I usually just send in old photos of the home and ***** generically. It seems to work, but I may just be lucky.

Oh and **** DCAD. They did nothing to earn more of my money and no additional services are being provided. Such a terrible system.

yukmonkey said:

---

I usually just send in old photos of the home and ***** generically. It seems to work, but I may just be lucky.

Oh and **** DCAD. They did nothing to earn more of my money and no additional services are being provided. Such a terrible system.

---

I agree that the whole raise taxes 10% per year is bs. Just logically struggle with the concept of arguing my value stayed the same or went down in an "upward" moving market. Maybe I'm just a sheep.

YouBet said:

---

They are out and raised ours by $67K.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ.

That may be our trigger point to get the f^ck out. My taxes. My god the taxes.

---

That is what you get for owning a Mac mansion...

Just kidding...I feel your pain. I have been battling DCAD and D here is Denton...
Supposedly local yokels who serve on the appraisal district are ordinary citizens but they haven't done me any favors.

I don't have any good solution either and I have a real doubt hiring an attorney or firm specializing in appraisal protest will get better results. An appraisal is all data-driven and comparable sales for your neighborhood and thus your appraisal remains the same. Will the attorney utter a magic word that will rescind DCAD current appraisal,?

planoaggie123 said:

---

You are right. The true value of your home went up. Likely could sell for more than paid.

The issue is...they use generic basis to apply a false and ultimately unrealized value. Hell, that value may be way lower when you finally sale but you paid taxes for years saying otherwise.

The issue is homes should be taxed at a basis on what you paid. If cities need more cash, there should be votes to raise the rates. Changing home value is changing the rates without the procedure of voting.

---

Slippery slope here. Up until the great run up in values this had benefitted homeowners.

Move towards a capital gains type model and you put people upside down.

Almost every house being built in our area right now is a $1.75-2M white modern mansion at 5-6 sq ft.

Every single one of them are spec homes that are For Sale. The existing homes on the market almost all have signs that are home builder signs and not realtor signs. Thus, it will be a tear down.

So, that explains our big jump. Just kind of amazing to watch a slow motion transformation of an entire neighborhood of mostly one story ranch homes transform into 2 story white mansions with the occasional Uber modern home that is not white.

culdeus said:

---

planoaggie123 said:

---

You are right. The true value of your home went up. Likely could sell for more than paid.

The issue is...they use generic basis to apply a false and ultimately unrealized value. Hell, that value may be way lower when you finally sale but you paid taxes for years saying otherwise.

The issue is homes should be taxed at a basis on what you paid. If cities need more cash, there should be votes to raise the rates. Changing home value is changing the rates without the procedure of voting.

---

Slippery slope here. Up until the great run up in values this had benefitted homeowners.

Move towards a capital gains type model and you put people upside down.

---

How does this happen when base on purchase price?

Seems like makes taxes predictable and holds govt officials accountable for the budget / rates. Can play all sorts of budget games when you adjust values.

Maybe I am missing a piece though.

If you fix it to the purchase price the taxing authority only has the option to raise tax rates to increase revenues. If you're not raising values to meet the market that incentivizes people to not move from one house to another, which suppresses inventory on the market, which can cause increasing home purchase prices until the system collapses.

Not saying it would absolutely happen that way, but that's the issue I see. Adjusting the value is a better system than adjusting the rates, because adjusting the value is less ham fisted.

Really not sure that property taxes as your main source of revenue is better than an income tax. Certainly living in a property tax state while earning and then an income tax state while retiring is probably best.

hph6203 said:

---

If you fix it to the purchase price the taxing authority only has the option to raise tax rates to increase revenues. If you're not raising values to meet the market that incentivizes people to not move from one house to another, which suppresses inventory on the market, which can cause increasing home purchase prices until the system collapses.

Not saying it would absolutely happen that way, but that's the issue I see. Adjusting the value is a better system than adjusting the rates, because adjusting the value is less ham fisted.

Really not sure that property taxes as your main source of revenue is better than an income tax. Certainly living in a property tax state while earning and then an income tax state while retiring is probably best.

---

Well, there are also a myriad of other taxes and tax breaks that come into play (that you never hear about) that might surprise people once they start researching where to retire. One example is that 13 states tax your SS while the rest do not. I never knew that until I started looking into retirement stuff. Many other scenarios out there like that that have to be looked at holistically.

Texas isn't necessarily the best place to retire depending on your personal financial situation.

hph6203 said:

---

If you fix it to the purchase price the taxing authority only has the option to raise tax rates to increase revenues. If you're not raising values to meet the market that incentivizes people to not move from one house to another, which suppresses inventory on the market, which can cause increasing home purchase prices until the system collapses.

Not saying it would absolutely happen that way, but that's the issue I see. Adjusting the value is a better system than adjusting the rates, because adjusting the value is less ham fisted.

Really not sure that property taxes as your main source of revenue is better than an income tax. Certainly living in a property tax state while earning and then an income tax state while retiring is probably best.

---

So without our government applying a "value" to our homes you think the market would not properly adjust? I kinda get that in the past but now we have so much readily available data to determine reasonably accurate FV without government 10% increases.

Ultimately the government is going to overspend and figure out ways to take it from us anyways. Just like to get annoyed for a few days then move along with life...

I protest, at least online, every year. I guess the good news for me is, based on the comps for the two houses that sold in my neighborhood last year, even with the increase, my house is valued by Tarrant County $25,000 less than what it ought to - and that's just based on the square footage. I have a pool also, so that should increase the value a bit.

So I will protest online for some modest amount again and see if I can get some shaved off.

Most increases are justified. Single family market has been hot for a couple years now, but red hot now.

planoaggie123 said:

---

culdeus said:

---

planoaggie123 said:

---

You are right. The true value of your home went up. Likely could sell for more than paid.

The issue is...they use generic basis to apply a false and ultimately unrealized value. Hell, that value may be way lower when you finally sale but you paid taxes for years saying otherwise.

The issue is homes should be taxed at a basis on what you paid. If cities need more cash, there should be votes to raise the rates. Changing home value is changing the rates without the procedure of voting.

---

Slippery slope here. Up until the great run up in values this had benefitted homeowners.

Move towards a capital gains type model and you put people upside down.

---

How does this happen when base on purchase price?

Seems like makes taxes predictable and holds govt officials accountable for the budget / rates. Can play all sorts of budget games when you adjust values.

Maybe I am missing a piece though.

---

I see what you are saying now. There has to be some accounting for appreciation. And in a depreciation situation what happens? You are stuck with the bill.

jsdaltxag said:

---

Most increases are justified. Single family market has been hot for a couple years now, but red hot now.

---

It's hard to justify the % not the valuations.

Our market value stayed flat, which allowed our appraisal value to finally catch up after being limited for a couple of years now.

planoaggie123 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

If you fix it to the purchase price the taxing authority only has the option to raise tax rates to increase revenues. If you're not raising values to meet the market that incentivizes people to not move from one house to another, which suppresses inventory on the market, which can cause increasing home purchase prices until the system collapses.

Not saying it would absolutely happen that way, but that's the issue I see. Adjusting the value is a better system than adjusting the rates, because adjusting the value is less ham fisted.

Really not sure that property taxes as your main source of revenue is better than an income tax. Certainly living in a property tax state while earning and then an income tax state while retiring is probably best.

---

So without our government applying a "value" to our homes you think the market would not properly adjust? I kinda get that in the past but now we have so much readily available data to determine reasonably accurate FV without government 10% increases.

Ultimately the government is going to overspend and figure out ways to take it from us anyways. Just like to get annoyed for a few days then move along with life...

---

No, unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're saying set a fixed valuation on a property based upon the value at the time of purchase. Which means no tax increases unless a tax rate increase is imposed. If there's no tax rate increase, then an individuals taxes stay stagnant while property values increase due to inflation or market pressures. If they live in a house for 7 years you're talking about a person absorbing a ~15% tax hike for a similarly valued house (assuming only a 2% valuation rise annually), let alone an upgrade on their house. So imagine you have the option to live in a house with a fixed property tax rate, or you increase your taxes by 50% to upgrade. People will still choose to move, but it would certainly happen less often.



Let's say you buy a house for $100,000 and live there for 7 years. No tax rate increases and the house appreciates at 2% per year (pretty stale in any market, let alone the current real estate market), with a 2.5% tax rate on that value, or $2,500 total property taxes.

You're now at a market value of $115,000 and contemplating buying an upgraded house because your income has gone up and you've got a couple of rugrats getting to the age where they need their own room, so you're looking to buy a house 30% more than your current homes value, or 150,000 (115,000x1.3). Now you're choosing between taking a voluntary tax hike of 50% (100,000 purchase price to a new tax valuation of 150,000 on the new home) or sticking it out in your current home and making it work.

Gets even worse if you assume an up market of 5% per year. 140,000 new value, 30% upgrade to 182,000. You're looking at a voluntary 82% tax increase when switching homes.

I'm not saying it can't work, but it takes the decision making process out of the hands of the market at large and places it squarely on the local government to correctly set tax rates. Yes they create the assessment value, but that value is supposed to be reasonable in comparison to market values.

Grumble grumble **** DCAD. Let me grumble.

culdeus said:

---

jsdaltxag said:

---

Most increases are justified. Single family market has been hot for a couple years now, but red hot now.

---

It's hard to justify the % not the valuations.

---

This is on point. To an extent the valuations are what they are, what kills me (and all of you living in Dallas or Tarrant County) is the higher rates I am paying to help support Fort Worth's problems. In addition to getting directly taxed by JPS and TCC, the county rate is through roof and all of it stays in FW.

Southlake and Carroll ISD both offer significant exemptions to help offset the pain, but if I still lived in FW and was paying the city's rate my taxes would be even higher.

Up 80k. Hadn't wanted to look. Will hit the cap this year and next two, which is nice I guess.

Ag CPA said:

---

culdeus said:

---

jsdaltxag said:

---

Most increases are justified. Single family market has been hot for a couple years now, but red hot now.

---

It's hard to justify the % not the valuations.

---

This is on point. To an extent the valuations are what they are, what kills me (and all of you living in Dallas or Tarrant County) is the higher rates I am paying to help support Fort Worth's problems. In addition to getting directly taxed by JPS and TCC, the county rate is through roof and all of it stays in FW.

Southlake and Carroll ISD both offer significant exemptions to help offset the pain, but if I still lived in FW and was paying the city's rate my taxes would be even higher.

---

I'm not sure about Ft. Worth but in Dallas 63% of our property taxes go to DISD/schooling. So, all we are doing over here is throwing good money after bad. On top of that, we keep voluntarily voting in tax increases for DISD on top of these record valuations.

We will see zero improvement from DISD with this massive influx of money they will get. It will actually get worse. I would rather take my money, pile it up in my front yard, and set it on fire.

Why I'm skeptical of anyone advocating for the voter base to quell tax rate increases. Every time it comes up, it passes, because it's for the kiddos.

The house across the street from us is tax assess valued 16% higher than ours but their taxes are 10% lower than ours. Is this something I can use to protest? Also how does this happen if the percentages are the same? Sorry we are first time homeowners this year so don't know these things

The only thing you can protest is the market value of the improvements. They likely have homestead/senior citizen/disability/etc that have capped their taxable value.

Thanks

Up 18% over the last five years

GAC06 said:

---

Up 18% over the last five years

---

LOL. Bought in 2013. 63.3875% increase from what we bought for to the current TAD market value.

Bought just before the assessments came out in 2014.
2013 -> 2014: 11% jump (no homestead)
2014 -> 2015: 13.7% jump (10% capped)
2015 -> 2016: 12.8% jump (10% capped)
2016 -> 2017: No rise, but 6% catch-up on tax amount
2017 -> 2018: 17% jump (10% capped), compounded by a school tax rate increase that made my taxes jump by something like 15% year over year.
2018 -> 2019: No rise, but 7% carry forward.
2019 -> 2020: No rise
2020 -> 2021: No rise
Overall: 67.6% increase

Haven't been reassessed since 2019, expecting the hammer to hit at some point.

hph6203 said:

---

Why I'm skeptical of anyone advocating for the voter base to quell tax rate increases. Every time it comes up, it passes, because it's for the kiddos.

---

This is the backwards way of looking at it. They run the models assuming the tax % stays flat and appraisals go up. If we (city) pushed a revenue model with a floating % to meet current needs those models would fall apart.

Right now the city sees an endless stream of increasing money from maxed out % and increasing appraisal and they are finding places to push the money into.

Voting NO on some propositions just will make them push that money somewhere else stupid, not drop the rates.

hph6203 said:

---

Why I'm skeptical of anyone advocating for the voter base to quell tax rate increases. Every time it comes up, it passes, because it's for the kiddos.

---

I live in Coppell ISD and they have mastered the art of doing these off date elections (typically summer when people are on vacations, etc) and getting their benefactors (employees, contractors, etc) out to pass the vote.

Our house is up about 100% since the last appraisal before we bought it in 2015. So, I'm including the increase it took when we purchased it.

We were one of the first ones to buy into our street in away from the old guard. At the time, I worried about it because it essentially meant we became the most expensive house on the street overnight. We still roughly are and I worry about that but everything else around us has rapidly caught up and now one street over three, $1.5-2M mansions are going up simultaneously.

We just keep wondering who the first tear down domino will be that falls on our street at this point. I don't think it will be ours if we sell because our house is pretty kick ass for a one story ranch, but I could be totally delusional in my bias towards one story homes.

One story homes are the best.

Carlo4 said:

---

One story homes are the best.

---

Agreed.

mAgnoliAg said:

---

The house across the street from us is tax assess valued 16% higher than ours but their taxes are 10% lower than ours. Is this something I can use to protest? Also how does this happen if the percentages are the same? Sorry we are first time homeowners this year so don't know these things

---

I used an excel spreadsheet of all of my surrounding neighbors last year to show why my taxes should be reduced and was successful in getting the reduction. Someone posted it on last year's thread if you want to find it and take a look.