Posted on 05/26/2015 2:55:52 PM PDT by Theoria
In Ohio, if you don’t own the property, then you don’t pay the tax.
I’m not an attorney, but I’m pretty sure condo ownership can be seized for failure to pay taxes. They’re certainly foreclosed on by the mortgage holder with regularity.
Since apartment dwellers have no property rights in their unit, I’m unsure why you think the government should take property they don’t own.
I can assure you the last time my landlord’s property taxes went up, he raised the rent as soon as the lease expired.
I’m unclear why you think property taxes are some appalling innovation. They’ve been the mainstay of local revenue since long before the Revolution.
I assume that if only property owners should vote on how high property taxes should be, then votes should be in proportion to the taxes paid.
They don't break it out for you but everything from normal maintenance to property taxes to building insurance is included in your rent payment.
I would disagree. You are paying what the market will bear in terms of price for that particular rental in that particular area. And, when push comes to shove, it is the property owner who must send in the money to the tax office.
I’m not an attorney, but I’m pretty sure condo ownership can be seized for failure to pay taxes. They’re certainly foreclosed on by the mortgage holder with regularity.
Since apartment dwellers have no property rights in their unit, I’m unsure why you think the government should take property they don’t own.
I can assure you the last time my landlord’s property taxes went up, he raised the rent as soon as the lease expired.
I’m unclear why you think property taxes are some appalling innovation. They’ve been the mainstay of local revenue since long before the Revolution.
I assume that if only property owners should vote on how high property taxes should be, then votes should be in proportion to the taxes paid.
When Democrats win elections, they get to redistrict however they feel like it. When Republicans win elections, they get to redistrict however the Democrats feel like it.
1) Homeowners pay property tax and it is a very visible tax.
2) Renters pay property tax because it is included in their rent. They just don't see it.
3) Businesses pay property taxes. In some states and cities there is property tax even on the equipment ***inside** the buildings that are also taxed. This property tax is passed on to every customer that buys the product or uses the service ( even the homeless!) There is property tax included in the cost of every product and service from the mining of the raw materials, manufacture, wholesaler, and retailer! It's a **lot** of tax!
Condo owners pay property taxes just like those who live in more traditional housing. No difference.
See #44.
You aren’t necessarily having that tax included in anything, AND the burden of the taxation doesn’t begin to touch a renter or a generalized consumer.
They do not pick a number out of the air or even entirely based on comps.
The landlord figures out in advance what his fixed expenses are, these include property taxes, mortgage payment, insurance, administration and maintenance.
There are other expenses that may or may not be included such as utilities and security and other amenities.
Once they figure out how much their costs are they then figure out what the market rate is in that area and how much their profit will be.
While it is true the landlord is the one who cuts the check for the taxes, mortgage and everything else that is covered by your rent the money in the account comes from your check.
It is like when you pay taxes to the government and they pay for stuff. They may have cut the check but the money came from you.
I haven't read it yet. Gotta go to an appointment. I pinged for later read...
Of course the landlord figures out his expenses, but the economy has an impact and the competition has an impact. A renter isn’t necessarily paying property tax. Also, a renter is certainly not going to get nailed by the country tax office. There are many homeowners, for example, renting houses they own in one area while they live in another. Often they’re delighted just to get someone in the house and paying a chunk of what’s due. Not only do they NOT insist on a profit, they don’t insist on their expenses being met. This is not speculation on my part. I had a military career and saw it over and over again. A renter does not necessarily pay property tax.
I know. I have been a small business owner and a landlord.
Those properties quickly deteriorate and are often abandoned to the city or county and sold ( if the city can) at sheriff's auction. In some cities, like Philadelphia, large portions of whole blocks are abandoned to the city. And....Businesses that do not make enough to cover their expenses, of which property taxes is one of those expenses, go out of business.
Property taxes are one of the most hidden, regressive, and least transparent taxes of all. And....The poor get punched in the nose with them and don't even know it. Hey! You're a Freeper. You're not one of the low info voters and you don't “get it” when it comes to property taxes.
Finally, property taxes mean that no one every actually “owns” anything. The government does. People are really just renters to the government. Fail to pay the government “rent” ( property taxes) and you will soon be evicted.
That explains it a bit.
I’m talking homes in good neighborhoods. Generally, they’re placed with a property manager, and they take a fee, too. The homeowner renting their property is concerned with get a large portion of their expenses covered, but, in my experience, seldom to they get near their expenses.
“I have no idea what this means”
Here’s what it boils down to. Say there are three Congressional Districts each with a population of 100,000 people. In District 1 all residents are eligible to vote. In Districts 2 and 3 only 50% of residents are eligible to vote.
But since representation is set by total population and not eligible voter, all three get a Congressman.
As a result, the “votes” of the voters in Districts 2 and 3 count more than the voters of District 1.
What this case could do is toss out population as a factor, replacing it with number of eligible voters. The result would be that Districts 2 and 3 would be combined, making them equal to District 1.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.