Latest Breaking News

Gormy Cuss

(30,884 posts)

146. That on percent is the ad valorem rate for state collection. Most CA property owners pay 1.25-1.5%

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:10 PM

Dec 2011

because of all the local bonds and parcel taxes. So in terms of a mill rate it looks comparable.

What really saves owners money under Prop. 13 is that the valuation of the property for purposes of taxation can only increase by 2% per year unless there's an ownership change or there are major changes to the structure(s), like an addition or detached in-law unit.

Because of the 2% annual cap most of us who bought before the crash are still being assessed at considerably less than current market value. If however the current market value of the house drops below the assessor's value, an owner can petition for a temporary reduction in the assessed value and many owners have done so.

Prop. 13 was sold as a keep-grannies-in-their-homes protection but as is often the case with CA props, the biggest beneficiaries weren't the ones in the campaign ads.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

179 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Overturning of Prop. 13 sought in lawsuit (California) [View all] alp227 Dec 2011 OP

Be interesting to see if it works this time around, but I doubt it ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #1

Oh Great, just right after I purchased a home itsrobert Dec 2011 #2

You're not paying your fair share, you ungrateful 1%er slackmaster Dec 2011 #3

You are so wrong. schmice Dec 2011 #6

Sometimes the sarcasm thingy isn't necessary tularetom Dec 2011 #10

Really? schmice Dec 2011 #13

It's mostly only a FAIL Control-Z Dec 2011 #41

psst....slackmaster is a CA residential property owner too Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #12

And you know this how? schmice Dec 2011 #19

I express social consciousness by donating to worthy charities, not by posting on anonymous forums slackmaster Dec 2011 #20

I'm glad it isn't a joking matter then. schmice Dec 2011 #30

This suit wouldn't affect your bloody property taxes, though. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #55

You need to read up on Prop 4 (Gann) ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #65

Then that needs to be challenged, too. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #69

You clearly are not aware how popular they were at the time ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #96

Bans on interracial marriage were once popular, too. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #99

Comparing the proverbial apples and oranges. schmice Dec 2011 #117

the common point is that the things I mentioned were once JUST as popular as Prop. 13 and Prop. 4 Ken Burch Dec 2011 #124

Maybe not, but it might affect everyones' income tax, sales tax, fuel tax, etc. slackmaster Dec 2011 #137

In other words-you got yours. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #160

You've already suggested that I'm a racist because I support Proposition 13. slackmaster Dec 2011 #172

Nothing I was talking about equals anybody taking anything from you "by force of arms". Ken Burch Dec 2011 #174

getting rid of the supermajority requirement wouldn't affect property taxes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #58

Easy there, I was being sarcastic. I have a long track record on DU of being pro-13. slackmaster Dec 2011 #16

thanks for the clarification CountAllVotes Dec 2011 #18

You were just being sarcastic? schmice Dec 2011 #21

The old DU is still up. Feel free to search it or just use Google for my posts on the subject. slackmaster Dec 2011 #23

Maybe later. schmice Dec 2011 #25

95% of the human race has it worse than you. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #56

Not true, but why ruin a good screed with facts ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #66

If those changes hadn't been forced, the problems with the new funding structure would never Ken Burch Dec 2011 #71

The California pols had a responsbility to do the right thing and instead kicked it down the road. ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #94

But there was nothing they COULD do without raising taxes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #98

What makes you so confident about that? ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #104

So what were those alternatives? Ken Burch Dec 2011 #114

agreed schmice Dec 2011 #121

What? Raising the sales tax? That can't be something progressives could support Ken Burch Dec 2011 #169

Really? ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #164

So what, as you see it, was this magical way Ken Burch Dec 2011 #166

"Doing the right thing" was going to have to involve tax hikes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #161

You are so wrong. schmice Dec 2011 #120

So, you have an issue with the way social programs have worked Ken Burch Dec 2011 #162

Maybe inserting emoticons would save trouble too. LanternWaste Dec 2011 #26

I just re-discovered them this morning. There are a bunch of new ones, and they don't always work. slackmaster Dec 2011 #27

I was living in Mission Beach in the sixties WHEN CRABS ROAR Dec 2011 #59

It wasn't worth the horrible damage it caused. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #62

The damage was done by the pols, not the people who voted for Prop 13 and later prop 4 ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #67

The ONLY way to fix that is to get rid of the supermajority requirement Ken Burch Dec 2011 #68

Once 13 passed, there was NO ALTERNATIVE Ken Burch Dec 2011 #72

The "waste and theft in social programs" thing is just a racist, right-wing meme. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #44

Maybe if you had read all my comments on this thread schmice Dec 2011 #79

I retract the comment on megaprisons then. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #168

Has anyone checked to see if California property taxes are that much lower than JDPriestly Dec 2011 #127

Mill rates of 1% (like California's) aren't all that unusual in other states mainer Dec 2011 #140

The property tax rate sounds reasonable enough in California. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #144

That on percent is the ad valorem rate for state collection. Most CA property owners pay 1.25-1.5% Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #146

Here's a site comparing income, property, and sales taxes state by state mainer Dec 2011 #141

And prop 13 massively increased the tuitition at the UC system, making many campuses Ken Burch Dec 2011 #50

More mistatements ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #73

Even without Prop 209, minority and working-class enrollement was declining in the UC system Ken Burch Dec 2011 #84

You might want to check you stats ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #103

It isn't so much a matter based on race as it is based on economic status. schmice Dec 2011 #113

You haven't offered any alternatives Ken Burch Dec 2011 #102

I have ambivalent feelings. schmice Dec 2011 #109

So you've possibly made a case for forming a third party in Cali Ken Burch Dec 2011 #111

Only served the rich? schmice Dec 2011 #116

The phrase "only served the rich" was in reference Ken Burch Dec 2011 #125

This message was self-deleted by its author CountAllVotes Dec 2011 #11

It is not wrong, but Prop. 13 also roody Dec 2011 #14

I am not a business owner schmice Dec 2011 #22

Are you aware that commercial property taxes can be held down MORE than residential taxes under 13? Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #28

Thank you ! jaysunb Dec 2011 #37

Your father's property tax should be determined by what other people are willing to pay for his home slackmaster Dec 2011 #17

Your dad would have been able to stay in his home anyway Ken Burch Dec 2011 #45

The failure was that of CA politicians afterwards ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #74

It's economic royalism to defend 13. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #51

"So long as a few bitter old white folks, none of whom WHEN CRABS ROAR Dec 2011 #60

They could have voted for Prop 8, the non-barbaric alternative Ken Burch Dec 2011 #61

That it got no serious traction with the voting populace should be a clue ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #105

It got no serious traction because Howard Jarvis was a bazillionaire loudmouth Ken Burch Dec 2011 #107

It is pretty clear that you were not around when this all happened ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #115

More hyperbole and very few facts ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #75

I'm sorry you feel that way. schmice Dec 2011 #87

You twisted my words there. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #97

Quit with the false memes ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #106

Yeah... Fredge Dec 2011 #57

Prop 13 happened because people were losing their homes because they could not afford the property still_one Dec 2011 #4

Super DITTO! SoapBox Dec 2011 #5

Thank you. schmice Dec 2011 #7

Nothing good that came of 13 could possibly have been worth the damage it did Ken Burch Dec 2011 #46

Nonsense ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #78

Anything that affects state revenue Ken Burch Dec 2011 #82

You are not an economist. schmice Dec 2011 #95

So it was done YOUR way and there's NO money for social services or any of the rest Ken Burch Dec 2011 #100

they could not afford the property taxes AlbertCat Dec 2011 #9

This message was self-deleted by its author CountAllVotes Dec 2011 #15

I was living in California during the Prop. 13 campaign... KansDem Dec 2011 #36

No, it's not just about property taxes. The provision for a supermajority affects all Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #31

Bingo ! jaysunb Dec 2011 #38

Gas and sales taxes are regressive. Property taxes are progressive. closeupready Dec 2011 #29

thanks for that. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #112

"Incentives to businesses" is right-wing code for "break the unions and kill the poor". Ken Burch Dec 2011 #52

There is no analysis in your statements. schmice Dec 2011 #83

Sorry...but everytime somebody says "incentives to businesses" Ken Burch Dec 2011 #89

Prop. 13 happened because of slick marketing by big commercial interests. SunSeeker Dec 2011 #123

It and Prop 4 were supported in large numbers by the voters ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #132

If I'm not mistaken, Tansy_Gold Dec 2011 #151

There have been any number of good suggestions over time ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #153

It won't affect you that much. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #48

What good is it for a few bitter old white people to keep their homes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #53

Our taxes have risen every year. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #77

Then the answer would just to have been Ken Burch Dec 2011 #80

I think that maybe the Supreme Court did not allow that. I'm not sure, but I think JDPriestly Dec 2011 #145

California top state income tax 9.3% + 1% millionaire surcharge mainer Dec 2011 #138

But, as long as the supermajority requirement stays in place Ken Burch Dec 2011 #167

True. As I pointed out, we need to raise income taxes. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #178

you might've forgotten about the state DREAM Act alp227 Dec 2011 #154

Actually, Prop 13 INCREASED your property taxes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #54

Prop 13 was passed long before we bought our house. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #85

But your property taxes are much higher than they would have been without 13 Ken Burch Dec 2011 #86

I live in an older, well established community that is being gentrified. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #126

I think it's impossible to say what anyone's present taxes would be in the absence of Prop. 13 slackmaster Dec 2011 #143

Again, more bad information from you. ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #133

Luckily, even if this passed it wouldn't change the property tax provision. Kablooie Dec 2011 #171

The supermajority provision SHOULD be overturned. Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #8

Supermajority schmice Dec 2011 #32

I don't trust them either, but we can't blame them for doing nothing when their hands are tied. Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #33

Washington state has this too KT2000 Dec 2011 #24

narcissistic Californians tedder10 Dec 2011 #34

Did you attend public school here? slackmaster Dec 2011 #35

No. We don't need higher taxes jaysunb Dec 2011 #39

Racism?!?! slackmaster Dec 2011 #40

Of course there was racism Ken Burch Dec 2011 #47

Bingo ! Bango ! Bongo ! n/t jaysunb Dec 2011 #64

More unsupported hyperbole ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #81

That structure couldn't be fixed without the ability to raise taxes Ken Burch Dec 2011 #101

No other way but revenue? ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #108

Sorry Ken, you're waaaay out in left field on this one. I remember the discussion. My parents... slackmaster Dec 2011 #134

Are you quoting from a Republican campaign pamphlet there? Ken Burch Dec 2011 #49

Jerry Brown's alternative property tax measure in '78 would have protected those people too. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #63

Two links for anyone who is interested in real information about the California state budget slackmaster Dec 2011 #139

self-delete Ken Burch Dec 2011 #42

It needs to be overturned, if for no other reason than the fact that Ken Burch Dec 2011 #43

Please lose the false memes that Prop 13 gentrified public higher education in California ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #130

Prop. 13 was a trojan horse sold as saving grandma but it killed her grandkids SunSeeker Dec 2011 #70

Prop 13 saved seniors, weak pols are what hurt their grandchildren ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #88

With the supermajority requirement, it wasn't possible to "do the work" Ken Burch Dec 2011 #91

Revenue, espcially early on was not the issue ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #135

Prop 13 wasn't necessary to save seniors Ken Burch Dec 2011 #93

Interesting slam against the Democrats, working people, the poor, the retired, the people of color ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #136

It wasn't very many poor people voting for 13 Ken Burch Dec 2011 #158

Too bad the facts do not bear out your assumptions ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #163

Full Agreement. I saw Prop 13 ruin my daughter's school. Mojeoux Dec 2011 #155

Your fight is not with Prop 13 or 4, its with the pols who did not do their jobs for several decades ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #156

Indeed. Other than the tiny minority of fixed-income seniors Ken Burch Dec 2011 #159

Again factless hyperbole ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #165

What kind of turnout was there in the election in which Prop. 4 passed? Ken Burch Dec 2011 #170

It takes a 2/3 vote of the legislature to raise taxes, an impossible standard, meanwhile ... kwassa Dec 2011 #76

Initiatives are certainly a mixed blessing ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #90

Initiatives have been a disaster in CA SunSeeker Dec 2011 #122

Tell that to the mountain lions ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #131

Exactly. Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #147

It also needs real campaign finance reform laws Ken Burch Dec 2011 #92

Much of that is already underway ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #110

What's Underway? All I see is paralysis caused by supermajority requirements. SunSeeker Dec 2011 #119

New regulations are flowing down ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #129

Now that is worth dreaming of- Tumbulu Dec 2011 #118

Excuse me for saying this, but Californians are already highly taxed mainer Dec 2011 #128

I am a Californian who will not vote for any tax increases. Throd Dec 2011 #142

According to some here that makes you a racist 1%er ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #148

Project much? U4ikLefty Dec 2011 #150

Another hit and run poster with nothing to back them up ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2011 #152

It's not as though service levels and low tuition COULD have been maintained after 4 and 13 Ken Burch Dec 2011 #157

At what point does increasing taxes have a negative effect? mainer Dec 2011 #173

The real drain on revenue has been the megaprisons and California's fascist drug laws. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #175

So readjustment of spending priorities might be enough mainer Dec 2011 #176

In the Eighties, perhaps. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #177

Then you're against your state doing anything progressive. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #149

I hope to god it works. The republican minority uses 2/3 req to hold state hostage yurbud Dec 2011 #179