring next year and will move to DE which has no sales tax and the property tax is about 1/10 of property tax in NY. It's within driving distance of family in northeast. Being near the DE beaches will lure my daughters & family to visit often.

I am not suggesting DE specifically, just saying to consider how retirement friendly various states you are considering are.

 

[GMFan]

Originally Posted by PimTac


Escaping a political environment only to find out its changing in that same direction in your new residence is a risk. AZ is headed that way.


This is pretty much every state now. Sorry, but the grass isn't going to be much greener on the other side, they're all just "30 years behind" California, so enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Originally Posted by GMFan
Originally Posted by PimTac


Escaping a political environment only to find out its changing in that same direction in your new residence is a risk. AZ is headed that way.


This is pretty much every state now. Sorry, but the grass isn't going to be much greener on the other side, they're all just "30 years behind" California, so enjoy it while it lasts.


This is why I'm investing in property. I own 120 acres of land that I hope, in 30 years, will fund my retirement.

With our population steadily increasing, the demand for land and property is only going to go up.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted by Donald
There are retirement guides that show how retirement friendly various states are. Consider that. Some of the points are state income tax rate and is it on pensions and,/or SS. What about sales tax? Property tax?

We are planning on retiring next year and will move to DE which has no sales tax and the property tax is about 1/10 of property tax in NY. It's within driving distance of family in northeast. Being near the DE beaches will lure my daughters & family to visit often.

I am not suggesting DE specifically, just saying to consider how retirement friendly various states you are considering are.

Yes, I have seen those articles. You have your reasons for moving to Delaware. To me, that's was where I would move if I wanted a long winter.

 

[bbhero]

Funny how you are running from high taxes....

Get what you ask for.... Then move when it suits oneself.

 

[Kage860]

Blaming the original Californians and New Yorkers for high taxes is just as ignorant as blaming Poland for being occupied by the ussr. These states are where all the freeloaders congregated and outvoted the working people. That being said I'm in the highest tax county in the country because i prefer to stay near family then minimizing expenses. When my wife and I retire I wouldnt mind going to Asheville NC. From what I read it seems nice.

 

[tedonom]

Hello everyone, I came to your forum, you know, I read your posts and I am very pleased that there are such people in our country. Maybe someone of you is interested in music as someone from the visitors wrote earlier, and would like to go to a concert with me? (removed - mod)

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by tedonom
Hello everyone, I came to your forum, you know, I read your posts and I am very pleased that there are such people in our country. Maybe someone of you is interested in music as someone from the visitors wrote earlier, and would like to go to a concert with me? (removed - mod)

I'd want dinner first.

 

[dnewton3]

bye bye, spammer ...

 

[Yah-Tah-Hey]

Definitely not Nebraska. Property tax funds everything. Every year the legislature and governor make lots of hoopla about our high property taxes and at the end of the session, nothing has been done because there isn't anything left to tax.The ones making the most noise are the growers who were paying $8000 dollars an acre a few years back. Now the crop isn't what it cost to grow it, there isn't a market for it thanks to the Donald, and the tax man cometh once a year with a big smile on his face looking at all that high priced ground. We might be seeing Willie again.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by Donald
There are retirement guides that show how retirement friendly various states are. Consider that. Some of the points are state income tax rate and is it on pensions and,/or SS. What about sales tax? Property tax?

We are planning on retiring next year and will move to DE which has no sales tax and the property tax is about 1/10 of property tax in NY. It's within driving distance of family in northeast. Being near the DE beaches will lure my daughters & family to visit often.

I am not suggesting DE specifically, just saying to consider how retirement friendly various states you are considering are.


DE gets your money through annual vehicle registrations. You might want to look into that, they are ridiculously high...