My property taxes have hovered around $5000 a year for some time. They haven't changed appreciably even though the market value of the house dropped 25% or more a few years ago. If I could find just the right place, I'd downsize in a minute.
My property taxes have hovered around $5000 a year for some time. They haven't changed appreciably even though the market value of the house dropped 25% or more a few years ago. If I could find just the right place, I'd downsize in a minute.
Really! $200?? Chicken feed compared to our taxes in NJ. I feel darned lucky that I only pay $7800/annually. Most of the towns around me are in the five figures, but we have high ratables in our area which keeps our taxes lower, relatively speaking.Originally Posted by iris lily
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
High property taxes are yet another reason renting is becoming increasingly appealing to me (in a small city center or resort town rather than the 'burbs or the country). For what Cathrine pays in Prop taxes alone, I could rent a nice house somewhere - even in Calif if I went back to someplace like in my ski resort town where you can find nice little cabins right in town for under $700/month. I wonder what the "true cost of home ownership" would be if people calculated in all the property taxes they paid over the years - along with maintenance, repairs, renovations, insurances, cost to buy and sell the house, interest on a mortgage, capital gains taxes when sold, etc... - and used that "total" amount to determine what they paid as home owners. For instance, I paid $120K for my first house and sold it for $220K several few years later. Seems like a big profit but isn't once you add in all those other expenses over the years. Renting is looking better and better all the time. Plus, when the Apocalypse comes to suburbia (referencing the OP's article), it'll be easier to move on down the road to a better life.
$2,400 a year is high relative to what I was paying in property tax when I moved into the house eight years ago (by about 50%; I'd have to dig to find the specific percentage). That figure also does not include the several hundreds of dollars we now pay separately as "fees" for street "maintenance" (I use that term quite loosely), plowing city streets (another generous verb), sewers and hydrants, permits, etc. So let's say closer to $3,000 a year. Our house is a mid-70s rambler of about 1800 square feet on a standard city lot and probably would sell for around $150-160,000 now (well below what I paid for it but at least slightly higher than it was during The Great Recession). The annual property tax amount has never gone down in all that time, even if the "taxable value" of the house fluctuated to reflect the disaster in the market. It does not help that the Minnesota Legislature manipulates property tax heavily in response to voting years and/or whoever squeaks the loudest about tax rates making it impossible to go on.
Maybe based on what others are paying, the property tax here (at least on a house in this bracket) is not killer. But it certainly has not seemed to track the value of the property and it does not reflect well on what people with similar houses are paying in first-ring suburbs here. And it's not the only higher tax we pay here. Like I said elsewhere, at least I can see where much of the money is going. But ... well, now we're reaching a whole separate off-topic topic.
Success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome. - Booker T. Washington
It's sort of like Warren Buffet says: that he pays much much more in property taxes on a very modestly priced house the bought in North Dakota for $14,000 years ago and that hasn't appreciated by a huge amount, then he does on a place he bought in Calif that is now worth millions. Seems unfair. During the boom years, if I had kept my first house, it's value went up to over $500K yet the property taxes would have remained at $300/year for me. That wouldn't happen in too many places outside of Calif.where they would have risen to reflect the overall housing situation. However, if on the other hand someone bought a house during the boom and paid $500K for it and their property taxes were $5,000/year, when the bust came and their house value dropped by half they probably still have to pay $5,000/year in taxes unless they can get them reduced by the county. OK now I'll quite hijacking the suburbia thread and changing it into a property tax thread.Maybe based on what others are paying, the property tax here (at least on a house in this bracket) is not killer. But it certainly has not seemed to track the value of the property and it does not reflect well on what people with similar houses are paying in first-ring suburbs here. And it's not the only higher tax we pay here. Like I said elsewhere, at least I can see where much of the money is going. But ... well, now we're reaching a whole separate off-topic topic.
My daughter and son-in-law live very close to the downtown urban core of a major US city. My wife and I live in the suburbs of that same city. They pay far, far more for housing, insurance, taxes, education, home upkeep etc. In fact they pay far, far more for pretty much everything except for food (the same as ours) and commuting expenses (They have a slight advantage over us. They drive less distance but in heavier traffic). I think that in our area the suburbs give a far better quality of life but understand that is a matter of personal taste and preference. However, looking purely at the economics of the situation there is no question that us suburbanites come out way ahead at least in our little corner of the planet.
Yeah, it's cheaper for me to live in suburbia, too. A while back I put my house on the market and was going to move into the mountains. I found an REO for $70,000. in a gorgeous neighborhood. (mostly second homes.) But, it was a 45 min. drive from town. It also had association fees. (about $1,000. a year.) The land alone was worth $150,000, but I think it would have been hard to sell. Plus, everything up there had two bedrooms and two bathrooms. I prefer a small one bedroom, one bathroom cottage. (Lower overhead and less cleaning.)
I also would never put my house (or any assets) into someone else's name. I've heard a lot of horror stories about parents putting their kids on the deed or titling their house to the kids to avoid probate and/or estate taxes and then the kids get sued or have an accident, etc... and the parents lose their home because it's in the kids name. Best to put things like that in a revocable living trust instead.[/QUOTE]
Yes. So true. I have a copy of the trust, but it still makes me nervous to be grouped with my brothers. I'm going to email my parents your story. I feel like the same thing that happened to my older brother could easily happen to the middle one. (stroke and coma.) He has the same lifestyle...
I think if your parents want to stay in their home until they pass or decide to sell and move, then a living trust is the way to go. My Dad this on his property and it worked for us (sis and I) but we didn't have any issues or disagreements about how to settle either my Moms or my dads properties. Just sold everything, paid off any debts and medical bills, end of life stuff, taxes, etc.. and split what ever was left 50/50. I was the executor and trustee so handle everything. However I have heard that many siblings get into battles for many years over this stuff - and then never have a relationship again. With your parents estate being so large, and possible fights with your brothers about how to do thing, even having a trust can be difficult.
I agree with Jane. I live in the suburbs in a neighborhood built in the 60's. Our house is under 1200 square feet. Every inch is used. Very close to stores and quiet. Sadly the town mayor wants it to be more like a mini city with dead end planning and skyrocketing taxes. The schools are good. I would like to move back to the city if the kids would be out of school.I would definatly downsize and use more public transportation.I want to walk/bike more perhaps we'll lead by example. I use a manual push mower, so far I'm the only one on the block.I enjoy using my carpet sweeper too at home. I am working on stocking up on natural food, visiting the weekly farmer's market etc. That kind of shift takes time and commitment but it'll become a good habit before you know it.I can picture self sustained suburbia.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote