If it costs $90k for a $4 million home then a $1 million home would be taxed at $22.5k. That’s still half a years salary at median wages for an average priced home in many markets. Don’t let your hatred for rich people lead you to advocating for shitty policies.
Inflated home values are a huge part of the problem. That’s a large part of the point I’m making. At face value it seems fine to say “they have a $4 million home, they can afford the property taxes” but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you’re going to end up in a shitty spot. If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn’t be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it’s specifically related to second and third homes.
but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you’re going to end up in a shitty spot
And that’s why you don’t do that and instead make progressive taxation a thing.
If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn’t be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it’s specifically related to second and third homes.
Nah. It is good and correct to tax extremely large/valuable single-family homes at high rates even if they’re primary residences.
(Of course, another aspect of the issue is that single-family houses in very high-demand areas should lose their zoning protection so they can be bought out and replaced with multifamily buildings. Reasonably-sized single-family houses should never have gotten to unaffordable valuations in the first place.)
Seeing as most homes increased by about 400% in the last 10-15 years in that area, while wages increases negligibly, I feel they have a point. On the other hand, it is difficult for most people, myself included, to garner sympathy when you see someone with a 4.4 million dollar home.
I can have sympathy for people with more money than me, but not for their financial situation, because their finances are objectively better than mine will ever be, and I’m not feeling sorry for myself.
If the land your single family home is sitting on is suddenly worth four million dollars, that’s a sure sign that that plot of land should NOT be used for single family zoning. It’s doubtlessly some of the most valuable land in the city, close to job centers and lots of community resources. That kind of land should be used for multi family housing. Quit hoarding it so you can live your Leave it to Beaver fantasy in the middle of a built up urban area.
Not quoting you specifically here but the general vibe of this owner:
“But I want to live as a rancher in the middle of Manhattan. I demand we warp the tax laws to enable it.”
But if you built your house in a relatively undesirable place and the area gets gentrified due to no fault of your own, now you have to get out of the way because richer people decided they like your land after all?
The house is valued at $4.4 millions.
If it costs $90k for a $4 million home then a $1 million home would be taxed at $22.5k. That’s still half a years salary at median wages for an average priced home in many markets. Don’t let your hatred for rich people lead you to advocating for shitty policies.
I’m going with this is the actual problem.
Also, your math assumes a flat tax rate, and any decent tax system is progressive. I don’t know how Florida’s works, but again, actual problems.
Inflated home values are a huge part of the problem. That’s a large part of the point I’m making. At face value it seems fine to say “they have a $4 million home, they can afford the property taxes” but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you’re going to end up in a shitty spot. If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn’t be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it’s specifically related to second and third homes.
And that’s why you don’t do that and instead make progressive taxation a thing.
Nah. It is good and correct to tax extremely large/valuable single-family homes at high rates even if they’re primary residences.
(Of course, another aspect of the issue is that single-family houses in very high-demand areas should lose their zoning protection so they can be bought out and replaced with multifamily buildings. Reasonably-sized single-family houses should never have gotten to unaffordable valuations in the first place.)
Seeing as most homes increased by about 400% in the last 10-15 years in that area, while wages increases negligibly, I feel they have a point. On the other hand, it is difficult for most people, myself included, to garner sympathy when you see someone with a 4.4 million dollar home.
I can have sympathy for people with more money than me, but not for their financial situation, because their finances are objectively better than mine will ever be, and I’m not feeling sorry for myself.
If the land your single family home is sitting on is suddenly worth four million dollars, that’s a sure sign that that plot of land should NOT be used for single family zoning. It’s doubtlessly some of the most valuable land in the city, close to job centers and lots of community resources. That kind of land should be used for multi family housing. Quit hoarding it so you can live your Leave it to Beaver fantasy in the middle of a built up urban area.
Not quoting you specifically here but the general vibe of this owner:
“But I want to live as a rancher in the middle of Manhattan. I demand we warp the tax laws to enable it.”
Get the fuck out of here, you entitled fuck.
But if you built your house in a relatively undesirable place and the area gets gentrified due to no fault of your own, now you have to get out of the way because richer people decided they like your land after all?
Not that it changes your point, but Florida’s property tax is not progressive in any of the areas that I lived.