rgag12 said:

---

Surely the landlords pass property tax costs down to their tenants via their rents? If not I imagine they wouldn't be landlords for very long.

---

Of course they do, as they should.

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

Jabin said:

---

Tennessee somehow gets by with no income tax and low property taxes (in most but not all locales).

Perhaps the answer is to reduce government expenditures?

---

Don't disagree with reducing spend but I want to own my house. Once I pay for it, it should be mine until I die or sell. Obviously not the case with property tax.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Does Florida not have a sales tax?

---

Florida has sales and property taxes and no income tax similar to Texas. The main difference is Florida has an incredibly efficient bureaucracy compared to just about anywhere else as DeSantis has been reforming their government for 7 years to the point they have some of the best services in the country, best education in the country, and truly serve the people of Florida. Of course his disaster response is legendary. He has done this while continuing to lower taxes and find more "holidays" for everything from school purchases to fishing licenses and beyond. He has not only run surpluses he has been paying off the overall debt in Florida to the point they are debating the pros and cons of paying it off entirely (since the amount is getting so small) or keeping a small debt for credit purposes.

I really wish Texas would have it's own DOGE as well, we have ridiculous waste here as well but it is hidden because they throw us trinkets of tax cuts and other issues while running a bloated bureaucracy with little incentive to reform because our state is so flush with cash. Florida simply decided to clean up their government and bureaucracy in the midst of significant growth and it has paid huge dividends.

Greener Acres said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

---

Agree with this point, however could you not keep property taxes for commercially zoned properties and reduce/exclude property tax for residential zones?

Is there any precedence? What does a state like Tennessee do?

rgag12 said:

---

Greener Acres said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

---

Agree with this point, however could you not keep property taxes for commercially zoned properties and reduce/exclude property tax for residential zones?

Is there any precedence? What does a state like Tennessee do?

---

You would essentially create a 100% homestead exemption. Despite how conservative state leadership is and how much they demand tax relief, I would be surprised if they would go against their corporate donors with a change like this. As a pro-business state it would be hard to sell the idea that now the business community is an even larger funder of services like schools, cities, etc.

Greener Acres said:

---

rgag12 said:

---

Greener Acres said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

---

Agree with this point, however could you not keep property taxes for commercially zoned properties and reduce/exclude property tax for residential zones?

Is there any precedence? What does a state like Tennessee do?

---

You would essentially create a 100% homestead exemption. Despite how conservative state leadership is and how much they demand tax relief, I would be surprised if they would go against their corporate donors with a change like this. As a pro-business state it would be hard to sell the idea that now the business community is an even larger funder of services like schools, cities, etc.

---

Agree, any massive change to the state's current tax system will create a paradigm shift for the state itself.

There is no world where such a big alteration of the tax system wouldn't alienate some of the current "winners" in the system today. There are a lot of consequences that would have to be thought out.

That's why I don't think it will happen in Texas . It would be considered too regressive even though almost everyone does indeed pay property taxes one way or another.

AJ02 said:

---

AggieIce said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Obviously the difference would have to be made up elsewhere. Where would that be?

---

Consumption tax would be the fairest

---

Trying to imagine how that would be. Would it be across the board on EVERYTHING? Every clothing purchase, every purchase from Lowe's or Home Depot, etc? And how much? Would a $50 pair of jeans now cost $65?

Or is it reserved only for "large" purchases, like vehicles, homes, boats, etc?

I honestly have no real comprehension of just how much tax revenue in Florida is derived specifically from property taxes, and how much you'd have to increase the cost of other goods to offset that.

---

Florida also has no income tax

so if you get rid of the property tax also that means a lot of consumption taxes

not great if you are retired and not working

or don't own a house!

An LVT tax is the most economically efficient tax and keeping a relatively low one in place of high property taxes makes a lot of sense.

Most modern countries use a VAT tax to some extent. We are a rare exception. You could use that to make up the differences.

But ultimately we won't do anything rich donors don't like. The current system bleeds the middle class and makes retirement much more difficult while allowing local governments to spend recklessly. I'd bet we keep at it.

Quote:

---

If you got rid of property tax then you'd have to massively increase sales tax, and then also expand state government because you'd need apparatus in place to spread the tax out across the state.

---

But you're reducing the Property Tax and CAD system...so I don't think it would expand the govt. Likely reduce it quite a bit.

I would love a system that does not involve property taxes. If it's replaced by a consumption tax, living near a state border would be advantageous. The system will always be gamed.

AggieIce said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Obviously the difference would have to be made up elsewhere. Where would that be?

---

Consumption tax would be the fairest

---

So the tax that is the most punitive on poor people...

aggie93 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Does Florida not have a sales tax?

---

Florida has sales and property taxes and no income tax similar to Texas. The main difference is Florida has an incredibly efficient bureaucracy compared to just about anywhere else as DeSantis has been reforming their government for 7 years to the point they have some of the best services in the country, best education in the country, and truly serve the people of Florida. Of course his disaster response is legendary. He has done this while continuing to lower taxes and find more "holidays" for everything from school purchases to fishing licenses and beyond. He has not only run surpluses he has been paying off the overall debt in Florida to the point they are debating the pros and cons of paying it off entirely (since the amount is getting so small) or keeping a small debt for credit purposes.

I really wish Texas would have it's own DOGE as well, we have ridiculous waste here as well but it is hidden because they throw us trinkets of tax cuts and other issues while running a bloated bureaucracy with little incentive to reform because our state is so flush with cash. Florida simply decided to clean up their government and bureaucracy in the midst of significant growth and it has paid huge dividends.

---

Good stuff. I have 2 properties in Florida. Property taxes there are much better than in Texas. Florida must benefit from tourism more than many states. Maybe that helps fill the tax buckets to some degree.

Or maybe the state shouldn't be in the education business. It's a conflict of interest

WestAustinAg said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Does Florida not have a sales tax?

---

Florida has sales and property taxes and no income tax similar to Texas. The main difference is Florida has an incredibly efficient bureaucracy compared to just about anywhere else as DeSantis has been reforming their government for 7 years to the point they have some of the best services in the country, best education in the country, and truly serve the people of Florida. Of course his disaster response is legendary. He has done this while continuing to lower taxes and find more "holidays" for everything from school purchases to fishing licenses and beyond. He has not only run surpluses he has been paying off the overall debt in Florida to the point they are debating the pros and cons of paying it off entirely (since the amount is getting so small) or keeping a small debt for credit purposes.

I really wish Texas would have it's own DOGE as well, we have ridiculous waste here as well but it is hidden because they throw us trinkets of tax cuts and other issues while running a bloated bureaucracy with little incentive to reform because our state is so flush with cash. Florida simply decided to clean up their government and bureaucracy in the midst of significant growth and it has paid huge dividends.

---

Good stuff. I have 2 properties in Florida. Property taxes there are much better than in Texas. Florida must benefit from tourism more than many states. Maybe that helps fill the tax buckets to some degree.

---

They have tourism, we have oil and natural resources. We also have the main artery for processing and shipping petroleum products in the Western Hemisphere. That's worth a lot more.

Greener Acres said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

---

The consumer ALWAYS pays the tax. Businesses just collect it for the government.

Someone else mentioned about how people may jump county lines to save on sales tax in lower-tax counties. We have a fix for that here in Florida, at least for big-ticket items. Whenever you buy anything involving a legal title (car, boat, whatever), you pay sales tax based on your county of residence. My wife and I both replaced our vehicles in 2023. We bought our new cars from a dealership in Orlando, which is in Orange County. Orange has a 6.5% sales tax, but we got charged 7% because our address in Lake County.

Greener Acres said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

This is a massively overlooked point by people who are frustrated with their individual tax situation. We are massively funded by commercial/industrial property in the state. Look at the tax rates of cities with larger commercial bases vs those with larger residential bases and the rates are always higher. Home owners cost more in services for a city/school/county and they pay less in taxes.

Moving to a consumption tax actually hurts individuals at the benefit of commercial properties.

---

I like the compromise above, but maybe even just a 50% reduction to homesteaded properties…?

All taxation is theft and residential property taxes are particularly burdensome for those on fixed incomes, but property taxes are the most productive of all taxes.

Every other system of taxation has a significant drag on economic output, but taxing property promotes productive use of the land. Few people can afford to leave their property to sit idle for years so if they can't grow, produce, or sell something on the land, property taxes will incentivize them to transfer it to someone that will. Even property tax exemptions like ag and timber exemptions promote economic activity.

We all hate residential property taxes but they help keep property values in check and prompt people to remain in the labor force years after they might otherwise be able to retire. And for those who no longer have the income to cover their tax burden, it incentivizes downsizing (or even leaving the state) so that other more productive people can make better use of that property.

It sucks for retirees, but the state has a pretty compelling interest in keeping them in place.

BMX Bandit said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

the walmart in central houston pays about $1mm in property taxes.

how much increase of sales tax would be needed to match that?

---

Think about that. That's just one Walmart. That's not a tax on Walmart, that's ANOTHER tax on the consumer. It gets rolled up into COGS one way or another and we the consumers pay that. Ronald Reagan explained this to us 40 years ago.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

People that rent do not pay property tax

---

awful nice of those landlords to eat that cost and not bake it into the lease.

hopefully my tenants don't get wind of me being the only landlord not taking a loss on taxes

---

The owner pays the taxes not the renter - it's a simple concept

Renter could be getting govt handouts to live there or it's rent controlled - but keep on with your absolutes but renters do not pay property taxes

lb3 said:

---

All taxation is theft and residential property taxes are particularly burdensome for those on fixed incomes, but property taxes are the most productive of all taxes.

Every other system of taxation has a significant drag on economic output, but taxing property promotes productive use of the land. Few people can afford to leave their property to sit idle for years so if they can't grow, produce, or sell something on the land, property taxes will incentivize them to transfer it to someone that will. Even property tax exemptions like ag and timber exemptions promote economic activity.

We all hate residential property taxes but they help keep property values in check and prompt people to remain in the labor force years after they might otherwise be able to retire. And for those who no longer have the income to cover their tax burden, it incentivizes downsizing (or even leaving the state) so that other more productive people can make better use of that property.

It sucks for retirees, but the state has a pretty compelling interest in keeping them in place.

---

Just for additional information, all residential property owned as a homestead (where the homestead exemption is applied) by a person over 65 is eligible for a property tax freeze, meaning their tax bill will not increase while they or their surviving spouse owns the property. This protects the retired citizens on a fixed income. People who are over 65 are also permitted to defer payment of taxes on their property until they sell or die. There are provisions that prohibit the sale of the persons property in these cases. The tax bill ultimately comes due at the individuals death or sale of the property, but the individual is protected.

BMX Bandit said:

---

cslifer said:

---

If you replace property tax with sales tax the residents take on more of a burden and businesses get a free pass. It would take an awful lot of sales taxes to make up for the lost property tax revenue from a mall or big box store.

---

the walmart in central houston pays about $1mm in property taxes.

how much increase of sales tax would be needed to match that?

---

How much sales tax would that single walmart generate over an entire year? Probably much more than you think.

AggieIce said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Obviously the difference would have to be made up elsewhere. Where would that be?

---

Consumption tax would be the fairest

---

. In Florida. Hotel an car rental taxes. Let visitors to Orlando, Tampa and Miami fund the state

lb3 said:

---

All taxation is theft and residential property taxes are particularly burdensome for those on fixed incomes, but property taxes are the most productive of all taxes.

Every other system of taxation has a significant drag on economic output, but taxing property promotes productive use of the land. Few people can afford to leave their property to sit idle for years so if they can't grow, produce, or sell something on the land, property taxes will incentivize them to transfer it to someone that will. Even property tax exemptions like ag and timber exemptions promote economic activity.

We all hate residential property taxes but they help keep property values in check and prompt people to remain in the labor force years after they might otherwise be able to retire. And for those who no longer have the income to cover their tax burden, it incentivizes downsizing (or even leaving the state) so that other more productive people can make better use of that property.

It sucks for retirees, but the state has a pretty compelling interest in keeping them in place.

---

You're correct in your analysis, but it sure sounds a lot like "freedom be damned". People should be allowed to just live. Sure I have to support and sustain myself, but I shouldn't also have to support the need for the kids who live in my general viscinity to have the nicest, most state of the art, ever expanding school there is. Elon is killing it on the federal level, imagine if we had a state level DOGE looking into efficencies. There's got to be a better way. We don't own squat but as has been mentioned it lines the right pockets so it will be hell to change it.

I like property tax. In theory, it forces people to make the property productive. I think a zero property tax system, would allow rich elites to buy land and hold it forever, because there is no expense once they purchase it. I think it will lead to a Lord/serfdom kingdom.

Imagine Elon Musk buying most of a city and holding it. Everyone else will just have to rent from him. This is extreme, with the fraud we have seen in the govt., I could see politicians using our own taxes to buy land and hold it forever.

FYI: On "I never really own my land, just rent from state" - If you forget to pay your income tax, they are still coming for your land. Its an asset to take.

AggieIce said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

AggieIce said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Obviously the difference would have to be made up elsewhere. Where would that be?

---

Consumption tax would be the fairest

---

Trying to imagine how that would be. Would it be across the board on EVERYTHING? Every clothing purchase, every purchase from Lowe's or Home Depot, etc? And how much? Would a $50 pair of jeans now cost $65?

Or is it reserved only for "large" purchases, like vehicles, homes, boats, etc?

I honestly have no real comprehension of just how much tax revenue in Florida is derived specifically from property taxes, and how much you'd have to increase the cost of other goods to offset that.

---

Everyone that owns or rents pays property tax, but everyone pays more in goods and services. So I'd imagine that it wouldn't need to be a super substantial amount. Plus with lower mortgages (for those that escrow) and lower rents people won't notice as much at least.

---

This sounds good and all, but I don't see a world where landlords lower rent just just because their tax bill went down. It would require some other downward market pressure to create that incentive to reduce rent pricing.

Getting rid of property taxes will disproportionally benefit property owners, and likely will disproportionally harm renters whether it be commercial, or residential.

I predict renters will continue to pay the same rent, (which used to cover the owner's property taxes that the owner now just gets to pocket as profit) while now paying more in something like new consumption taxes.

TLDR: I don't think landlords are going to just pass on the savings to their renters.

I'm with you on school funding. Cut the burdensome reporting requirements and let teachers teach. We don't need ivory palaces or fancy athletic facilities to learn. Temporary buildings that can be added and subtracted easily should be the norm rather than redistricting every few years.

I would get out of athletics all together and transition to year round schooling with a definitive tracks for professionals and those interested in the trades.

Aggrad08 said:

---

An LVT tax is the most economically efficient tax and keeping a relatively low one in place of high property taxes makes a lot of sense.

Most modern countries use a VAT tax to some extent. We are a rare exception. You could use that to make up the differences.

But ultimately we won't do anything rich donors don't like. The current system bleeds the middle class and makes retirement much more difficult while allowing local governments to spend recklessly. I'd bet we keep at it.

---

this is illogical

literally a VAT on everything would make life MORE expensive for retirees

on fixed incomes who can't get pay raises!

Maybe renters don't pay property tax directly but the landlords absolutely include the cost in the rent , so indirectly renters do pay property tax.

Maybe another way of saying it is the property tax comes out of what the landlord collects as rent but at the end of the day the landlord absolutely has to figure it into his business expenses and it needs to be covered by offsetting revenue or he'd be losing money.

rgag12 said:

---

If you got rid of property tax then you'd have to massively increase sales tax, and then also expand state government because you'd need apparatus in place to spread the tax out across the state. You'd have a situation where rural police, emergency services, and schools would have zero money and would have to be appropriated money from the urban parts of the state.

Property tax ain't going away.

---

I think Desantis is saying no "state" sales tax. The "local" - ie county/city - could still levy a property tax. At least that's how I interpreted his message.

Do a sales tax. I don't want some arbitrary finger in the sky assumption of how much my home is worth so they can tax me off that. I want to see a large 40 foot neon sign over the capital that shows the tax rate. And if it needs to go up well then the politicians who's butts are in the seats will need to own it and not some mystery county guy.