Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Media AJC reboots misleading "Your taxes are too high" series
Posted by Scott Henry @ScottTheHenry on Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:09 PM
The biggest problem, though, is that the articles strike an alarmist note without providing the proper context about a complex subject. Put simply, the AJC's series suggests — assumes, really — that if your property is overvalued by the county, then your taxes are too high. But it ain't necessarily so.
Remember, all you homeowners out there, the years before the bubble burst, when your tax assessment reliably undervalued your property? Did that mean you were paying too little in taxes? Of course not. That's because everyone else's house was undervalued, too.
Wonk alert: As you probably already know, your home valuation is one of two variables that determine your tax bill. The second is the millage rate, which, in turn, is a product of the budget of the local municipality. The amount you end up paying in taxes is, ideally, reached through the following process:
1. County assessors appraise everyone's property and each local municipality comes up with its "tax digest," the total value of all taxable property within its jurisdiction
2. Your local elected officials — city, county, school board — develop their respective next year's budgets to reflect anticipated revenue and costs
3. Using those two factors — the tax digest and the budget — officials extrapolate their jurisdiction's respective millage rate
4. Those millage rates are applied to your individual tax assessment to determine how much poorer you will become
Now, in a perfect world, the fair market value of everyone's property would be accurately reflected on his or her tax bill. But just because the county overvalues your house doesn't mean you're paying too much, any more than your house being undervalued in the past meant you got a break. Rather, the important question is whether your house is overvalued relative to other homes (and to commercial property).
For instance, the AJC series says the typical Douglas County home has been appraised by county assessors at 37 percent more than it's actually worth on the open market. Ignoring commercial property for a moment, that suggests that the county digest is inflated by 37 percent. Now, let's say the county budget is $50 million. If the county were to update its assessments and somehow figure out the fair market value of everyone's home, the residential portion of the tax digest would suddenly drop by 37 percent. Which means the county would be forced to hike up the tax rate if it still aimed to collect enough revenue to support a $50 million budget.
So, even if the county had a real-time, real-world valuation for your house, the higher millage rate might mean you wouldn't pay any less in taxes.
In fact, I think the AJC's whole question of whether homeowners are "paying too much in taxes" is somewhat misleading. The proper question should be, "Are you paying more than your fair share?" This is because, if every property is overvalued by 37 percent, it's all a wash. Same with everyone being undervalued the same amount. It's only when some people's houses are overvalued and others undervalued that taxpayers get screwed. Or if some neighborhoods are overvalued by a wider margin than others. Or if residential properties are overvalued relative to commercial properties.
Actually, that last scenario is the likeliest one, because commercial property owners have the resources needed to go to the mat with county assessors in appealing their valuations. And I suspect that homeowners who don't appeal their valuations will end up subsidizing some of the tax burden of those who do appeal their valuations.
Or perhaps it's people with big homes getting the shaft. Or people in new homes. Or people on one end of the county — or maybe it's the other end. I don't know who's getting shafted. And, more to the point, neither do the AJC's readers. Because the issue is far more complicated than simply whether your home is worth less than the county thinks it is.
Comments (27)
Showing 1-27 of 27
like
dislike
Mr. Henry
As a property owner of over 80 properties in metro Atlanta I can say that the values are varying greatly with S Dekalb and S W Atlanta have the worst problems with houses varying by 70% on the same block. The AJC is late getting on the bandwagon but at least they are willing to do the analysis of the problem unlike other media companies.
Sounds a lot like another Atlanta paper that ignores actual crime statistics by enclosing the word perception with quotation marks. It's nice how they are able to refute reality and prey on fear by using mighty punctuation marks. Guess all of the print media in Atlanta has a problem with honesty. Well, at least Sunday Paper's attempt ended in, well, ending. Which band of propagandists will be next?
It's so pathetic of the AJC to trot out this tired series every 6 months. Government is evil!! We all pay too much in taxes!! Such conservative propaganda. What a joke. I really hope the AJC goes under sooner or later because the paper has become a pathetic joke. I think it took me 3 minutes to read the entire paper this morning because it was so full of disgusting stories about cops and crime and taxes that I can't imagine anyone cared about. This paper is being driven into the ground and I can't wait for it to go under.
So what's your solution? Leave your property taxes exactly as they are even if your house value drops?
Solution to what, POH? My criticism is of the AJC's simplistic treatment of a complex subject, and its implication that if your assessment is inflated, that automatically means you're paying too much in taxes. Here's a theoretical example that is probably all too common: Let's say the county has overvalued your house by 5 percent, but the average home in your tax jurisdiction is overvalued by 15 percent. In that scenario, not only are you not being over-taxed, but you'd actually be paying less than your fair share compared to most homeowners.
A more meaningful analysis would have examined which neighborhoods are most overvalued and why. It would have identified systemic glitches in each county's assessment process that have led to some property owners paying too much and others paying too little.
I'm not saying such an undertaking would have been easy or even doable, but it would've justified the much-hyped, week-long treatment that the AJC has afforded this series.
You're nickle and dime-ing AJC's pandering to those Angry and Dumb White Joes Who Never Read Jack Shit Anyway while ignoring the alarming uptick in the AJC's reliability-turned-dependence on gore and grotesque mayhem and human road kill and other sick-humans sensationalism they've been churning lately to game their site counts - to impress advertisers I assume. Hell, they keep it up they'll reach the human waste-products level of their Cox brethren at WSB-TV. Hard to do I know, but they'll get there.
I challenged my valuation in Cobb, which hadn't been changed in years, and I won. Should I be paying higher taxes on a house that's dropped tens of thousands of dollars in value just to make liberals who work for free tabloids feel better? Here's a suggestion: Fuck You.
here's a suggestion for you, pj: learn what a millage rate is and how it's applied you mathematically-challenged retard
it's kind of amazing to me that you can be so angry about your taxes and yet so ignorant as to how they are defined
Okay, numbnuts, here's the math: the county tried to defraud me. First the bill came in with the valuation the same as it was in 2007. I pulled all the recent sales in the subdivision (2009-2010), and none of them were within $50 grand of that amount.
So I appealed, in writing, with data, and it was rejected pro forma. I appealed the rejection, and after months of foot-dragging, I got a hearing. The tax assessor came in and immediately tried to settle for half the overage (really gives you confidence in how much care they took the first and second time, doesn't it?). I challenged him with the actual data, and he tried to justify the valuation using a single sale in a different subdivision of a house that was 20 years newer construction than my house.
If a private appraiser did that, it would be black-and-white fraud. If you can tell me why it was okay for a government employee to do it without resorting to cant or insults, I'll be impressed, but you'll still be wrong.
The board rejected his valuation, and unanimously voted to value the property at exactly the number I'd first proposed in the appeal.
So: government assholes intentionally offer up pure FRAUD in valuations, but I should just suck it up and pay more because shitheads who probably never paid property taxes in their lives think it's all cool and stuff, 'cause you're probably like, a suburban rube who deserves it, you know?
Again: Fuck. You. Without lube.
haha you're so angry and you still don't understand comparative property taxation. just frothing with rage at a world you barely understand
so dumb, so mad, so sad
So the law, we'll just ignore that, 'cause it makes us feel better to talk about "comparative property taxation."
Try that one in the real world, kid, and see who comes out as 'dumb.' (As I predicted, you couldn't make a credible argument--what a shock.)
yeah ok man whatever
sorry that you're enraged by your inability to process complex topics
Go bus another table, kid. You don't have clue one about the real world.
you seem to define 'real world' as 'get utterly apoplectic about a topic that you don't really understand' which is a pretty standard response from people who get called out on their own ignorance
your valuation doesn't really matter once they establish next years mills but if it makes you feel better for getting one over on the fraudulent government then whatevs
logically (bear with me, i know this is new) you wouldn't want AJC to publish anything because the more people who revalue, the more likely that the millage will increase and your taxes will go up again
but thanks for playing into the vulnerable-to-outrage-porn stereotype of the AJC sycophant
They must have come up with a new definition of "ignorance" recently, meaning "unwilling to agree with a leftie editorialist's rationalization for why governments ought to be allowed to collect more taxes than the law allows." I understood the argument; it's just a specious one. Henry can't stand the thought of a government actually spending less money, so he wants people to be ignorant about their legal rights and not force those governments to live up to the law. Not what you'd call a defensible position for an alleged "journalist," but nobody expects anything less from Creative Leftists.
Again, you've never had to pay property taxes, and you've probably never filled out a tax form more complex than a 1080EZ, so I don't expect you to understand. It's okay, really. Waiters aren't required to grasp tax law.
Eric may be onto something, PJ. Where in my post does it say people shouldn't appeal their valuations or that governments should be able "to collect more taxes than the law allows?" I'm simply pointing out that the AJC series did a poor job explaining the taxation process.
*In fact, I think the AJC's whole question of whether homeowners are "paying too much in taxes" is somewhat misleading. The proper question should be, "Are you paying more than your fair share?"*
You mean to say you weren't asserting there that even if your property is overvalued by the government (which mine demonstrably was, to the point of outright fraud on the assessor's part) that you really shouldn't question your valuation because then you might not be "paying your fair share"?
I have no problems with criticizing the AJC; I barely glanced through the articles in question, as usual, they were badly-written tripe (it's a worthless rag that still acts like it's a monopoly), but you didn't stop at that, you went on to argue that the plebes ought to shut up and pay higher taxes no matter what property values have done because... well, just because you think so. You even admitted you really don't know anything about the actual data.
wow pj you really have no idea what the point of this article was
it has nothing to do with 'the law' however you imagine it
i don't know if it's more funny or sad how stunningly ignorant you are
you can complain about leftists all you want but this:
"I understood the argument; it's just a specious one. Henry can't stand the thought of a government actually spending less money, so he wants people to be ignorant about their legal rights and not force those governments to live up to the law."
-simply demonstrates that you really and truly don't understand the argument at hand. i don't know how to tell you in a polite manner that you're barking up the wrong tree
this is how property taxes work: the county establishes how much money it needs through cumulative budgeting. it then splits up everyone's share of that money through what is called a 'millage rate'. you pay 'mills' of the value of your property in what we call the 'property tax'
so if you get your property revalued, your 'value x mills' payment goes down. if a lot of people get revalued and the average value goes down, then the millage rate - and commensurately your property tax - will go up to meet next year's budgetary target. given that property taxes are a proportional value tax, and not an absolute value tax (like sales taxes) there is no way that any amount of revaluation will actually reduce the total budget of the local government. all you can do is reduce the comparative share that you pay, so it is in your best interests to make sure that nobody revalues their property but you
effectively you're bitching about 'the law' that doesn't exactly exist except in your highschool dropout perspective while remaining entirely ignorant of how the government you hate actually works
i guess it's just easier to boil a complex problem down to 'those damned leftists!' seems to work for fox news
p.s. 'specious' as an adjective refers to an argument which is fallacious based on unfounded assertion. the author's argument is not unfounded, you simply don't understand it. please don't use words unless you understand what they mean
"You mean to say you weren't asserting there that even if your property is overvalued by the government (which mine demonstrably was, to the point of outright fraud on the assessor's part) that you really shouldn't question your valuation because then you might not be "paying your fair share"?"
EVERYONE's property is overvalued compared to the market, jackass. this means that everyone is paying a proportionally fair share
let's say i have a Thing, and you have a Thing, and the value of Thing is $1000. the government says Thing is worth $1500, and takes $150 from both of us in taxes.
are you paying too much for Thing tax? not really. because if the government needs $300, and it assesses the real value of Thing at the actual $1000, then it will just raise the Thing tax from 10% to 15%
are you paying more for Thing than anyone else? no! in other words, are you paying your fair share of Thing tax? (hint: the answer is yes)
if you really want to complain about spending, then complain about spending. don't complain about a tax collection system that you demonstrably do not comprehend
in conclusion,
"Again, you've never had to pay property taxes, and you've probably never filled out a tax form more complex than a 1080EZ, so I don't expect you to understand. It's okay, really. Waiters aren't required to grasp tax law."
i'm sorry that you don't understand how property taxes work. that's not my fault though. insult me all you like but it's hard for me to actually feel insulted when you've got a pound of anger and a pinch of common sense
oh yeah i've gone ahead and downvoted my comments too just to make you feel better
it's an awful thing, realizing that you're a stupid person. nobody should have to go through it. you have my sympathy
Heh.
Well kid, I'll grant you this: I'm certainly not angry any more. Now I'm amused. It's exceptionally funny to see a waiter who thinks he needs to tap out a sophomoric dissertation on property taxes to make himself look like he has a clue. You're about as right in your guesses about me as you are about everything else, but again: you did provide some valuable entertainment here. Probably the first time in you're life you've done anything worth more than minimum wage.
It's no wonder you don't have a real job; you're too much of a snot to actually work at anything useful, but with self-regard like that, I'm sure you can get yourself all the way up to, oh, tattoo parlor administrator by the time you're 40.
Here's something you didn't bother to consider: when property values were going through the roof, all these county and city governments were spending as fast as the new money was coming in, whether that spending was justified or not. Now that valuations are down--and now that the citizens who have a clue are forcing those governments to live up to the letter of the law--there's less tax money coming in. What you and Henry can't abide is the thought of those governments doing what everybody else has had to do--adjusting their spending downwards in response.
Yes, yes, I know. "That's, like, crazy man, you're just saying that 'cause you're a fan of Bourgeois Tagg, or something, you big dummy!" Got it.
Now go bus that table, those dirty dishes aren't going to clean themselves...
you still don't understand property taxation. sorry to break it to you
i can get a new job tomorrow but you'll be an idiot forever
i could perhaps draw pictures, with crayon, and send them to you if you feel like it would help you at all understand the taxes that make you cry so hard
Whatever gets you through the next shift, junior. Run along now.
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
Vernon Jones wants to return to the Gold Dome and other interesting qualification tidbits 1
Qualifying period ends, dust settles, campaigns begin
-
Suspects in Pittsburgh gay bashing slated to go to trial Tuesday
The men accused of beating Brandon White in Southwest Atlanta already headed to court
-
Film Clips: Men In Black 3
Men in black are back, Chernobyl's tourism industry is booming, and music festival romance all this weekend 'at the movies.'
- More »
More by Author
-
Ga. Senate punishes females, the poor, poor females 13
Georgia's senators went after women and poors like they stole something
-
Super-sizing Savannah 10
Why Atlanta's mayor cares so much about improving another city's port
- More »
