[Chat] Propery Tax hearing

Tue May 3 17:45:39 EDT 2005

Emily,

De facto, what the system really amounts to is that if you have owned 
your house for a while, then it is assessed much lower than a house 
which recently has changed hands.  For example, a house across the 
street from me recently sold for a lot (John Spurrier will know more 
details), and when I looked at the State Department of Assessments and 
Taxation online database, the assessment had gone up by 150%.  With the 
phase-in, it will go up by 50% this year, and then will be subject to 
the 4% per year cap.  Meanwhile, my house went up by 10%, or actually 
less than the 4% per year cap.  In one way, such a system is good in 
that those who have lived here a while are not driven out by a huge 
increase in property values; on the other hand, it clearly can lead to 
huge discrepancies in taxation.  The extreme of this sort of thing is 
California under Proposition 13; the tax on a house can go up 1% per 
year, but as soon as it changes hands, it is reassessed at market value; 
with housing prices out of sight in much of California, you can imagine 
the discrepancies in taxes between a house someone has owned for many 
years and a house that has just changed hands.

You can ask yourself in general about the fairness of a tax that is 
based on how much other people would pay for your house, but which is 
mitigated by the slowness in reassessment as long as the house does not 
change hands, and which is further mitigated by the 4% per year cap on 
assessment increases.  The harder problem is to come up with an alternative.

Our mayor wanted to raise the 4% per year cap to 10% per year (the 
maximum allowed by state law) because he wanted more revenue; there was 
no hint that he would reduce property tax rates.  Fortunately, the City 
Council turned him down.

Steve.

John Spurrier wrote:

> Emily,
>
> The assessments used to be based upon 40 percent of market value, but 
> the rate was around $5.85 per $100 of assessed value, plus the state 
> assessment bringing it to over $6 per $100 of assessed value. Over the 
> past few years they converted to full market value (supposedly) and 
> reduced the rate to $2.46 which is around 40 percent of the old rate. 
> I believe this was because
> publications comparing major cities for economic development and 
> business relocation purposes often compare property tax rates and 
> Baltimore's was so high that it was seen as discouraging investment.
>
> Here's a link to property tax rates around the state:
>
> http://www.fountainheadtitle.com/taxrates.htm
>
> John
>
> John Spurrier
> Your LIVE BALTIMORE Preferred Realtor
> (410) 433-7800
> subscribe to my email newsletter
> jspurrier at cbmove.com
>
>
>
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: echalmers at mindspring.com
> Reply-To: echalmers at mindspring.com,The Charles Village Chat List 
> <Chat at charlesvillage.info>
> To: The Charles Village Chat List <Chat at charlesvillage.info>
> Subject: RE: [Chat] Propery Tax hearing
> Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:49:59 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>
> If the property tax increases people are appealling are anything like 
> mine, I am unsure what the basis of an appeal would be. My property is 
> worth around $250K, and the assessment--admittedly high in dollar 
> amounts--is being raised from $80K by $3K each year for the next 3 
> years. Yes, my taxes will be higher, but I also have a huge equity in 
> the house. I am unsure what I could argue, although of course I would 
> like to keep my taxes low.
>
> The problem as I see it is that the tax rates themselves are so high 
> that it's almost impossible to get a fair calculation of what the 
> assessment should be. If our houses were assessed at market value, 
> none of us--and almost no one else-- could afford them. Thus they are 
> assessed at 1997 rates, and who knows what is fair. The state could 
> make the process a whole lot simpler by lowering the rates and using 
> more market-based assessments. I think that may be what Martin 
> O'Malley wants to do.
>
> Emily
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Spurrier <jfspur at hotmail.com>
> Sent: May 3, 2005 8:03 AM
> To: Chat at charlesvillage.info, Discussion at charlesvillage.info
> Subject: RE: [Chat] Propery Tax hearing
>
> Didon,
>
> I appealed my assessment recently with mixed results. I chose to appeal
> because there were
> mistakes on the property information sheet for a building that I recently
> purchased.
>
> I would suggest that if you haven't done so already, get a copy of the
> worksheet for your house.
> Also, try to locate other similar properties with lower assessments 
> that are
> more in line with the condition of your property that can be used as
> comparables. Then get copies of the worksheets for those addresses.
>
> Is it the new assessment that you are appealing? Aren't you subject to 
> the
> 4% cap for increases?
> Regardless of the amount of the new assessment, your increase should be
> limited to 4% each year.
>
> I brought photographs that indicated property conditions the assessor
> couldn't possible know about.
> They offered a slight reduction which will save me a few hundred dollars
> over the next three years.
> Since I had recently purchased the building at a great price, it was 
> hard to
> persuade the hearing officer that the property was worth less than I paid
> for it.
>
> Good luck!
>
> John
>
> p.s. if you need help with comparables, let me know.
>
>
>
> John Spurrier
> Your LIVE BALTIMORE Preferred Realtor
> (410) 433-7800
> subscribe to my email newsletter
> jspurrier at cbmove.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at charlesvillage.info
> http://charlesvillage.info/mailman/listinfo/chat_charlesvillage.info
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at charlesvillage.info
> http://charlesvillage.info/mailman/listinfo/chat_charlesvillage.info
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at charlesvillage.info
> http://charlesvillage.info/mailman/listinfo/chat_charlesvillage.info
>
>