Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 02 Oct '13 03:59
    http://news.yahoo.com/slave-descendants-fighting-tax-hikes-104349183.html

    Residents of one of the few remaining Gullah-Geechee communities on the Southeast coast opened new appeals Monday against soaring property values that brought them big tax hikes, fearful they could be forced off their lands their families have owned since their ancestors were freed from slavery.

    The African-American residents of the tiny Hog Hammock community on Georgia's Sapelo Island got sticker shock last year when steep increases in their property values saddled them with whopping tax bills.

    Skyrocketing appraisals and tax bills came amid pressure from affluent mainland buyers driving up land values while seeking property along or near the Atlantic coast. But critics say the increasing tax burden violates protections enacted to help preserve the island's indigenous inhabitants.

    Made up of slave descendants long isolated from the US mainland, the Gullah-Geechee culture has clung to its African roots and traditions more than any other in America. Hog Hammack -- with fewer than 50 residents -- is one of the last such communities from North Carolina to Florida.

    Julius and Cornelia Bailey saw the appraised value of the single acre on which they have a home, a convenience store and a small inn shoot from $220,285 to $327,063 last year. Appraisers in Georgia 's McIntosh county held firm on the new value after being ordered to take a second look in January by local authorities.

    The Baileys and more than 40 of their neighbors appealed anew Monday after seeing little relief from the new appraisals.

    Cornelia Bailey said her tax bill shot from about $800 to $3000 thought she and other island residents receive virtually no county services. They have no schools, no trash pickup, no police station and only one paved road.

    "So what are we paying for?" Bailey said after the board shot down her appeal and at least 9 others Monday. "We are just paying for the privilege of living on Sapelo Island. We don't want to be crybabies, but it seems like we are being treated unfairly."

    So what should be done to help them if anything?
  2. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 04:34
    All peoples' primary residences should be exempt from property taxes.
  3. 02 Oct '13 04:45
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    All peoples' primary residences should be exempt from property taxes.
    Does this depend on whether they rent, own, or live there by the beneficence of others?
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 04:47
    Originally posted by JS357
    Does this depend on whether they rent, own, or live there by the beneficence of others?
    I don't think anyone pays property taxes AND rent. It's kind of one or the other.
  5. 02 Oct '13 05:04
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    I don't think anyone pays property taxes AND rent. It's kind of one or the other.
    Landlords pass their property taxes on to renters. You said, "All peoples' primary residences should be exempt from property taxes." How does this work?
  6. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 05:05
    Originally posted by JS357
    Landlords pass their property taxes on to renters. You said, "All peoples' primary residences should be exempt from property taxes." How does this work?
    No, landlords do not pass their property tax onto renters.
  7. 02 Oct '13 05:08
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    No, landlords do not pass their property tax onto renters.
    Of course they do. It is part of their costs to be recovered by rents.
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 05:12
    Originally posted by JS357
    Of course they do. It is part of their costs to be recovered by rents.
    You need to make up your mind. Is the property tax the landlord's cost, or the renter's cost? The renter pays rent. The landlord pays the property tax.
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 05:15
    Similar logic to that diplayed above:

    The government began taxing air conditioners, so I'm passing the cost of air conditioning to my employer - because I recover the cost of air conditioning from my paycheck. So really, my home air conditioning is my employer's expense.
  10. 02 Oct '13 05:18
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    You need to make up your mind. Is the property tax the landlord's cost, or the renter's cost? The renter pays rent. The landlord pays the property tax.
    And the landlord recovers his property taxes as part of the rent. It is part of the renter's cost. The landlord is an intermediary of that sum.
  11. 02 Oct '13 05:22 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Similar logic to that diplayed above:

    The government began taxing air conditioners, so I'm passing the cost of air conditioning to my employer - because I recover the cost of air conditioning from my paycheck. So really, my home air conditioning is my employer's expense.
    One level up, it is. Two levels up, it might be an expense for your employer's customer. But they won't know it, neither might your employer.
  12. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 05:25
    Originally posted by JS357
    And the landlord recovers his property taxes as part of the rent. It is part of the renter's cost. The landlord is an intermediary of that sum.
    What about buildings that are seized for failure to pay property taxes?
  13. 02 Oct '13 05:32
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    What about buildings that are seized for failure to pay property taxes?
    Obviously, their owners did not have enough, or at least, pay enough, from rents.

    Assuming a pure system where the building'srental income is the only source of property taxes.

    I don't see why this is a big deal. I have no ideological agenda. Landlords pay taxes from their income. Their income is from their renters. So their renters pay the landlords' property taxes, one step removed.
  14. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    02 Oct '13 05:37 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by JS357
    Obviously, their owners did not have enough, or at least, pay enough, from rents.

    Assuming a pure system where the building'srental income is the only source of property taxes.

    I don't see why this is a big deal. I have no ideological agenda. Landlords pay taxes from their income. Their income is from their renters. So their renters pay the landlords' property taxes, one step removed.
    If the renters are paying the property taxes, the renters get punished when the property tax is not paid. That's not how it works. The legal owner is the one who gets punished because the legal owner is the one who is responsible for the taxes whether he has renters or not.

    Assuming a pure system where the building'srental income is the only source of property taxes.


    I don't know what the purpose of this assumption is. The source of property taxes is the owner of the property. If he doesn't pay, the property is confiscated, and the taxes are paid that way. It has nothing to do with renters.

    Buildings that get seized are a counterexample to your assumption that landlords pass on taxes to renters. Sometimes they don't.
  15. 02 Oct '13 06:17
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    If the renters are paying the property taxes, the renters get punished when the property tax is not paid. That's not how it works. The legal owner is the one who gets punished because the legal owner is the one who is responsible for the taxes whether he has renters or not.

    [quote]Assuming a pure system where the building'srental income is the ...[text shortened]... ounterexample to your assumption that landlords pass on taxes to renters. Sometimes they don't.
    Not at all. I said, "Obviously, their owners did not have enough, or at least, pay enough, from rents."

    A building owned by a person who intends to rent it, and intends it to be source of profit, will have to charge enough to pay the property taxes and other expenses from the gross rental income. The renters' payments will cover the property tax. I don't understand why this is an issue. Renters pay property taxes, without some of the benefits and risks.