I agree. Even something as simple as a pick-up truck (And it is not one with all the bells and whistles, just a newer year 2020). Property tax this year was over 700 dollars. That would pay two monthly payments.
Maybe they could be pro-rated somehow. Each year they go down or based on one’s income. I understand property increases in value, but to me it seems like a penalty for owning and taking good care of your assets.
Someone who now owns their home and paid property tax on it every year (30 or plus)…
It definitely needs to stop then and allow that person to be a true HOMEOWNER!!
Sure, there are so many state programs that need funding, but if our state and federal governments would manage their monies as us everyday citizens need to, they would have more money in their budgets to do so.
Property taxes are for at state government not federal. You pay land taxes to have public needed infrastructure for 6 main functions.
Schools: Property taxes help fund public schools, including construction and maintenance of school buildings, teacher salaries, and educational resources.
Safety: Property taxes contribute to the salaries and supplies for firefighters, police officers, EMTs, and other public safety workers. Additionally, they provide funds for legal payouts for misconduct and personal injury lawsuits.
Parks and Recreation: Property taxes help maintain and construct public parks, lakeside jogging paths, nature preserves, and other recreational facilities.
Infrastructure: Property taxes fund the construction and maintenance of roads, highways, and streets, as well as public transportation systems.
Social Services: Property taxes support local social services, such as libraries, health departments, and animal shelters.
Government Administration: A portion of property taxes goes towards funding the administrative costs of local government, including salaries, benefits, and operational expenses.
As a county ages and takes on population there become other needs not listed. This is just the top 6. As there are also flood plain survey’s ect.
This one is at the top of my list. New York Towns and Schools have become EXTORTIONIST when it comes to property taxes. $7,000-20,000 is a typical tax burden for a single family home in Columbia County upstate. They are destroying the minds of our children and then we get to pay them for the privelege of letting them do it. It HAS TO END. I’d like to defund the public school system so they can start over and figure out what is truly needed and how they can get money for it without threatening us with confiscating our homes if we don’t pay them to abuse our children.
My mom had to leave her home in Texas because she couldn’t afford both food and mortgage payments. She tried to sell the house, but the realtor told her, “mortgage rates are too high.” I suggested she rent it out and move to a cheaper place for a year. She took my advice, but then received a letter from Rockwall County stating they would be removing her “over 65” discount and “homestead exemption” since she wasn’t living in the house. This means her property taxes will nearly double, going from about $6,000 a year to around $10,000. The taxes were based on her original home price of approximately $335,000, and as a senior, they were supposed to remain stable. Now, with a new valuation of about $550,000, her taxes can increase annually since it’s no longer her homestead.
She has a renter in the house with a lease, putting her in a worse situation than before because she didn’t anticipate the retroactive tax increase. She had hoped to move back once she could afford food and the mortgage, but now that seems impossible. Her life has been turned upside down.
We need to support our seniors. She has worked hard her entire life, and now, at almost 80 years old, she is struggling due to inflation and rising property taxes. She didn’t choose this situation. Please help her and others like her.
Property taxes should only have to be paid until your home and property are paid off. Once it is paid off people should truly own their home and not have to pay taxes on it anymore, but only once it is paid off.
Cars too, we pay taxes when we purchase it, we pay taxes when we gas up weekly, we pay to register the car over and over again, we pay insurance. Enough is enough!!!
You got that right! The old couple who worked 50 years buy a retirement home and get it paid for they should be comfortable in their retirement. The the city taxes and utilities cost them $6k a year. Their retirement is $1.5k a month. Do the math. One third of their income gone before they get it, then the food, drugs, insurance, doctor visits, etc.
Argument: By forcing property owners to fund services through property taxes that they may neither use nor support, the government is engaging in compelled financial speech.
Case Reference: Janus v. AFSCME (2018) is notable for its discussion of compelled speech in the context of government-mandated fees.
Fourth Amendment – Unreasonable Seizure:
Argument: Seizing property through foreclosure due to unpaid property taxes constitutes an unreasonable seizure.
Case Reference: In Horne v. Department of Agriculture, the Supreme Court held that taking property without just compensation is an unconstitutional seizure.
Fifth Amendment – Takings Clause:
Argument: Forcing property owners to pay taxes on inflated valuations, with the threat of foreclosure, amounts to a governmental taking without just compensation.
Case Reference: Kelo v. City of New London emphasizes that any taking must be compensated, which parallels the impact of taxing beyond fair market value.
Thirteenth Amendment – Involuntary Servitude:
Argument: Continuous payment of taxes under threat of losing one’s home could be argued as a form of involuntary servitude.
Case Reference: Bailey v. Alabama, where the Supreme Court ruled on forced labor under threat, could be interpreted here in the sense of financial servitude.
Fourteenth Amendment – Due Process and Equal Protection:
Argument: Inequitable tax burdens violate the Equal Protection Clause, as similar properties are taxed differently based on location and CAD discretion.
Case Reference: San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez dealt with the inequality of tax-based funding.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 – Direct Tax Clause:
Argument: Property taxes, as unapportioned direct taxes, contravene this clause, which prohibits direct taxes unless apportioned according to state populations.
Case Reference: Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. ruled that direct taxes must be apportioned, applicable here as property taxes are neither apportioned nor justified on that basis.
Article IV, Section 4 – Republican Form of Government:
Argument: The CAD boards violate the republican form of government guarantee by placing taxation control in unelected officials.
Example: Citizens have repeatedly petitioned against the unaccountable nature of CAD board appointments, highlighting the lack of direct representation.
This is definitely a constitutional issue. Many arguments can be made that property taxes deny our basic rights.
First Amendment – Compelled Financial Speech
Transgression: Property taxes compel property owners to support government services financially, regardless of their usage or personal beliefs, thereby constituting compelled financial speech.
Supporting Cases:
Janus v. AFSCME (2018): The Court held that non-consenting employees could not be forced to support union speech financially, laying groundwork for arguing against compelled property tax payments.
Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943): Reinforces the position that no state can convert a liberty (like property ownership) into a taxable right, underscoring the unconstitutionality of forced financial contributions for property ownership.
Fourth Amendment – Unreasonable Seizure
Transgression: Foreclosure as a result of unpaid property taxes constitutes an unreasonable seizure of property, which goes beyond the bounds of acceptable punitive action.
Supporting Cases:
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R.R. v. Chicago (1897): Establishes that property cannot be seized without just compensation, supporting the idea that foreclosure for unpaid property taxes is excessive.
Vanhorne’s Lessee v. Dorrance (1795): An early case affirming fundamental property rights, arguing against uncompensated seizure.
Fifth Amendment – Takings Clause
Transgression: Property taxes, especially those that result in forced sales or foreclosures, constitute an unlawful taking of property without just compensation.
Supporting Cases:
Horne v. Department of Agriculture (2015): Reinforces that government-mandated seizures or contributions of private property, even indirectly, can constitute a taking.
Kelo v. City of New London (2005) and Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York (1978): Highlight the need for balanced treatment and compensation in takings, emphasizing that property should not be seized through tax schemes without due compensation.
Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV (1982): Established that even minor, permanent physical occupations can constitute takings, illustrating that perpetual financial imposition through taxes on property can be seen as such an imposition.
Thirteenth Amendment – Involuntary Servitude
Transgression: Property taxes create a form of involuntary servitude by compelling property owners to pay indefinitely under threat of asset seizure.
Supporting Cases:
Bailey v. Alabama (1911): Held that debt coercion through punitive threats constituted involuntary servitude, which parallels the requirement to pay property taxes indefinitely under penalty of losing one’s property.
Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. (1895): Addresses the excessive burdens of certain tax forms, suggesting property taxes’ indefinite financial demands are coercive.
Fourteenth Amendment – Due Process and Equal Protection
Transgression: Property tax systems disproportionately affect lower-income and minority communities, violating the Equal Protection Clause by placing unequal burdens on different groups. Arbitrary assessments also infringe upon due process.
Supporting Cases:
San Antonio ISD v. Rodriguez (1973): Highlights the disparities in educational funding due to unequal property tax burdens, establishing precedent for the unequal impact of property tax assessments.
Armstrong v. United States (1960): Emphasizes that it is unconstitutional for only some individuals to bear public burdens, relevant here due to the unfair distribution of property tax impacts.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad (1916): Discusses direct versus indirect taxation and suggests the need for equity in tax application, which current property tax models lack.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 – Direct Tax Apportionment
Transgression: Property taxes, as direct taxes on ownership, should be apportioned according to population but currently are not, violating this constitutional requirement.
Supporting Cases:
Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. (1895): This landmark case clarifies that direct taxes, including those on property, require apportionment, providing historical grounding for this argument.
Article IV, Section 4 – Guarantee of a Republican Form of Government
Transgression: The structure of property tax administration violates the Constitution’s guarantee of a republican form of government. Since CAD boards operate without direct election or public accountability, they undermine the principle of representation foundational to a republic. Taxation decisions made by unelected officials violate the expectation that governmental power should derive from the consent of the governed.
Supporting Examples:
Example: Across most regions, citizens have actively petitioned against the unaccountable nature of CAD board appointments. This concern highlights widespread issues with these boards’ detachment from the electorate, resulting in a lack of direct representation and undermining public confidence in their decisions on property tax valuations. The appointment process for CAD boards bypasses direct input from citizens, leading to taxation without representation, which directly contravenes the republican principles guaranteed in the Constitution.
Federal Case Summary
Each constitutional transgression is substantiated by precedent-setting cases:
Janus v. AFSCME and Murdock v. Pennsylvania argue against compelled contributions under the First Amendment.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R.R. v. Chicago and Vanhorne’s Lessee v. Dorrance fortify Fourth Amendment protections against seizure.
Horne v. Department of Agriculture, Kelo v. City of New London, and Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York protect against uncompensated takings, supporting Fifth Amendment claims.
Bailey v. Alabama and Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. support the Thirteenth Amendment argument against coercive taxation practices.
San Antonio ISD v. Rodriguez and Armstrong v. United States confirm Fourteenth Amendment claims regarding due process and equal protection.
Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. reinforces the need for apportionment under Article I, Section 9.
Example of CAD board structure supports the republican guarantee clause by demonstrating the unaccountable nature of CAD boards, which lack direct public election.
Property tax IS a federal issue because the Constitution grants us the right to own property, which makes property taxes unconstitutional in that they deny true ownership. Yes, other taxation methods will need to replace the revenues of current property taxes, but prohibiting property tax restores our basic constitutional right to own property.
In live in Southern Oregon. I bought my house in 2014. Since then my property taxes have gone up 125%. I now pay more for my taxes every month than the loan on my house.
I’m 66. I get a very small SS payment each month. Soon I will be required to sell my home as I can no longer afford to pay taxes and maintain my home. I don’t travel, vacation, or live in any way that is extravagent.
There has to be a better way to end these ever increasing rates.
Let me know if you need another person to add a voice on this one.
I disagree, without property taxes your cities and towns would cease to function. I would support ending property taxes for citizens 70 and older who live alone and are living solely on a fixed income.
Yes!!! I have been railing against this since I moved here. How can we talk about property rights when we never actually own our property?
We are basically working our whole lives to pay a mortgage on a property we are renting from the government.