To understand the property tax revolt, you need to understand property taxes

Well, here we go again. CNN tells us that a property tax revolt is spreading, with a nationwide movement to eliminate property taxes on the march.

Most of us are familiar with the basic scenario of property taxation. Every state is replete with numerous political subdivisions commonly known as “municipal corporations.” These are counties, cities, school districts, fire districts, water districts, sewer districts, diking distraction, etc., etc. Each of these is known as a “taxing district” because state statute authorizes these districts’ legislative authority to adopt an annual budget and levy that budget as a tax on the property owners in the district.

Image created using AI.

Unfortunately, CNN presents this news in such a way as to perpetuate the two major misconceptions about property taxation: (1) the “rental” misconception, and (2) the “single value” misconception.

It’s easy to see why the rental concept is appealing. Elon Musk has likened property taxes to “a de facto lease from the government.” Failure to pay rent will put you out on the street. Likewise, if you don’t pay your property tax, the government can initiate a judicial process that results in the sheriff seizing your property and selling it at a public auction.

But this is a distorted view of property taxation. Suppose you owe a large debt you cannot pay. Is that debt a property tax? Odd question, you say? But your creditor can take you to court, get a judgment against you for the debt, and then move the court to issue a “writ of execution” against your property for the amount of the judgment. That writ commands the sheriff to seize your property, sell it at public auction, and pay the debt from the proceeds of the auction.

So, just like unpaid rent, any unpaid debt has the potential to put you out on the street. But we would laugh at the claim that we rent our property from our creditors.

The single-value concept is far more serious than the rental concept because it provides camouflage for government expansion without citizen awareness.

The single value concept holds that property tax liability is a function of a single variable: the assessed value of the property. Hence, inflation conceals government expansion from the citizen’s view because, under the single value concept, the taxpayer expects that inflation of property values will be matched in sync by inflation of tax liability.

So, imagine the chagrin of our friend who just received a notice from his county that a 4.7% increase in assessed value resulted in a 10.94% increase in tax liability. This makes no sense under the single value concept, and it adequately demonstrates that the single value concept is false.

Eliminate all taxes with the exception of sales taxes and tariffs. This funds the government. Thus all pay when they buy. All pay! This includes the uber rich. Elon Musk does not sit on a pile of gold under his bed. He uses his gold to invest in companies and projects that create wealth and jobs and taxes.

California would screw this up and increase sales taxes to levels that destroy, and the best and the brightest will flee to conservative states as they are doing today.

So, just like unpaid rent, any unpaid debt has the potential to put you out on the street. But we would laugh at the claim that we rent our property from our creditors.

Allow me to say bull to the crap from this Slag of a nitwit.

In reality the family home is immune from collection for any number of debts. If you did not put it up as collateral they can not take it. They can sue you but you can file for Bankruptcy and get it leaving you in your home. This is not the case with GOVERNMENT DEBT YOU FOOL. No one can be put in jail for private debt but you can for GOVERNMENT DEBT which is what property tax is.

The government has no desire or reason to want to work with you when they can take your house and sell it to someone else because you failed to pay less then $9 of your property tax. And then they keep everything they get out of the house.

Even if you used the property for collateral and fail to pay the debt the creditor is allowed to only take the amount owed. They must hand anything beyond that back to the owner. That is not the case with the government.

The government has every incentive in the world to raise your taxes until they can take your home and they do.

Recently in Detroit they admitted to doing exactly that. And now that the State Supreme Court has said they shouldn't do that they are claiming that their entire fiscal well being depends on taking people's property by hook or by crook.

This Non-thinker and certified moron should be placed in the stocks and pelted with garbage.

The underlying problem in America is not a particular source of government funding, but the fact that we have too much government at every level. It costs too much, delivers too little, is not malleable, and is rife with corruption. In the private sector if an entity doesn’t perform up to expectations it is either replaced or modified to perform as defined. With government, because of the hogs feeding at the trough, it only grows larger and more expensive. Government at all levels should be under perpetual reorganization to prevent the exact situation we find ourselves in today.

Did those idiots at American Thinker even read what they wrote?!?!

AT claims that this is a misconception:
“Failure to pay rent will put you out on the street.”

Here’s what they said:
“But this is a distorted view of property taxation.”

But then the geniuses at AT say:
“So, just like unpaid rent ... has the potential to put you out on the street.”

Hey MORONS, you just argued against yourselves!

“But we would laugh at the claim that we rent our property from our creditors.”

So, not paying rent will get you thrown out of your residence (by court order).

AND not paying your Property Tax WILL ALSO get you thrown out (by court order) of your residence.

But, they can’t be compared as the same.

American Thinker doesn’t think very well.

Property tax can work. Our county lowers the millage (tax rate) as total assessed value increases. They do not inflate the budget to spend any "largess."

Eliminate the property tax and look for all sorts of user fees to be billed willy-nilly. I don't hear that discussed when there's talk of nuking the tax. Want fire protection? Pay the fee. Didn't pay? burn, baby, burn. Police? ditto. Want to use the park? pay up. Your street needs resurfacing? Here comes the assessment, and so on, and so forth.

Replace it with a consumption (sales) tax? No thank you; you decouple the user from the cost of the service. If it is raised to the state level, then you end up paying for the largess of other municipalities.

And regardless of how the various departments are funded, renters will see the fees incorporated in their rent. It is really a non-issue except when you deal with income tax exemptions / adjustments. And there is a scheme in place for that at the state level already. It is solvable at the Federal level for renters with a tweak to the IRS tax code.

Property tax IS taxation WITH representation. Don't like how high it is in your municipality? Vote accordingly.

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.