Taxes and fairness?

[normiss 855]

It's everywhere.

Bass Pro land deal

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Property tax deductions for parkland, greenland and in some cases agriculatural lands make perfect sense to me.

The issue is the allowed abuse of those designations.

[normiss 855]

The article clearly states the owners are doing nothing illegal.

[DiverMike 5]

I live in the Midwest where a lot of real farms eventually turn into malls and business parks. Real estate taxes are based on the value of the property as it is currently being used - not the potential use.

I don't know that it is 'unfair' that someone rents cows or bees to get a lower tax rate on an undeveloped lot. I do think it is unfair to tax someone's real estate on what it could potentially be earning if they sold it to a developer.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

The article clearly states the owners are doing nothing illegal

And nothing in my post says they did either.

[billvon 3,075]

Undeveloped land is taxed much less than developed land. Makes sense to me.

[normiss 855]

Except for it's location, I tend to agree.
A land value that high and they pay 1/3 the tax I do on a 1/2 acre.
I'm surprised everyone is supporting the wealthy paying less in taxes.

[billvon 3,075]

>A land value that high and they pay 1/3 the tax I do on a 1/2 acre.

Is your 1/2 acre improved?

[Rick 67]

This has been SOP for years. Many of the vacant properties on I-drive and US 192 (tourist area) have cows grazing on them so they can be classified agricultural for taxes, even though they are obviously investment properties.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Except for it's location, I tend to agree.
A land value that high and they pay 1/3 the tax I do on a 1/2 acre.
I'm surprised everyone is supporting the wealthy paying less in taxes.

That's just property taxes. Who knows what other taxes are being paid? And so they put cows on it. Even if the intent is to avoid taxes, they are putting it to the exact use that is stated - agriculture.

Once the land is improved, then the taxes come in. Think of reasons for these taxes. Need to put in roads and sidewalks. Sewage. Water. Gas. Electric. All that is dinero.

If it's anything like Cali, take a look at your property tax bill. Here, there are always a bunch of special assessments put in. I.e., back in 1990, they developed this property into housing. The city put in sewers, paid for it by issuing bonds, and putting on a property tax yearly until the thing is paid off. Then several things are added.

Undeveloped land doesn't have those things. It's just sitting there being used by some cows or chickens or alpacas or alligators.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[wmw999 2,544]

Yup, I'm pretty much in agreement here. If its use profile is generally that of what it's classified as, then I don't really see a problem, even if someone "only did it to make money." I know a couple of non-farm places that have enough acreage on their property to sell the hay off it, for the same reason.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[normiss 855]

The entire area has been saturated with commercial and industrial business for YEARS and this property is totally surrounded.
This is clear mis-categorizing land use.
But when your rich buddies are fellow investors, all you need to do is throw a couple of cows on the property and voila!

Yet taxing is sooooo simple some feel the rich should pay more.
Except in this case. Or that. Or those. Or mine. Or yours.
It's clear how easy sticking it to one group is when ALL tax law is bogged down in a government mire of regulations and exceptions.
Anything is ok to make someone else pay. So long as it doesn't affect 'me'.

[DiverMike 5]

I am confused. If he is using the land to let a single cow wander around, how is it miscategorized? Are you arguing it should be categorized as an empty commercial lot because his neighbors have commercial lots and it might someday be used commercially?

Not with you on this one.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Rick 67]

The issue is it is clearly investment property. This debate has been going on for years in the Orlando area. We have properties worth millions of dollars that is being taxed at a significantly lower rate by virtue of "a few cows". Some feel the investors sitting on the property until it is worth more should be taxed at the higher rate.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

The issue is it is clearly investment property.

By whose definition or decision? Are you able to read the mind of the property owner to determine if he just doesn't want a lot a property for his favorite cow to be comfortable?

I know I am being a little ridiculous, but tax valuation is pretty black/white.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Rick 67]

Quote

Quote

The issue is it is clearly investment property.

By whose definition or decision? Are you able to read the mind of the property owner to determine if he just doesn't want a lot a property for his favorite cow to be comfortable?

I know I am being a little ridiculous, but tax valuation is pretty black/white.

Hence the on going debate. I tend to side more with the land owner but I can see the other side also. This is in no way "farm land". there are some livestock owners that rent the cows to the property owners just to avoid taxes. Legal yes right IDK.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[wmw999 2,544]

It's a pisser. Would the fix to resolve those not-too-many investors be worse than the problem? It's impossible to have a perfect system.

The best might be to get the city to act on it, but it's the city's call, then. And yeah, cronyism carries a big weight in city politics lots of places.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Rick 67]

Quote

It's a pisser. Would the fix to resolve those not-too-many investors be worse than the problem? It's impossible to have a perfect system.

The best might be to get the city to act on it, but it's the city's call, then. And yeah, cronyism carries a big weight in city politics lots of places.

Wendy P.

very true when the area was first developed years ago when
Walt came to town it was all agricultural. Up until a few years ago the building dept was still run as an good old boy network. Getting a permit in a timely manner depended on who you knew.

On the 1 hand the increase in tax revenue would be fantastic. But on the other hand the local government cannot act on what they think you might do with your property in the future.

Iguess you can tell I am on the fence with this one.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Some feel the investors sitting on the property until it is worth more should be taxed at the higher rate.

Yep. We can usually get a sense of what people feel. But ask them to "think" about something and different responses often occur.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[champu 1]

There are a preponderance of pathological bad situations that can arise from giving the government the power to declare undeveloped land to have some enormous potential value and demand taxes be paid accordingly. Especially if you feel there is already cronyism between developers and those in the assessor's office.

"Hey, I want that land over there but the owner doesn't want to sell it, could you jack up his taxes for me?"

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

"Hey, I want that land over there but the owner doesn't want to sell it, could you jack up his taxes for me?"

I agree completely.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The issue is it is clearly investment property. This debate has been going on for years in the Orlando area. We have properties worth millions of dollars that is being taxed at a significantly lower rate by virtue of "a few cows". Some feel the investors sitting on the property until it is worth more should be taxed at the higher rate.

Investment gains are virtual until realized. One zoning change or newly discovered endangered lizard and the presumed value plummets. You can't tax on promise, only on what is established.

[Rick 67]

Quote

There are a preponderance of pathological bad situations that can arise from giving the government the power to declare undeveloped land to have some enormous potential value and demand taxes be paid accordingly. Especially if you feel there is already cronyism between developers and those in the assessor's office.

"Hey, I want that land over there but the owner doesn't want to sell it, could you jack up his taxes for me?"

that is a good point. Personally i"feel" they should be taxed higher but I do not like what that could lead to. So like Wendy said before "It is impossible to have a perfect system".

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Investment gains are virtual until realized. One zoning change or newly discovered endangered lizard and the presumed value plummets. You can't tax on promise, only on what is established.

so, in short, property taxes of any kind are completely unfair. you should only be taxed when you sell property - not be getting mugged every year

it's pretty much an arbitrary method to take money locally from residents

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Investment gains are virtual until realized. One zoning change or newly discovered endangered lizard and the presumed value plummets. You can't tax on promise, only on what is established.

so, in short, property taxes of any kind are completely unfair. you should only be taxed when you sell property - not be getting mugged every year

no, you tax it based on it usage type.

Residents need police, fire, municipal infrastructure, schools, etc. Property taxes are a large contributor to that. Renters pay as well, but indirectly.

Agricultural land needs far fewer of these.
Heavy industrial tends to use the land hard (pollution).