How about no tax increases without making cuts to existing government. When do we see that? Their only solution to every problem is to stick out their hand to the taxpayer. I'm tired of the game.

Just be over 65!

Saved over $100,000 in property taxes paid this year by protesting.

Y'all should do the same.

https://www.youtube.com/live/AykMs3fkGGE?feature=share

cecil77 said:

---

Just be over 65!

---

The key is to "identify" that you're over 65

AlaskanAg99 said:

---

According to my.MUD, this exemption o ly applies toward the school portion of your taxes, city/county/mud/port authority/hospital district is still as it was before.

Which is not how I thought it would work as a homeowners exemption would be across the board.

---

Yep. For all the big hoopla this saves a whopping $780 a year. 60k x 1.3% (Katy ISD, I'm sure others are in the same ballpark). That's not "relief"

crowman2010 said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

Just be over 65!

---

The key is to "identify" that you're over 65

---

Hey! That should work, right?

This is ultimately a nice gesture, but mainly pointless.

Why are our exemptions defined as absolute numbers, whereas our taxes are percentages?

Helping us with our taxes in a substantial manner would require rewriting the law so that our exemption is the larger of these two values:

$100,000
-or-
20% of appraised value (20% pulled out of thin air, but you get the idea)

Having our exemption defined at only $100k still doesn't protect us from the real estate market gaining 100% in value over 2-3 years. Having a percentage of value does.

Side note: All taxation is theft.

itsyourboypookie said:

---

Saved over $100,000 in property taxes paid this year by protesting.

Y'all should do the same.

https://www.youtube.com/live/AykMs3fkGGE?feature=share

---

Holy ****, how big is your house?

cecil77 said:

---

Just be over 65!

---

I think over 65 should be exempt from taxes related to schools, etc. They might still use other public services, but they have paid way more than their fair share of school taxes to that point.

spicyitalian said:

---

Welcome to $500k median home prices.

---

Already there in some parts…

AgGrad99 said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

Just be over 65!

---

I think over 65 should be exempt from taxes related to schools, etc. They might still use other public services, but they have paid way more than their fair share of school taxes to that point.

---

Agreed, but the prop tax freeze is nice...

Logos Stick said:

---

tk111 said:

---

Can someone baby talk me through what that means for me as a homeowner?

---

It means the CADs will raise values even more to make up for the lost revenue.

---

Exactly. Look for rapidly increasing appraisals for non-homestead properties (many people have several). The rapid runup on them will help them offset the increased exemptions on homesteads. The extra amount given on homesteads (though the exemption is $100,000, we were already at $40,000) will be eaten up as soon as they can do so.

Kvetch said:

---

spicyitalian said:

---

Welcome to $500k median home prices.

---

Already there in some parts…

---

Most of Colin County is. My area specifically is $550K. Completely killed my dreams of house ownership here and has me looking at other aspects of my life. Literally missed the timing by a year. The most frustrating part.

cecil77 said:

---

crowman2010 said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

Just be over 65!

---

The key is to "identify" that you're over 65

---

Hey! That should work, right?

---

MY AGE WAS INCORRECTLY ASSIGNED AT BIRTH! I CAME OUT AS A 29 YEAR OLD!

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

tk111 said:

---

Can someone baby talk me through what that means for me as a homeowner?

---

It means the CADs will raise values even more to make up for the lost revenue.

---

WRONG...
Tax RATES are set after all of the valuations for the county are finalized.
Each entity submits their approved budgets to the tax assessor. Once the CAD is done with the rates the Tax Assesor then takes the rates for each entity and recommends the required tax rate against the approved CAD valuations to meet each entities budgetary requirements.

The CAD is the first step in the process. They're going to get their pound of flesh from every property owner regardless of the valuations.

Yes, the individual valuations play a role but ultimately it boils down to the spending.

Larger homestead exemptions only pass the buck along to landlords (and by extension renters) and commercial properties (and by extension customers or employees).

---

Thank you! Hardly anyone realizes that it's:

TAX RATE x CAD values = property owner's check they get to write

Everyone gets so po'd at their property values going up which most of the time are or should be a mirror of current market prices. If it's not reasonable there are ways to contest this and if the paid CAD staff can't resolve with you, then you go before a volunteer citizen Review Board. Have your ducks in a row. My father served on our local Board for years and he would often ask, "well would you sell it for that?". No way....oops.

The time/effort/anger needs to be spent on the multitude of local taxing entities WHILE THEY ARE WORKING ON THEIR ANNUAL BUDGETS. Don't let them spend like drunken sailors, since you elect them. I've never lived in a large metro so your voice may not be heard as well, but I'd bet there are citizen groups around who unite for more clout. Otherwise, run for office.

As property values go up, tax rates should come down if they are looking at a target of 'No New Revenue" (which means bringing in the same dollars they did the year before). Proposed budgets and especially proposed tax rates are req'd to be transparent and printed 'twice' before they are voted on.

Get involved. Rant over.

Considering that the tax rate is not supposed to increase in a certain range by each city, county, mud, etc,, they need to lower the 10% increase to match. No reason the my increase value should be allowed to exceed their rate of increase.

humble brag I guess...saving 100k on tax payments means what - $12M home?

I pay a firm to look into protesting mine every year and we split the tax bill savings.

If a property tax remains, IMHO, it should be based on the sq.ft. of the house (including garage) and sq.ft. of the land. Maybe include a progressive rate as the sq.ft. increases. Take all the bull**** power from the appraisers, allowing these taxing bureaucracies to reduce their staff exponentially.

I agree that even this isn't perfect but removing the sometimes arbitrary appraisals from the mix should help, along with the reduction in staffing.

SouthTex99 said:

---

CADs can value whatever they want but the cap should be based on the annual rate of inflation and roll forward from the anchored base value at origination. Inflation indexes are utilized in almost every other time impacted transaction in modern society, why not in real estate?

Taxpayers are not buying their homes again every year. When they purchase real estate they should be able to reasonably project what their property tax expense will be this year, 10, 30 and even 50 years from now.

---

Sound reasonable but it doesn't work, especially since our federal government and the Fed slavishly expand inflation and the debt.

I lived next to a South Korean family that their mother lived in a 1500/1600 sq.ft. home in California, bought in the early 60s for ~ $60,000. Her taxes were based on purchase price yet the home 3-4 years ago was valued @ ~$2,000,000. The state requires their pound of flesh so it jacks up the taxes on newer homes to account for the difference and in California's case they also drop an income tax on your ass.

Ultimately our problem isn't a taxing issue it is uncontrolled government spending.

Sid Farkas said:

---

California wins here. My property taxes are (for all intents and purposes) locked…I pay the same amount every year.

I've lived in my house for 23 years, the value has skyrocketed, and I pay roughly the same amount I did in year one.

I don't know how you guys put up with a moving target like that.

---

No it does not. As a former CA property owner it sounds good, but its had a long list of unintentional consequences that saw CA have a budget surplus of $160B to -$30B within a year.

It was poorly written and highly abused.

AlaskanAg99 said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

California wins here. My property taxes are (for all intents and purposes) locked…I pay the same amount every year.

I've lived in my house for 23 years, the value has skyrocketed, and I pay roughly the same amount I did in year one.

I don't know how you guys put up with a moving target like that.

---

No it does not. As a former CA property owner it sounds good, but its had a long list of unintentional consequences that saw CA have a budget surplus of $160B to -$30B within a year.

It was poorly written and highly abused.

---

See if I got this straight...youre saying the state should tax people out of their homes, just so they can continue to be irresponsible with even more revenue? How in God's name has it been "abused"?

My grandmother would've had to sell her home if prop 13 hadn't passed.

You, kind sir, are out of your mind.

tk111 said:

---

Can someone baby talk me through what that means for me as a homeowner?

---

It means more poor people will not be paying property tax, cue the regret of unintended consequences

Lol, everyone knows it tax rate times value.

That's not what the poster is saying. He's saying they work backwards from the budget to determine revenue. If they can't increase value enough, they'll raise rates to hit their number.

YouBet said:

---

Looking ahead, you are going to see people just walk away from property. These % increases we are getting every year are unsustainable. I don't care how well off you are at some point the math won't make sense to own.

Edit: or people leave Texas to retire elsewhere. There are several states where it will make more sense to retire from a financial bottom line.

---

"You vill own nossing and you vill like it"

Sid Farkas said:

---

AlaskanAg99 said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

California wins here. My property taxes are (for all intents and purposes) locked…I pay the same amount every year.

I've lived in my house for 23 years, the value has skyrocketed, and I pay roughly the same amount I did in year one.

I don't know how you guys put up with a moving target like that.

---

No it does not. As a former CA property owner it sounds good, but its had a long list of unintentional consequences that saw CA have a budget surplus of $160B to -$30B within a year.

It was poorly written and highly abused.

---

See if I got this straight...youre saying the state should tax people out of their homes, just so they can continue to be irresponsible with even more revenue? How in God's name has it been "abused"?

My grandmother would've had to sell her home if prop 13 hadn't passed.

You, kind sir, are out of your mind.

---

No. I'm saying Prop 13 had a lot of unintended consequences because it was bad policy.

Texas does need to do better as people continue to move here and it's exploding demand.

Logos Stick said:

---

Lol, everyone knows it tax rate times value.

That's not what the poster is saying. He's saying they work backwards from the budget to determine revenue. If they can't increase value enough, they'll raise rates to hit their number.

---

What I'm saying is that if you give everyone the same deduction you've affected everyone more or less equally. A falling or rising tide affects all boats equally.

What increasing the homestead does do is disproportionately hit landlords (renters) and commercial properties harder as this shifts a lot of valuation onto them.

I laugh at all the "my appraisal is up I'll never be able to afford this" that's because EVERYONE'S appraisals are up. Increasing variations are not a windfall for the taxing entities because the rates aren't calculated until AFTER the valuations are set.

Correct. Because racing entities cannot raise the Effective rate beyond 3.5% without a rollback election.

So thrbvalues have to be set before the calculations are done. It doesn't matter how high valuations go, taxes cannot increase beyond 3.5%, which can mean the tax rate has to decrease to stay under the effective cap.

M&O (maintenance and operation) is subject to the 3.5% cap. Bond obligations must be met. You could set everyone's valuations to $1 and bond obligation tax rates would skyrocket because the bonds revenue must, by law, be raised.

Now that Harris County has gerrymandered all fiscal responsibility off the commissioners court in sure they'll factor the increased valuations into their budget to keep them under the 3.5% cap. But that's a discussion for another thread. Not going to derail this one.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

What I'm saying is that if you give everyone the same deduction you've affected everyone more or less equally. A falling or rising tide affects all boats equally.

What increasing the homestead does do is disproportionately hit landlords (renters) and commercial properties harder as this shifts a lot of valuation onto them.

I laugh at all the "my appraisal is up I'll never be able to afford this" that's because EVERYONE'S appraisals are up. Increasing variations are not a windfall for the taxing entities because the rates aren't calculated until AFTER the valuations are set.

---

This. And as commercial rates go up, so does the cost of everything. You're going to be paying the same, just in a different manner that is not as noticeable. It's just rearranging the deck chairs.

It has been misstated here multiple times that the $100k exemption means you don't pay taxes on $100k of value. You actually only get that exemption on school taxes, all others are taxed at 100% of assessed value unless you are capped at the 10% annual increase.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

M&O (maintenance and operation) is subject to the 3.5% cap. Bond obligations must be met. You could set everyone's valuations to $1 and bond obligation tax rates would skyrocket because the bonds revenue must, by law, be raised.

Now that Harris County has gerrymandered all fiscal responsibility off the commissioners court in sure they'll factor the increased valuations into their budget to keep them under the 3.5% cap. But that's a discussion for another thread. Not going to derail this one.

---

Correct because bonds are voted on. People are free to put themselves in as much debt as they want. Commissioners could raise taxes 15%, force a roll back and if it passes. Taxes raise 15%.

Or people can vote on huge bonds to fund whatever.

AlaskanAg99 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

M&O (maintenance and operation) is subject to the 3.5% cap. Bond obligations must be met. You could set everyone's valuations to $1 and bond obligation tax rates would skyrocket because the bonds revenue must, by law, be raised.

Now that Harris County has gerrymandered all fiscal responsibility off the commissioners court in sure they'll factor the increased valuations into their budget to keep them under the 3.5% cap. But that's a discussion for another thread. Not going to derail this one.

---

Correct because bonds are voted on. People are free to put themselves in as much debt as they want. Commissioners could raise taxes 15%, force a roll back and if it passes. Taxes raise 15%.

Or people can vote on huge bonds to fund whatever.

---

Some cities and counties like to use certificates of obligation to take away the possibility of the voters shooting down the bonds.

Just go Howard Jarvis on taxes.

(Yes, Google Howard Jarvis, grow a pair, and then go to town).