Spoken like a true self-absorbed property tax assessor living in a rental house, enjoying county-level freebees! 
That is precisely my point as well. Property tax extortion needs to be fixed at the federal level; since the states over-stepped their rights the moment they “invented” property taxes and removed the right for persons “to be secure in their homes” under threat of forced home seizure and extortion payments based on conjured-up yearly debt placed on unrealized property values.
This isn’t about how stuff gets funded – its about how Americans are being robbed of their wealth and homes. Those who argue the financial side of this American Theft, are probably benifiting financially in some way for this disgusting annual extortion of wealth to continue, at the expense of Elder-American Security…and their argument in defense of continuing property taxation is the same lame exuse used by all of them – them, pretending to be ‘brain-injured’ or mentally retarded, and unable to entertain the possibility that other resources could be found, instead of stealing grandma’s house for that critically needed $500 in back taxes. They are starting to sound like that ever-repeating radio song that instantly causes everyone in the area to reach toward the radio knob at the same time, for an immediate “station change”.
UPDATE: And hot off the presses…a brand new policy proposal was just now created to address the many concerns in this forum. A link to this proposal is provided below:
2 Likes
It concerns me that retired fixed income homeowners are challenged with the bulk of their property taxes going towards the school systems.
Consider removing the portion of the taxes going to fund schools from retired homeowners or those without children or those who homeschool their children. Sales tax, utilities, annd other taxes are already very high. Eliminating taxes in one major area to then turn around and increase taxes in several others will not solve the problem. How are we going to increase American wealth if low income never increases. Make America rich and wealthy again by eliminating the burdening property tax.
2 Likes
It should be federal law, not just state law, that property taxes end for seniors.
1 Like
Completely agree, if we are going to charge property taxes it should be a one time tax when you purchase the house and the taxes should be based on the unimproved value of the land to incentivize people to use the land productively, if you’d like you can roll that 1 time payment into your loan but it would be paid off at the same time as your mortgage
3 Likes
As a retired person, I am drowning in TAX! It takes most of my annuity and is slated to go up again this year. I don’t want to lose my home but it is looking bad. Years ago the town I come from (not the current one I live in), had a policy of no property taxes after age 70. What a boon to the seniors. I suggest this as a possible alternative to ending them entirely. Thanks.
2 Likes
Correct, which is why the push for flat sales tax is a big topic. With such the states should also goto the flat sales tax. This eliminates needless tax codes, complicated forms, and loopholes. It also would do away with governments asking you what you make. Which they have no reason of needing your financial income from your career. You also would no longer need to wonder who paid their taxes. Simple flat 5% 10% whatever was agreed upon. This would cover those expenses your referring to.
1 Like
And very importantly, in puts an end to discriminitory taxes that unfairly target a particular demographic (property owners) while letting others off completely (renters and distance commuters), in sharing what is supposed to be “shared community expenses”. A flat tax evenly spreads the burden of expenses across the widest possible demographic, I think.
1 Like
Property that produces zero revenue from the resources that come directly from said property should not be taxed.
Propertys that do generate revenue from the resources below, at surface level or above said property, should be taxed depending on the industry of production.
I have analyzed various distribution measures of taxation along the East Coast, and noticed that the further South you go, down into Florida, Property Tax is offset by Sales Tax, and the further north you go, in the Northeast, there is a lower Sales Tax, but a higher Property Tax rate. I completely agree with ending Property taxes for a number of reasons: (1) Because people can adjust their behavior of consumption, and lower their taxes this way… In fact, I am in favor of reducing our consumeristic-minded culture… You can offset property taxes by increasing sales tax if necessary. But in the Northeast, this is not possible… you can’t change your behavior, and you are discouraged from owning land.
My grandparents have a 250 acre old dairy farm that they can barely pay the taxes on, and the family farm will likely have to be sold after my grandparents die. The only way the taxes could be paid for is through income-generating activities (i.e. renting land to beef cattle farmers, renting land for hunters, bed and breakfast, selling hay, etc.)… and then you have to pay taxes for THAT income… but that’s the only way the property taxes could be paid for, and how we could keep the family farm for this long. It would have been impossible otherwise.
1 Like
Great idea! However, property taxes are state and local issues. Your issues are with your local County and City governments and, in some cases, with your State. I applaud your idea and hope you will pursue it at your State and local level.
And Perhaps we might even use federal funds and federal-level resources to go after state and county laws through the judicial systems, up through the state supreme courts and to the supreme court if needed. Just because state and local governments are where many problem reside, doesnt mean we cannot be creative about how to turn the heat up on them within other branches of government. We have checks and balances for a reason. Example shown below…
I agree, however I want to make sure that we are not then taking the funds from somewhere else. For example, raising state taxes to make up the difference.
A bit confusing here, since, if property taxes are eliminated, then there would naturally be less money available, unless replaced – it would’t RAISE funds; it would lower them. So how can you agree but then say you dont want this revenue stream to be replaced by another revenue stream (unless perhaps you are agreeing with someone else’s talking points but it is not showing up here as a reply to them).
Yes! Property taxes are unconstitutional because if a person must pay taxes to keep their property, then it’s not really theirs. This tax needs to be abolished in each state. I would support a one-time purchase tax so money continues to flow into infrastructure and other local needs.
2 Likes
Why pay Property tax? Before 1913 and Amendment 16 Property Taxation was illegal. We need to Repeal Amendment 16, problem solved. I don’t think we need to be trying to figure out how to better enable the government to steal from the Citizens. No one should live in fear of government taking their property because they fall into hard times etc. As long as there are Property Taxes Citizens are actually slaves because they own nothing. The real solution is the Repeal of Amendment 16. Have a Blessed Day, Fred Walker End Income, Property and other forms of Direct Taxation through Repeal of Amendment 16
1 Like
Not to mention, the Constitution (via the 4th Amendment) already tells the states, the counties, the world, and the universe itself that the American People have “the right to be secure in their homes”.
Now, how in the hell are people supposed to be secure in their homes, if the county government waves a magic wand every year, declares that you own them money, and if you dont/wont pay up, they will violate said security and take your home. When the county government violates the Constitution by even “threatening” to take your home, then anything the county gov does after that fact (like try to collect a debt by seizing your home) is not even in the scope of the initial constitutional violation – it is not even justifiable that they can violate your security in your home yearly because they want some money. Period. You cant say…I am going to violate the constitution by threatening you, and that is ok because I didnt yet steal your home from you because you owed a debt. The violation is in the “INITIAL THREAT” of home seizure.
It shouldn’t even get to the point of a home seizure – the law was broken THEN, and the county govt should be pushed back on THEN – right at the moment they broke constitutional law by depriving you the right to be "secure "in your home. Forget the seizure of the home for a moment. Focus on the Constitutional violation that comes into play the moment the county levies a tax against your home (which you possibly cannot afford). THAT is when the security was threatened – and every year thereafter. It is repeat violation.
A lot of people use the arguement that homes can be seized because a debt was not paid…what the hell does that have to do with the violation of the law BEFORE any of that happened? The violation of the fourth amendment happens EXACTLY at the same time the county government sends you a tax form stating that you owe them money on that home. The second it happens – your home became at risk until you pay that extortion money. How is this confusing? Why is the county government allowed to do it? Forget what they do with the money. Concentrate on the Fourth Amendment only and the violation of it. How can it be argued that this is NOT a violation of said amendment? I would love to hear a fresh take on it instead of some over-hyped monotonous nonsense that many simply spit out from memory, about why the money is needed, or what can be seized for non-payment of debt. Seems like many people dont have the ability to put blinders on and focus at only a crucial part of a picture at a given time and not stray outside of a fixed focal point - which is probably why we cant get any traction on the Fourth Amendment violation (regardless of anything else).
Thought Experiment: Imagine a red light connected to the fourth amendment…stare at the words, understand their meaning completely…and describe when the red warning light first goes off. That flashing red light represents a violation. When does the light go off and the 4A violation occur? It occurs the moment the house is no longer “secure to the homeowner”? When does that insecurity first occur? It occurs when the homeowner opens the mailbox and sees the county govt letter demanding either a payment, or the person’s home turned over for resale. This aint rocket science.
4TH: “The right of a person to be secure in his home shall not be violated”
Question: Did the County Government violate the 4TH Amendment by threatening the security of homeowner’s home? Since precident has already been set 1000s of times before, when payments were not made, and other homes were seized, it is a definite threat made by past precident, which causes the homeowner to NOT be secure in his/her home – which then triggers the Constitutional violation.
I rest my case.
Now moving on to correcting the Constitutional issue with property taxes. Many of the same people who argue for property taxes and claim that it is not a violation of the fourth amendment also follow up with this statement: “But it is an issue at the state level, so there is nothing that can be done here.” This is also incorrect. Below is the solution to most all state-level and county-level constitutional violations – including and especially county-level threats to a person’s right to be secure in their homes…
So, in summary, this post shows the violation and shows the solution to the violation. The rest is left to us, the American People. Thanks.
Final Thought: For those who still want to argue that property taxes are OK because the money is used to fund schools and roads, I will offer support to your argument in this way: "I completely agree with you that schools and roads need funding; however, it should be done without raising concerns within the mind of the homeowner that the security of their home is under threat. If the county government, can extract that wealth from the homeowner, and the homeowner never once worries about loosing his home in the process of that extraction, then there is no violation. Since the violation is triggered and exists INSIDE THE MIND of the homeowner, and this is protected, the county govt needs to operate while taking into account the right of the homeowner to be left peacably be, regarding the security of his home. It is on the county govt to figure that out – not the homeowner or the neighbor, or an unrelated avid apologist.
Read it again: “The right of a person to be SECURE in his home shall not be violated ”
1 Like
I agree, with that said I don’t have the resources or seven to fourteen years to take the State, County or City to a possible Supreme Court solution. However my Proposal for Repeal of Amendment 16 could happen during the 2026 Election. Article 5 of Our Constitution directs this process. Just as Amendment 18 stopped the sale of alcoholic beverage’s Amendment 22 Repealed Amendment 18. We can and should do the same and Repeal Amendment 16. This one action will return the Nation back to pre 1913 Law where Direct Taxation like Property and Income Taxes were found unconstitutional by the Courts. I hope this helps explain my position and my Proposal. Have a Blessed Day, Fred Walker
I assume it would be as simple as:
Amendment XXVIII (28)
Proposed, 14, November 2024
-
The Sixteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
-
No direct tax shall be applied to Citizens of the United States of America.
2 Likes
Absolutely agree with your proposal as well! Fully on board with it, Fred! It is a VERY AMERICAN political action, and completely in line with the Constitution. 
2 Likes
Thanks much, hopefully We can spread this Proposal far and wide. This one action would solve 90% of the tax related issues on this sight. Best wishes, Fred Walker
2 Likes