Sunday, November 9th, 2008 at 6:31 AM
Property Tax Re-Assessment
We have more clarity on the property tax re-assessments, thanks to the U-T’s article yesterday:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081108/news_lz1c08taxes.html
If you apply to lower your property taxes by November 30th, the tax assessor will use OLD comparable sales (November ‘07 to March ‘08) to determine your assessed value.
My previous thought was to wait until January ‘09 to apply so you could use current comps. But the appeal period doesn’t begin until March 1, 2009, so if you haven’t done so, you might as well send in your application in the next three weeks, and do it again in March.
Here is a link to the form:
http://sdcounty.ca.gov/cob/docs/aab/aabadobeapp.pdf
In the fine print of the application:
If you selected DECLINE IN VALUE, be advised that the application will only be effective for the one year appealed. Subsequent years will normally require additional filings.
I can’t imagine the tax assessor raising your taxes next year if you don’t submit another application, but this phrase will give you a reason to keep sending them in as long as property values around you are in decline.
You don’t have to include comps to justify your value, but it is an option. If you’d like me to send you the recent sales around your home, email me at jim@jimklinge.com
Posted on Sunday, November 9th, 2008 at 6:31 AM in Property Tax Re-Assessment | 8 Comments » | 
Email
| 
Print
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I do not get it. Everyone was happy that one’s tax is frozen with the date of the purchase and no one made the peep in the past. As direct consequence, the working masses that came to SD during 90s and 2000s subsidized La Jolla Farms and RSF fat cats by paying their taxes (imagine what your taxes were in Del Mar if you bought in 80s?).
anon | November 9th, 2008 at 12:11 pmNow all of a sudden, speculators are on the losing end and tax is supposed to be lowered? And the government is listening?
Where the fuck were you while I had to move from rental to rental while the speculators were evicting me out to flip the property?
If you were happy with NOT paying the real property tax like everyone else in the nation, why the fuck am I supposed to subsidize you in the house you evidently cannot afford.
Get the fuck out of the house you do not belong in and start spending what you earn.
“I do not get it. Everyone was happy that one’s tax is frozen with the date of the purchase and no one made the peep in the past.”
You con’t get it because you’re not up on CA history. In 1978 CA voters passed a proposition limiting real estate tax increases in times of increasing value. Then CA voters passed another proposition requiring real estate taxes to be lowered in times of declining value. There is nothing “all of a sudden” about it, and “the government is listening” because CA voters forced it to. It has nothing to do with whether or not homeowners can afford the taxes or their houses. It’s because 77% of frequent CA voters are homeowners.
GeneK | November 9th, 2008 at 1:30 pmAs direct consequence, the working masses that came to SD during 90s and 2000s subsidized La Jolla Farms and RSF fat cats by paying their taxes (imagine what your taxes were in Del Mar if you bought in 80s?).
———————
People who choose to move to SD during the boom years made the **choice** to pay higher taxes when they agreed to pay higher prices. Nobody put a gun to their heads and forced them to move here, nor were they forced to buy over-priced houses with neg-am loans. Those were choices they made entirely on their own, and they only have themselves to blame. Native and long-time Californians are not responsible for newcomers and their increased burden on our state’s infrastructure and public service resources.
That’s the beauty about Prop 13: you actually control what you pay. It’s like the difference between an ARM and a fixed-rate mortgage. You know your costs up front, and that’s a very good thing.
BTW, the greatest beneficiary of property tax money is the public school system. The people who moved to RSF and Del Mar in the 80s already paid for their kids, so they might take the view that they should not have to pay for the newcomers’ kids. After all, it’s the newcomers who have destroyed so much of the beauty and quality of life in Southern California.
Just a different perspective.
CA renter | November 9th, 2008 at 4:20 pmIt’s a good thing that the people who bought in the 80’s don’t need firefighters, police, courts, town halls, and courthouses, use public works, drive cars on roads, or use parks. Otherwise, they might be seen as freeloaders.
Chuck
Chuck Ponzi | November 9th, 2008 at 6:10 pmCA renter,
Spoken like real Republican – “don’t give fuck who is dying as long as I do not see it”.
I actually am European by origin, have PhD, make more than $300k a year and still believe that not paying taxes (or cheating on them via Prop 13) is wrong.
The fact that you believe that we have “choice” on not supporting the society is going a long way to explain why are we closer to Brasil than to Germany. Then again, I doubt that hicks like yourself have ever left the Inland Empire to get the perspective …
It is hard to decide who is more repulsive – likes of you or Defense Industry Captains and Porno Industry kings inhabiting RSF.
anon | November 9th, 2008 at 9:31 pmAs for being a “hick”…was born and raised in L.A., college graduate of two college-educated parents. Never lived in the Inland Empire, nor visited there…maybe drove through a handful of times, if that. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a “hick,” just clarifying for you.
CA renter | November 9th, 2008 at 10:24 pmHmmm…I had posted a longer reply about how wrong you are about me, anon. Seems the spam filter didn’t like it.
Just wanted to say you couldn’t be more wrong, and that Prop 13 actually protects the poor from the rich (“granny” isn’t taxed out of her home by speculators and newbies who want to overpay for their “investments”).
About 55% of property tax revenue goes to school districts. The newbies, who are more likely to have young children, are NOT subsidizing the long-time/native owners.
Again, people **choose** how much they want to pay in property taxes. It’s the main reason we are renting right now. When we sold our last house, we could have easily afforded the P&I portion of our payments on a new house we wanted to buy, but the property taxes made the payments rather uncomfortable. I felt prices would come down, so we rented instead. Everyone else had the same choice, but wanted to be a Donald Trump, instead. Their fault, and theirs alone. Sorry, but that is a fact.
CA renter | November 9th, 2008 at 10:31 pmIt’s funny that nobody seemed to have a problem buying a home under CA tax rules when property values were going up and they expected to resell their homes for a big profit before their intro rates reset.
GeneK | November 10th, 2008 at 3:22 pm