Quote:

---

2. Local control - ALL of your property taxes are levied by someone who most likely lives in your county and many times by you when you vote for a bond. Income sales and the vat all go to a higher jurisdiction that throws it into a pot you may or may not get back

---

This point can't be emphasized enough. One drawback to moving away from property taxes is that the new funding mechanism would be controlled by the comptroller.

The state (comptroller) will redistribute the taxes collected based on politics/needs/etc. Its already happening with our school taxes. Best case scenario for the large urban areas generating the revenue is that their reps team up and keep money in those towns. That's the worst case scenario for the rural parts of the state. In my personal opinion, the character and strength of rural Texas is instrumental to the long-term success/image/strength of our state. But for that to occur, taxes from the cities would be redistributed to the rural areas, thereby depleting the resources for the places were most people live. This would be politically untenable for those areas and their representatives/senators/etc.

Germany has a VAT tax. So everyone hides their sales and thus reduce their taxes. That's stupid. Go to a shopping center in any major city and they wont take your credit card. They have to hide their sales....so they take cash only. Very 1950's.

lobopride said:

---

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Good thing Huffines will eliminate ALL property taxes because he is a TRUE Republican /s.

---

It sounds great, but what do you replace it with?

---

Rainbows and Unicorn farts according to his website.

---

I think the /s means sarc off

Huffines has been talking about broadening the base for sales taxes including sales tax on house transactions (he spoke to a trade group I am a member of)

WestAustinAg said:

---

Germany has a VAT tax. So everyone hides their sales and thus reduce their taxes. That's stupid. Go to a shopping center in any major city and they wont take your credit card. They have to hide their sales....so they take cash only. Very 1950's.

---

Vat also taxes professional services such as engineers or lawyers. I don't know about doctors

rgag12 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Taxation is theft.

---

Look, I Have been a diehard conservative since my youth, but this concept of taxation is theft is a bit ludicrous. There are certain spend items that benefit the entire country : military and highways being just a start. Now if you want to say that unaccountable spending is theft, I'll be all onboard

---

You are talking about the free rider problem. 1) It's more or less a myth, 2) Everything the government does can be privatized, and 3) Even if the free rider problem were legit, it still doesn't justify government stealing money from people.

The entire basis for the legitimacy of government is social contract theory, which is complete and utter nonsense.

---

The government does too much, but to privatize basic things like fire and police is extremely dumb. Anyone who has picked up a history book knows why.

---

Private police and fire would be superior. There are more private police even now in America. The government sucks at everything they do. Police and fire are not exemptions.

Martin Cash said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Taxation is theft.

---

Look, I Have been a diehard conservative since my youth, but this concept of taxation is theft is a bit ludicrous. There are certain spend items that benefit the entire country : military and highways being just a start. Now if you want to say that unaccountable spending is theft, I'll be all onboard

---

You are talking about the free rider problem. 1) It's more or less a myth, 2) Everything the government does can be privatized, and 3) Even if the free rider problem were legit, it still doesn't justify government stealing money from people.

The entire basis for the legitimacy of government is social contract theory, which is complete and utter nonsense.

---

You don't really believe that, do you?

Do you?

---

Absolutely!

" If it moves, privatize it, if it doesn't move, privatize it; since everything either moves or doesn't move, privatize everything." Walter Block

Quote:

---

Texas needs a tax overhaul. VAT or sales tax to replace property taxes.

---

I miss many things about Texas, but one I don't miss is property taxes. They're insane! I can't imagine what you guys are going through.

We live in Tennessee. Property taxes adjust once every four years. The jump after that fourth year generally averages out to 20-25%, but it's still at a lower rate than what you pay in Texas.

Like Texas, Tennessee has no state income tax. However, the sales tax is high...9.5% AND they tax food at 7.5%. I often say I'm paying less than if I lived in Texas...but I've never run the numbers. One thing is for sure...the states figure out a way to get their piece of the pie...by whatever means necessary.

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Taxation is theft.

---

Look, I Have been a diehard conservative since my youth, but this concept of taxation is theft is a bit ludicrous. There are certain spend items that benefit the entire country : military and highways being just a start. Now if you want to say that unaccountable spending is theft, I'll be all onboard

---

You are talking about the free rider problem. 1) It's more or less a myth, 2) Everything the government does can be privatized, and 3) Even if the free rider problem were legit, it still doesn't justify government stealing money from people.

The entire basis for the legitimacy of government is social contract theory, which is complete and utter nonsense.

---

The free rider problem is not a myth, there are a plethora of examples proving the it true, particularly when it comes to public goods. While I agree that all goods and services provided by government "can" be privatized, those with little to no profit opportunity will never be privatized. Why do we have toll roads running alongside government provided freeways? Why don't public parks and greenspaces provide the same rides, food, and entertainment as Six Flags or Disneyworld for free? Everyone is willing to take advantage of those resources, as long as someone else pays for it, hence, the free rider problem.

Lastly, social contract theory runs the gamut of pro-sovereign to pro-individual, so the generalization into a single thought does little to prove the point. Government is the camel's nose. Based on certain social contract theories, it's up to us as individuals to rein in and tie up that beast, to never let it sneak even a nostril under the tent. As long as government has the power to collect taxes by force and print money at-will to provide goods and services, it will grow unmitigated. The question becomes, what are we going to do about it now? The camel has all but driven us from the tent.

This discussion has gone off into tax authority versus appraisal district, etc.

The bottom line is that we don't own our property, even if we have a clear deed and no mortgage. We are renting it from the government.

That needs to change.

Depending on your financial situation, it would make sense to not live in Texas if your primary expense is property taxes in your later years. There are several other states where you could reduce or eliminate this burden.

There are obviously other factors to consider but it's something to assess.

Voting should be a cross between Spartan policies and the old policies of the US.

Only those who served in the military were allowed full citizenship in sparta. Being a citizen was something to aspire to and work toward for the betterment of your country. In the US you either had to be a property owner (and thus a tax payer) or have a certain amount of wealth and thus be a tax payer.

If you contribute nothing to the functioning of the government or the safety of the country you should have no say regarding how those resources are spent.

This should go towards the beaurocrats as well.

You pay no taxes on your income from the state.

You also get no vote and cannot form unions. As a beaurocrat you are a servant of the state.

I've got until the end of the month.

They'll get the check then.

Here's your annual reminder that land and property owners foot the bill for all the roads, schools, fire, and police.

YouBet said:

---

Depending on your financial situation, it would make sense to not live in Texas if your primary expense is property taxes in your later years. There are several other states where you could reduce or eliminate this burden.

There are obviously other factors to consider but it's something to assess.

---

Florida property taxes are around 1%. And no income taxes. That's probably where i'm moving at some point. Love the panhandle.

I sure do wish my state rep, Kyle Kacal, attempt to do something to end property taxes.

BobaFettsClone said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Taxation is theft.

---

Look, I Have been a diehard conservative since my youth, but this concept of taxation is theft is a bit ludicrous. There are certain spend items that benefit the entire country : military and highways being just a start. Now if you want to say that unaccountable spending is theft, I'll be all onboard

---

You are talking about the free rider problem. 1) It's more or less a myth, 2) Everything the government does can be privatized, and 3) Even if the free rider problem were legit, it still doesn't justify government stealing money from people.

The entire basis for the legitimacy of government is social contract theory, which is complete and utter nonsense.

---

The free rider problem is not a myth, there are a plethora of examples proving the it true, particularly when it comes to public goods. While I agree that all goods and services provided by government "can" be privatized, those with little to no profit opportunity will never be privatized. Why do we have toll roads running alongside government provided freeways? Why don't public parks and greenspaces provide the same rides, food, and entertainment as Six Flags or Disneyworld for free? Everyone is willing to take advantage of those resources, as long as someone else pays for it, hence, the free rider problem.

Lastly, social contract theory runs the gamut of pro-sovereign to pro-individual, so the generalization into a single thought does little to prove the point. Government is the camel's nose. Based on certain social contract theories, it's up to us as individuals to rein in and tie up that beast, to never let it sneak even a nostril under the tent. As long as government has the power to collect taxes by force and print money at-will to provide goods and services, it will grow unmitigated. The question becomes, what are we going to do about it now? The camel has all but driven us from the tent.

---

I haven't heard of any good examples that a free market couldn't provide a workaround.

The problem is that you cannot control the beast. America started out as one of the most free and limited governments in history. It has since grown into the largest government in the history of the world.

You cannot tame the beast.

Marcus Brutus said:

---

This discussion has gone off into tax authority versus appraisal district, etc.

The bottom line is that we don't own our property, even if we have a clear deed and no mortgage. We are renting it from the government.

That needs to change.

---

The right of a sovereign to tax property has been around since said sovereign was able to claim title to the land, and then divvy it up amongst the people. It's not like this is a new concept.

Topics such as this only add to my belief that it will take a total economic collapse to settle the issue. Politicians do not work in our interest, and this prevents any sort of meaningful reform because it scares THEM.

Spotted Ag said:

---

Here's your annual reminder that land and property owners foot the bill for all the roads, schools, fire, and police.

---

Here's your annual reminder that taxes on rented property are a pass-through expense that is paid by the tenant.

WestAustinAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Depending on your financial situation, it would make sense to not live in Texas if your primary expense is property taxes in your later years. There are several other states where you could reduce or eliminate this burden.

There are obviously other factors to consider but it's something to assess.

---

Florida property taxes are around 1%. And no income taxes. That's probably where i'm moving at some point. Love the panhandle.

---

So how do they pay for schools and why are we not copying that?

I never thought Florida might become my fallback state.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

This discussion has gone off into tax authority versus appraisal district, etc.

The bottom line is that we don't own our property, even if we have a clear deed and no mortgage. We are renting it from the government.

That needs to change.

---

The right of a sovereign to tax property has been around since said sovereign was able to claim title to the land, and then divvy it up amongst the people. It's not like this is a new concept.

---

I dgas how long it's been around. Feudalism and socialism have been around since the beginning of human existence and I don't want that either.

If they want to tax me based on property value, fine, but they should have no right to the property. Not paying property taxes becomes a lien against the property. Bull*****

Martin Cash said:

---

Jason C. said:

---

Taxes that increase with fluctuating "market-based" property appraisals carried out by the taxing entity, instead of by vote by representatives, are undemocratic. Especially when they're (after income taxes) the largest tax most taxpayers pay. We aren't talking adding half a penny to sales tax when a housing market gets hot.

---

You do realize that the taxing entities have nothing to do with appraisals, right?

---

Immaterial as it is still a 3rd party government entity generating a phantom valuation. And they play games by increasing the land value one year, then the structure value the next, etc.

It is a scam system. If you bought your house for $300K you should be taxed on $300K. Not $450K just because maybe you could sell it for that. What if the valuation was $1 million? Why should you have to pay tax on $1 million?

There is no other asset you have to pay taxes on an unrealized paper valuation.

I would strongly prefer Texas have a state income tax or VAT tax and no personal property taxes to pay for government services.

As well, I don't think people should have to pay ISD taxes if they do not have children attending the ISD. There is way too much waste and reckless spending and budget increases in public school systems. They only way this stops is to cut off the $ flow and have the ISDs and schools be held accountable to those who are actually using and paying for the services.

At minimum, if you have kids and choose to have them educated in private schools you should be exempt from ISD taxes. I need that $$ to pay toward my kids tuition.

I'm sorry for your loss, I think of my parent's daily. But getting back to taxes, they tax your used oil, tires and batteries. It has gotten ridiculous.

Marcus Brutus said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

This discussion has gone off into tax authority versus appraisal district, etc.

The bottom line is that we don't own our property, even if we have a clear deed and no mortgage. We are renting it from the government.

That needs to change.

---

The right of a sovereign to tax property has been around since said sovereign was able to claim title to the land, and then divvy it up amongst the people. It's not like this is a new concept.

---

I dgas how long it's been around. Feudalism and socialism have been around since the beginning of human existence and I don't want that either.

If they want to tax me based on property value, fine, but they should have no right to the property. Not paying property taxes becomes a lien against the property. Bull*****

---

So what should the entity do when you don't pay the taxes?

Shoefly! said:

---

I'm sorry for your loss, I think of my parent's daily. But getting back to taxes, they tax your used oil, tires and batteries. It has gotten ridiculous.

---

That is a point that so few seem to grasp. While Federal income taxes are always front and center in any tax debate, I'll wager that the remaining tax burden rivals them for the common man. Whether it's property, gasoline, or whatever "pass through" taxes occur, we pay a $&#@load of taxes.

Dad was 97, and had lived a long and prosperous life. I miss him, but I grieve more for his misery the last view months of his life more so than for my loss - one that was expected. I do appreciate the kind words.

B-1 83 said:

---

Shoefly! said:

---

I'm sorry for your loss, I think of my parent's daily. But getting back to taxes, they tax your used oil, tires and batteries. It has gotten ridiculous.

---

That is a point that so few seem to grasp. While Federal income taxes are always front and center in any tax debate, I'll wager that the remaining tax burden rivals them for the common man. Whether it's property, gasoline, or whatever "pass through" taxes occur, we pay a $&#@load of taxes.

---

Of course, and it is why Biden is being disingenuous to the point of just being a liar when he says if you make less than $XXXK your taxes won't increase. That may be true for federal income taxes, but all the other service taxes, higher costs due to new taxes on companies and industries, etc. get directly passed through to the consumer, the tax payer. He is lying and he and his minions know it.

Husky Boy Jr. said:

---

96ags said:

---

I don't mind the property tax system, but it should be based on your purchase price not a annual valuation.

As long as you don't add to or change the use of the property, the valuation should not change.

---

That makes a lot of sense. Plus I would avoid dealing with the mouth breathers at the appraisal district.

---

This is essentially what California did with Prop. 13 back in the 1970s. Value is set by the sale price at time of sale, and the assessed value can only rise by some limited percentage (2% per year, I think.)

This can lead to its own distortions, especially when people own a property for a long time. My parents have lived in the same house in Livermore (about 40 minutes from Oakland) for about 50 years now. They paid $36k for the house when they bought it, I think a year or two before Prop. 13 passed. Current tax assessment is in the $85k range.

A quick look at Zillow tells me that if they sold the house today, they'd probably clear $1m, easily. (An almost identical house, on a slightly smaller lot a block and a half away, sold for $1.015m 6 months ago.)

On one hand, there's no danger of being taxed out of the house. On the other, they can't afford to move out, even if they downsize, unless they either leave the state, or buy a single-wide somewhere like Modoc or Barstow, because they wouldn't be able to afford the taxes. That's actually part of the reason that the real estate market in California is so pinched - because people like my parents can't afford to sell their house and move into a smaller one.

If you want to make the tax system fair, to my mind the ultimate in equality would be a fixed head tax. Every adult resident pays $x every year. No exemptions, no exceptions, everyone pays the same. Not that it has any chance of happening.

DrEvazanPhD said:

---

Jason C. said:

---

Taxes that increase with fluctuating "market-based" property appraisals carried out by the taxing entity, instead of by vote by representatives, are undemocratic. Especially when they're (after income taxes) the largest tax most taxpayers pay. We aren't talking adding half a penny to sales tax when a housing market gets hot.

---

Yep. I love going to protest my taxable value and being asked "what information can I provide to show my home is not worth what the county says it's worth."

Bull****

---

Comparable sales . . . ?

The neighbor who paid 500k over market price while bidding against 20 other buyers is who destroyed your property taxes for the local neighborhood. Hope that helps.

-Former commercial property tax consultant.

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

Martin Cash said:

---

Jason C. said:

---

Taxes that increase with fluctuating "market-based" property appraisals carried out by the taxing entity, instead of by vote by representatives, are undemocratic. Especially when they're (after income taxes) the largest tax most taxpayers pay. We aren't talking adding half a penny to sales tax when a housing market gets hot.

---

You do realize that the taxing entities have nothing to do with appraisals, right?

---

Immaterial as it is still a 3rd party government entity generating a phantom valuation. And they play games by increasing the land value one year, then the structure value the next, etc.

It is a scam system. If you bought your house for $300K you should be taxed on $300K. Not $450K just because maybe you could sell it for that. What if the valuation was $1 million? Why should you have to pay tax on $1 million?

There is no other asset you have to pay taxes on an unrealized paper valuation.

I would strongly prefer Texas have a state income tax or VAT tax and no personal property taxes to pay for government services.

As well, I don't think people should have to pay ISD taxes if they do not have children attending the ISD. There is way too much waste and reckless spending and budget increases in public school systems. They only way this stops is to cut off the $ flow and have the ISDs and schools be held accountable to those who are actually using and paying for the services.

At minimum, if you have kids and choose to have them educated in private schools you should be exempt from ISD taxes. I need that $$ to pay toward my kids tuition.

---

Preach. This would cut my property taxes by more than half.

Husky Boy Jr. said:

---

The most equitable way to tax is a state income tax but that is a non starter for the state GOP.

---

Why income rather than sales or flat?

B-1 83 said:

---

rgag12 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

Here's another twist to the "taxpayers voting" concept………..

The 4 heirs to the family ranchito all live outside of that county. We pay taxes there, yet cannot vote on issues impacting taxes there. How do we solve that little pickle?

---

Move there or sell the land

---

So I should have a vote in some of my property tax impacting areas, but not others? Ok…..

---

Short answer is I know it sucks for you, but that's the way it is. You get to vote in one district. There is no other option.

As you said earlier you know of no one that pays no taxes: property, sales, income, etc. Should I get to vote in San Antonio because I have to pay a resort tax when I go to the Hyatt? I pay taxes in that district, but dont get to vote on whether I think resort taxes are fair.

Edit: and I agree with you. Property tax is morally evil IMO.

Langenator said:

---

Husky Boy Jr. said:

---

96ags said:

---

I don't mind the property tax system, but it should be based on your purchase price not a annual valuation.

As long as you don't add to or change the use of the property, the valuation should not change.

---

That makes a lot of sense. Plus I would avoid dealing with the mouth breathers at the appraisal district.

---

This is essentially what California did with Prop. 13 back in the 1970s. Value is set by the sale price at time of sale, and the assessed value can only rise by some limited percentage (2% per year, I think.)

This can lead to its own distortions, especially when people own a property for a long time. My parents have lived in the same house in Livermore (about 40 minutes from Oakland) for about 50 years now. They paid $36k for the house when they bought it, I think a year or two before Prop. 13 passed. Current tax assessment is in the $85k range.

A quick look at Zillow tells me that if they sold the house today, they'd probably clear $1m, easily. (An almost identical house, on a slightly smaller lot a block and a half away, sold for $1.015m 6 months ago.)

On one hand, there's no danger of being taxed out of the house. On the other, they can't afford to move out, even if they downsize, unless they either leave the state, or buy a single-wide somewhere like Modoc or Barstow, because they wouldn't be able to afford the taxes. That's actually part of the reason that the real estate market in California is so pinched - because people like my parents can't afford to sell their house and move into a smaller one.

If you want to make the tax system fair, to my mind the ultimate in equality would be a fixed head tax. Every adult resident pays $x every year. No exemptions, no exceptions, everyone pays the same. Not that it has any chance of happening.

---

California is literally the fecal standard for tax destruction for a state with property tax nonsense. The issues in NY and CA are the sole result of the taxing basis and have required massive change in appraisal systems.

In 2001, loan officers would call around to appraisers to see who could hit a value for the appraisal. The appraiser would get the order to do the work if he/she could hit the value before the appraisal. This lent to a future with independent appraisers due to valuations being manipulated.

Also, Zillow is in the grave because they have led people to horrible horrible valuations and now hold a devalued portfolio due to their horrible asset valuation model.

Yep I absolutely hate paying my property taxes every January.