Gwinnett.talk

By BobG

September 24, 2007 7:53 AM | Link to this

The overriding problem with this proposal— the deal killer for me— is that a state sales tax would minimize the people’s control of the purse strings and thereby their influence over their elected officials.

No longer would Commissioners, Council members and School Board members have to justify their expenditures to the voters who elected them… they would only have to convince the State Legislature. In other words, politicians would be asking politicians for more of the taxpayers’ money!

Lack of local control… that’s why this idea should be dead before it starts.

By atlmom

September 24, 2007 8:37 AM | Link to this

I think sales tax is SO subjective. First of all, WHY OH WHY is there a tax on what the state/city thinks my house is worth? Do I use more city services if my house is worth more - The answer would be NO NO NO. Why isn’t it based on something objective - like square footage, or acreage? It makes no sense - then the city raises your taxes but pretends that they are lowering saying the millage rate went down - when taxes collected went UP - because assessments went up.

It’s ludicrous, considering all the ways the state/city collects taxes!

I’m all for anything that makes things more equitable - and this actually does that because then I’m not assessed on what someone who works for the govt (who couldn’t get another job doing assessments) thinks my home is worth - hardly unbiased.

But, I do believe that cities/counties should have control over the money that the state shouldn’t - so that’s why this proposal isn’t the best. It’s just the state legislature wanting more and more money. What do other states that don’t have property taxes do? I’m sure there are some…

By lovelyliz

September 24, 2007 8:45 AM | Link to this

$$$ is $$$ and if one way the government collects $$$ is decreased and another increased, I am still paying out the same amount of $$$.

Of course I am suspect of any politician who claims that their tax reform is going to help me and my fellow middle class Americans. You can call it healthy cynicism, but this sounds like yet another way to increase the percentage of taxes paid by those who can least afford it. As most of these plans are once you move beyond the superficial political rhetoric and get into the fine print.

By Ken

September 24, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

I’m opposed to the plan due to the fact that it takes away local control of local government. If people were that concerned with their property tax rates, they could simply vote out their local government and elect a new one.

I think in this case that the cure is worse than the disease. I’d rather the state focus on reducing taxes overall, rather than targeting tax methods.

By Edie

September 24, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

Sales Tax returns are not subject to the Open Records Act, however Property Tax returns are. Once the light is taken off the actual source of income with this proposal, how will public really know what is going on? How will the public judge fairness, efficiency, etc. of state administrators?

By BobG

September 24, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this

A sales tax is not better; it is just easier to accept. It is not a solution; it is just easier for a politician to justify.

Here is a simple solution that makes more sense— require cities, counties and school boards to adopt a mathematically-correct millage rate.

Did you know that taxing authorities can set any property tax rate they can get away with, regardless of how much money they actually need to fund the government? There is no law that requires them to simply do the math.

Require a mathematically-correct rate and the tax rate will be directly tied to the cost of government. Taxpayers will then have a clear indicator of whether or not their politicians are holding the line on costs… and can vote out the officials who do not.

Also, increases in property values (the tax digest) will automatically result in a tax decrease… as long as officials keep costs down. Politicians could no longer manufacture a fake tax cut— to give voters a tax cut, officials would actually have to cut costs.

Visit Millagerate.com for more info… and send Glenn Richardson the link.

By ron

September 24, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

I would be in favor of a sales tax only if there were zero exemptions.A sales tax on every dollar spent,for anything,by anyone or any organization.No exceptions,None.Zero.

By GaLiberal

September 24, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

This isn’t about a better or ‘fairer’ tax system. It’s about milking Atlanta taxpayers to benefit rural Georgia. They have long complained that Atlanta gets all the state money for new roads. That’s mostly true, but guess where the roads are needed - Atlanta. I was recently in Vidalia and they are putting in some sort of split E-W road project to alleviate their “rush hour” traffic jams. Credit me with some intelligence. I’ve been there during “rush hour” and would exchange their 15 minute wait at a stop light for my 45-60 minute commute any day.

So what happens when property taxes are replaced with a state sales tax? The legislature will develop some formula to “fairly distribute” the money around all counties. That means Atlanta metro area pays and the rural areas get the money. Just look who controls the legislature. It’s the rural counties. Also, instead of you being able to control spending at the local level, you now would have to control it at the state level. Again, the rural counties would win out so Atlanta pays for their projects.

Rural areas are poor because of their location not because they don’t have an Atlanta-type highway system. But that won’t matter as long as the Rethuglicons can convince people it will reduce their taxes (which it won’t).

By Assessor

September 24, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

atlmom,

All county government appraisers must adhere to the Appraisal Manual issued by the GA Dept of Revenue and the Official Georgia Code. In addition, all county appraisers must pass a series of examinations from level I to IV, recieve continuing education every two years to maintain certification, and must be well versed in GA Code regarding property tax. It is a profession, and we treat it as such.

Before you make broad, generalized statements about county assessors,please take the time to educate yourself about what we do. Find out how many parcels are in your county and realize that it is the county appraisers responsibility to assign value to each one. And while you are learning about what we do, perhaps you can read up on appeal process for disputing the county’s valuation of your home. That would be much more effective than complaining about it on a messageboard.

Cordially,

By ConservativeDem

September 24, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this

All I hear is who has/wants control of my money! I am for sales tax or no tax at all. Everyone can reason why not to do it but it is because of the lack of control over their community. I like that idea. My community has been in the hands of the same families for decades. We need a change. These members spend like they want regardless. There is nothing to slow or impede their spending whims.

By WeCanDoBetter

September 24, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

Let’s see what ‘local control’ has gotten me over the past seven years. Well it brought me a 300% increase in my property taxes; it brought me king Vernon Jones; it brought me the annual rebirth of potholes on the street serving my sub-division; it brought me the continuation of insufficient stormwater management that results in the flooding of that service street whenever more than one quarter of an inch of rain falls over a 24-hour period; it brought me many new subdivisions and much new traffic on streets with the same inadequate capacity they’ve had for more than 15 years; and it brought me the same schools, curriculum, and ‘products’ insufficiently prepared for the next phase of learning essential for a 21st century economy.

Don’t be silly. If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten. The ‘property tax’ approach we’ve used for 100 years is broken. It’s a cash cow for local officicals, and one that they (as represented by entities such as the Association of County Commissioners and the Georgia Municipal Association) do NOT have a vested interest in ‘fixing’; for if they did such an interest, they’d have been offering workable options for years. It’s clearly the ‘cash’ that’s of interest to them, my circumstance tells me they have little concern about the ‘cow’.

There may indeed be problems with the model being proposed by Mr. Richardson (I’m not sure as I’ve not yet seen the full proposal). But rather than simply offering idiotic quotes like “We’d like to get rid of taxes, but this isn’t the way to do it”, why not roll up your selves, identify the problems with the proposal, suggest several options that would fix the problems, then move forward? I say lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way of those who are attempting to do so.

From one cow who is about milked dry.

By tlc

September 24, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

Assessor, the appeal process is a joke. No one ever wins against the county. It all boils down to a tiny board of commissioners recieving kickbacks off the developers. Newton County commissioners are bought, always have been and always will be. Most other counties fall into the same category as well. Tell me how fair it is to pay upward of 5k in taxes a year and not have county water or garbage pick up and then having to drive your nice clean car down a dirt road. My assessed value this year was 107,200 OVER last years. I live in a rural area by choice and recieve no luxeries like trash pick up (yes, it’s a luxery when you don’t have it). I’m watching my elderly neighbors have to put their homes up for sale after 40+ years because of their taxes and I don’t find any of it FAIR by any means. Our assessors and commissioners need to study the impact their assessments make on long term home owners instead of thinking revenue only.

By ATL

September 24, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

The dealkiller is that this is perhaps the dumbest idea from a public policy standpoint that I’ve seen from the General Assembly in a long time. (And that’s saying alot!) This law seeks to wipe out over 270 years of practice of revenue generation and there is no guarantee that any local goverment will see the revenue it needs to provide the basic functions of government. Only someone who gets their news and public policy ideas from a talk-radio show would be in favor of this silly scheme.

By BobG

September 24, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

WeCanDoBetter, MillageRate.com explains why the property tax system is broken, and how it can be fixed. See if it is a proposal that you can get behind.

A state sales tax creates more problems than it solves. A mathematically-correct millage rate is the right thing to do, even if only until a better solution comes along.

By N-GA

September 24, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

Who will benefit most from an big increase in sales tax? I think Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina and South Carolina.

Many Georgians will simply cross the state line to make big purchases (furniture, appliances, etc.).

It already happens with the current sales tax. People shop in other counties to save a little. What will they do to save a lot?

By anti-assessor

September 24, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

Assessor, maybe you could tell us the name of the class you and your fellow assessor’s take that enables you to asses the value of a property without ever seeing it in person? A “professional” would not make such a valuation without inspecting the property in person, so you can peddle that bs elsewhere. government employee = enough said.

By Smith

September 24, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Bottom line in all of this - baby boomers are approaching the age of being able to exempt out of paying the School Tax portion of their tax liability. The State realizes this and is trying to find another way to keep the revenue coming.

By Craig

September 24, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

I think BobG hit it correctly with your first post. I may be naive; I live in one of the smaller (but growing) exurban counties. But I find it easy to gripe to my local school board member, who lives in the same neighborhood I do, or my county commissioner. When I write to my Senator (Chip Rogers, who happens to be a big proponent of this scheme) his response is generally that I didn’t really read his bill.

Local control is better; the GlennTax is a bad idea.

By $$$$$$$$

September 24, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this

I figured out what I would pay under the most likely version of Richardson’s plan vs. what I currently pay in property taxes. I currently pay a load of property taxes (10K per year). However, Glenn’s plan would only save me about $700 per year.

Granted $700 is a good bit of cash, but I’ll gladly pay it to ensure that my city and county are run by the council persons and board members that I elect, not by a bunch of fools from Hiram and other areas of rural Georgia.

Also, if I even reduce my property taxes to 9K, I lose money under Glenn’s scheme. Anyone who is not filthy, stinkin’ rich and does not own beach from property on St. Simon’s (aka Richardson and Jerry Keen) loses under this proposal. The middle class is hit the hardest.

One of the really “nifty” parts of Glenn’s plan is that everyone will lose their federal property tax deduction. Therefore all that money from the federal deduction that was remaining in Georgia to boost the economy will go out of Georgia to the federal government. I’m sure that if Hilary wins in ‘08 (and there is a darn good chance she will)….. she will appreciate all that extra cash from GA to help pay for socialized medicine and the like.

This whole thing is all about Glenn and his bubba buds saving on property taxes on their vacation property. It’s also about Glenn’s hunger for power and for money from corporations. This is not about doing what’s best for GA.

By WeCanDoBetter

September 24, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

BobG, thanks for the link. The arithmetic is striaght forward enough, however I’d like to hear/see more discussion of the appropriateness of the theory which underlies the property tax approach to generating the lion’s share of a local government’s revenue. I suspect there are other options that offer promise - and perhaps a bit more in the way of equity - that aren’t being investigated and pursued primarily because we have fat and lazy leadership that find it oh so comfortable staying the old outdated course despite wholesale changes in the fundamental circumstances. I’m not yet convinced that we must continue to use ONE questionably equitable approach (set aside the disgusting machinations that may accompany its implementation) as opposed to using a combination of approaches to get to the end we desire.

By lovelyliz

September 24, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this

Be very weary of ANY politician promising to solve tax ills. There is usually fine print that ends up negating the fairness or righteousness of such offerings.

By Metro Atlantan

September 24, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

Eliminate those property taxes! Sales tax is the best. Local control is a joke - ever been or seen those county commission meetings? If you want to discuss how metro counties get ripped off, then let’s include the gas tax, MARTA, Grady, pork-toting legislators, and, of course, “Sonny”.

By republican

September 24, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

I think the only other person as dumb as Richardson is George Bush himself. What has happened to the Republican Party? They are all becoming socialists. First NCLB, then prescription drugs … now this.

By John

September 24, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

The advantage of the sales tax is that it is optional. If you don’t want to pay the tax, then you don’t buy the product.

[This assumes there will be a deduction for low-income folks so they can buy necessities.]

Compare that to a property tax which is mandatory. You have no choice but to pay.

The other advantage of the sales tax is that it is based on liquid assets (i.e. cash). If you have the cash to buy the product, then surely you have the means to pay the sales tax.

However, a property tax is based on a non-liquid asset (i.e. your house). If your house is valued at $100,000, that does not mean you have $100,000 in your bank account. So where the heck are you supposed to find the money to pay the property tax?

The sales tax is better than the property tax. We should go a step further and adopt the Fair Tax model by also abolishing state income taxes.

By WeCanDoBetter

September 24, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

John, your liquidity argument makes sense to me. Thanks.

How do you respond to those who argue that in a ‘down economy’, as Mr. Greenspan and others are opining we’re approaching, the liquidity approach (i.e., sales taxes) won’t produce the financial resources necessary to fund local governments?

Also, have you heard the argument that some in the Georgia Municipal Association are making that it’ll be difficult or perhaps impossible for local governments to successfully go the bond market to raise the funds for major capital projects if the locals do NOT have control of generation of revenue? What say you about this?

Thanks for your insight.

By WeCanDoBetter

September 24, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman (of the AJC) makes the argument that eliminating property taxes from commercial, industrial, and utilities will result in more than $3 billion in tax revenue being shifted to others. If true, isn’t there a way to reconstruct Mr. Richardson’s proposal so that properties such as these that generate income (and as John pointed out above our personal homes don’t generate income until they’re sold)would continue to be taxed in some way? Mr. Bookman, if you don’t like what’s being proposed, you ought to expose its weaknesses. But don’t stop there when you’ve got such a great forum, help us identify alternatives.

By Pompano

September 24, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

The issue of rising property values around the Beltline and other areas affecting Seniors and their ability to hang onto their homes due to higher assessments would be eliminated under a Sales Tax proposal

By BlueMoon

September 24, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

I see a lot of people that think this idea should die, mostly because of lack of regulation. BUT, there are easy way to counter that and I don’t believe that having a home worth a little more than my neighbor should subject me to paying higher taxes. I don’t use more county services than my neighbor do I?

NOPE

By Jacob

September 24, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

I long since discovered as long as you own something you owe the governemnt. I own nothing, absolutely nothing - not even an old car. Guilty? No. I have no offspring to leave anything to. Even when dead and you own something, you still owe the government.

By $$$$$$

September 24, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this

Pompano, many counties and cities completely exempt seniors from paying property taxes. Do you think that those seniors will be exempted from paying sales taxes? Seniors will pay more under Richardson’s scheme.

By gafarmer

September 24, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

The problems with property taxes today are driven by state laws passed by the general assembly.

Assessors and commissioners don’t chose the time for a revaluation, the State Department of Revenue does that with a sales ratio study and a fine on the county if the values in the study fall below 36% of “fair market value”.

Assessors use the tools ,methods, and training provided by the Georgia Department of Revenue throughout the process of appraising property values. Actions of the legislature change the process every year.

Yes the appeals process does work if the values of the board of assessors can be proven incorrect or unequally applied. The Board of Equalization is Chosen by the Grand Jury, not the assessors or commissioners,to provide a high level of objectivity on appeals. The training requirements of the assessors and board of equalization members is also quite high with continuing education a mandate for membership.

The greatest inequity in the system is not the increasing values, but the effect increasing values have on fixed income taxpayers who are primarily homeowners.

Homestead exemption was inacted so that average homeowners would pay little if any property taxes on their residences.. Realistically homestead exemption should be in excess of $150,000 today to have the same effect the mechanism had initally. Homestead exemption should be raised and also be indexed to rising property values to assure that the taxes on an average home remain low.

If the members of the general assembly are serious about reducing the burden on the homeowner they can increase and make permanent the grants from the state to the counties ,cities, and school boards to buy down the assesed taxes on homes and in effect create a higher homestead exemption.

Local control is an issue but the greater issue is that the citizens representatives who spend the tax revenue should be responsible for raising that revenue.

The increase in local taxes over the past 20 years has been driven by inflation (especially healthcare costs and education costs shifted to the local level) and unfunded mandates from the state and federal level. Study the system in your County or City and if you find ethics or administration problems become more involved in the process than a five minute response in a blog.

By Alecia

September 24, 2007 2:26 PM | Link to this

One of my properties in Gwinnett was overpriced a few years ago, I asked the assessor’s office how they came up with the numbers, and was surprised to learn that they used more expensive homes in newer neighborhoods as comparables. Not one home in my subdivision was on their list of comps. Anyway, I disputed it and won. The moral of this story is if you think your appraised value is too high, gather the numbers and fight. Do this the moment you receive notice of the new appraised value. Some counties have deadlines. On the subject of the elimination of property tax, I do not see how this will help the common guy in the Atlanta Metro. It will help people with rental properties, because their profits will increase. Unless I am mistaken and this law pertains soley to owner occupied residences. Shifting the tax burden to sales tax, reduces the power at the local level, and let’s face it the wealthy are successful, because they are just cheaper than the lower class. The middle class and lower income people freak out if they don’t have the same junk at their yard sales as the Joneses. The wealthy will buy what they want, but will more than likely purchase it online or out of state(avoiding sales tax all together).

By lopro

September 28, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

I am the budget analyst for a metro county and can tell you this would kill not only large counties due to SPLOST payouts to cites but also the small counties that are lacking the economic base to support a high level of sales taxes. The implications of this mess are numerous financially and politically, such as the loss of power the individaul has over their board memebers. It will not be easy for 99% of Georgia’s citizens to make their way to the dome to voice their opinions to the state leaders.

This is a HORRIBLE idea for local governments viability to provide sustainable services for their citizens.

What if this didn’t work so well and we are stuck with higher sales taxes and the need for additional revenue is necessitated and property taxes are reinstated???