Property Tax is Inequitable and Divisive

Grassroots activism

Property Tax is Inequitable and Divisive

One of the problems we face today is that we have become two distinct types of people: those who know exactly what their home is worth and those who have only a vague idea.

To those who know, their house is an asset, a part of their financial plan. It is either a step on the road to even greater assets or the pot of gold with which they will fund their retirement. To those who don't, their home is a combination sanctuary, clubhouse and scrapbook, where the heights of children are recorded in the doorjambs and there is a story behind every dent and blemish. They feel that, if they are lucky, they will die there and another generation will begin marking the doorjambs.

These two groups wouldn't ordinarily find themselves at cross purposes. What puts them there is the property tax, the most inequitable and divisive tax we have. That is the truth that everyone knows but about which no one will speak in the tale of teardowns, and it colors the way each group sees the houses themselves. Aesthetics are important, but nothing can make a replacement house seem larger or more out of place than the certain knowledge that it will eventually drive you out of the home you love.

Rising property values do not have to be a mixed blessing. A healthy town needs both kinds of homeowners, but we can keep both only if we control the property tax. And the first step in that process is to stop thinking of private wealth as public wealth.

Replacement homes are carefully managed investments, and their owners are often in more precarious financial shape than the guy in the little house next door. There is no pile of free cash to fund, for example, a $5,000 per lot fee by the Park District. In fact, the price a builder pays to the owner of a lot is meticulously calculated to reflect the market value of what will be built there, which is a risky and nerve-racking business. It is from the lot price that the tax must be paid. A tax to compensate for lost backyard recreation, recreation that has essentially moved inside, is in reality a tax on the lot seller to fund parks he won't be around to use.

A fair tax accounts for a person's capacity to pay. The property tax, the last remnant of the hated personal property tax, is much the same as taxing a man on the value of the kidney he could sell if he wanted to. We have no right to exact money from a man just because he possesses something someone else might want to buy.

Nor did America's founders intend government to redistribute wealth, not to mention having the school system do it. The imaginary value of your home should not determine what you pay for police and fire protection, or municipal services in general.

Reliance on the property tax has also created tragic inequities in the quality of education around the state. Communities must be allowed to build and maintain whatever quality schools and facilities they wish, but access to quality teachers should not be dependent upon real estate assessments.

Rebate plans, like House Bill 750, impose new taxes without guaranteeing that old ones will be permanently reduced. Only by permanently transferring specific budget items, like the salaries of some or all of our certified teachers, to the state can we hope to control the property tax and the unfairness it represents.

In the process, we will not only eliminate teacher salary bidding wars and rationalize contract negotiations, but radically reduce one of the main causes of disharmony among two equally valuable classes of citizens, both of whom happen to be our neighbors.

[ Home ] - [ Email ] - [ Links ]

	Property Tax is Inequitable and Divisive
	One of the problems we face today is that we have become two distinct types of people: those who know exactly what their home is worth and those who have only a vague idea. To those who know, their house is an asset, a part of their financial plan. It is either a step on the road to even greater assets or the pot of gold with which they will fund their retirement. To those who don't, their home is a combination sanctuary, clubhouse and scrapbook, where the heights of children are recorded in the doorjambs and there is a story behind every dent and blemish. They feel that, if they are lucky, they will die there and another generation will begin marking the doorjambs. These two groups wouldn't ordinarily find themselves at cross purposes. What puts them there is the property tax, the most inequitable and divisive tax we have. That is the truth that everyone knows but about which no one will speak in the tale of teardowns, and it colors the way each group sees the houses themselves. Aesthetics are important, but nothing can make a replacement house seem larger or more out of place than the certain knowledge that it will eventually drive you out of the home you love. Rising property values do not have to be a mixed blessing. A healthy town needs both kinds of homeowners, but we can keep both only if we control the property tax. And the first step in that process is to stop thinking of private wealth as public wealth. Replacement homes are carefully managed investments, and their owners are often in more precarious financial shape than the guy in the little house next door. There is no pile of free cash to fund, for example, a $5,000 per lot fee by the Park District. In fact, the price a builder pays to the owner of a lot is meticulously calculated to reflect the market value of what will be built there, which is a risky and nerve-racking business. It is from the lot price that the tax must be paid. A tax to compensate for lost backyard recreation, recreation that has essentially moved inside, is in reality a tax on the lot seller to fund parks he won't be around to use. A fair tax accounts for a person's capacity to pay. The property tax, the last remnant of the hated personal property tax, is much the same as taxing a man on the value of the kidney he could sell if he wanted to. We have no right to exact money from a man just because he possesses something someone else might want to buy. Nor did America's founders intend government to redistribute wealth, not to mention having the school system do it. The imaginary value of your home should not determine what you pay for police and fire protection, or municipal services in general. Reliance on the property tax has also created tragic inequities in the quality of education around the state. Communities must be allowed to build and maintain whatever quality schools and facilities they wish, but access to quality teachers should not be dependent upon real estate assessments. Rebate plans, like House Bill 750, impose new taxes without guaranteeing that old ones will be permanently reduced. Only by permanently transferring specific budget items, like the salaries of some or all of our certified teachers, to the state can we hope to control the property tax and the unfairness it represents. In the process, we will not only eliminate teacher salary bidding wars and rationalize contract negotiations, but radically reduce one of the main causes of disharmony among two equally valuable classes of citizens, both of whom happen to be our neighbors.
	[ Home ] - [ Email ] - [ Links ]