Property tax needs to be repealed / abolished NOW! (Morgan Co info here)

[jamil]

But why are they exempt when they make money? They show a profit year after year. They also buy properties in the area or are gifted properties and the majority of those come off the tax rolls.

I feel the same way with corporations that move in, build big because they get tax breaks and incentives then move on after the deal reverts back to the regular taxation. Should be a clause where they get the breaks but must remain for a certain period of time after.

Revenue is not the same as profit. They don't make profit per se. Though the scam mega churches, like Olsteen's still kinda live in both worlds, where they act like a quasi business, but do some churchy stuff too. They rake in donations and pay the leader in diamond rings, mansions, etcetera. And he pays income taxes on that. Presumably. Yes. I'm saying I think Olsteen is a fraudster bilking his paritioners out of their hard earned money.

Point is, I don’t think churches should pay taxes on their profits because they’re supposed to be nonprofit. But, they absolutely should pay property tax if every other property owner has to pay it.

 

[indyartisan]

Fairer that it was does not mean it’s good. It should not be based on market value.

If I had my druthers, local government and schools should just run bake sales to get their funds. Or they can beg for it. Turn tricks. Sell influence. Whatever. Okay, not really, but there are other ways to raise funds for local governments than to tax people’s property every year.

There are other ways but they don’t allow using the threat of taking ones home from them.
It will be difficult wresting that kind of power from the power hungry.

 

[firecadet613]

No one said they were surprised by this

Some of the responses could have fooled me...property taxes in Indiana are really nothing when compared to neighboring states.

We're 242 posts in, how many in this thread have wrote there elected representatives with their concerns?

 

[Ingomike]

Quick googlefu search brings out 2021 net income at 9.8 million. 2022 net income comes in at 20.3 million. This is from ProPublica non-profit explorer for Indiana.

This isn't about the church on the corner taking donations every Sunday. That place doesn't pay taxes on the one (possibly 2) building(s). This one college is pretty large and adding all the time. They are also buying more property yearly. They do pay property taxes on the places they rent out but when they buy places to convert to dorms or soccer fields or even animal sanctuaries they are not paying taxes on them.

That is the concern (gripe) that I have with it. Not just them as I mentioned we have another in the same county that I know buys properties close to campus and takes them off the tax rolls.

It is a fair concern as those properties removed from the rolls thereby increase others taxes. At one point Center township Indianapolis was raising a stink because of all the state owned property, county owned property, then add in museums and sports venues were taking millions of valuable property off the tax rolls…

 

[KLB]

It is a fair concern as those properties removed from the rolls thereby increase others taxes. At one point Center township Indianapolis was raising a stink because of all the state owned property, county owned property, then add in museums and sports venues were taking millions of valuable property off the tax rolls…

Then they should have cut their budget. Government always acts like they are being robbed of THEIR money, instead of realizing they are the ones doing the robbing.

 

[Lex Concord]

Isn’t the property tax a tax on those benefiting from the services?

It's a tax on some who benefit from the services.

I've been looking for a comprehensive list of all the things that property taxes fund in my county and have been unable to find one online so far. I seem to remember seeing a breakdown on the back of my assessment or bill at some poing; will check the paper files in a bit.

That said, most of the things that have been referenced (police, fire, roads, schools, libraries, etc.) for which property tax funds are typically used benefit everyone living in, and many traveling through a county.

As for things that only benefit property, I'm sure a fee system could be devised, if people cared to do so.

How does one pay a fee to use the county drainage system?

A usage fee could be calculated based on the acreage of the property, the soil type, the square footage of non-natural surfaces with a runoff factor (concrete, asphalt, gravel, etc.).

Drainage is another thing that could be easily argued benefit more than just property owners in a given jurisdiction; I think the same is true of nearly every service property taxes fund.

It is a frustrating topic. I just explain things and ask for specific solutions and get called a tax lover and worse.

I've seen that, and it is regrettable; I certainly don't agree.

While I agree solutions for how the funds would be replaced would need to be found — and it's a worthy discussion to have — I don't think that's the first step toward meaningful change toward elimination of property taxes.

As I believe you stated (or maybe I'm thinking of HoughMade's post), it's a political issue. It requires a political solution, which requires a critical mass of public sentiment against property taxes as a funding source.

I truly believe that someone could devise a detailed plan to replace property tax funding for every one of Indiana's 92 counties and, unless enough people pushed their legislators to adopt it (i.e. sufficient political will), nothing would change.

The core issue is not lack of solutions for fund replacement, but lack of interest/awareness. Until enough people and/or legislators agree that property taxes are an improper way to fund whatever, there will be no motion toward elimination.

Having suggested replacement funding sources will, of course, be required for such political will to gain traction, especially with those who would be tasked with the work of implementing the change.

I also believe that if many of the things property tax pays for were suddenly gone there would be some shocked people out there, when their neighbor floods their land, claims the property is his, and there is no drainage board to assist in this, there is no court to go to and no deed office to verify ownership…

This is where I think you're losing people. I may have missed it, but I've not seen anyone arguing to end property taxes and eliminate all or even most of the services. It is true that I think some of the things for which property taxes pay shouldn't be funded by taxes of any kind, but that is a different discussion.

My issue with property taxes is that I believe them to be an immoral means for government funding. It has ever been so in one form or another since feudal times at least, and it would likely take time on the order of decades to reach that end, if it's possible. That said, I think it's time to relegate property taxes to the dustbin of history.

 

[Lex Concord]

Some of the responses could have fooled me...property taxes in Indiana are really nothing when compared to neighboring states.

We're 242 posts in, how many in this thread have wrote there elected representatives with their concerns?

As I believe I stated upthread, I have.

I hope others will agree and act to share their sentiments with their legislators.

I hope I'm not alone; maybe I should change my avatar to Don Quixote.

 

[indykid]

To those who don't remember, or were too young to know what Gov. Mitch Daniels did, among others he believed in fiscal responsibility, and when he took office demanded that every state agency cut their budget by 10%. There was a lot of screaming, crying and complaining, but he eventually got them to cut their budgets.

Then he called them out, and demanded they cut their budgets another 10% and amazingly the many agencies complied, kicking and screaming.

When Daniels left office, and Purdue University hired him as president, I laughed knowing that he would do the same to them. He did one better, stating in his first year that while other universities were raising tuition buy 5%, Purdue would not raise tuition. He then held that for all his years as president of Purdue, holding tuition to the same level as when he took office.

Imagine a governor doing that today, demanding that not only do all agencies have to cut their budget, but account for every penny spent.

Want to cut or do away with property taxes? Mitch Daniels the current government.

 

[dudley0]

Revenue is not the same as profit. They don't make profit per se. Though the scam mega churches, like Olsteen's still kinda live in both worlds, where they act like a quasi business, but do some churchy stuff too. They rake in donations and pay the leader in diamond rings, mansions, etcetera. And he pays income taxes on that. Presumably. Yes. I'm saying I think Olsteen is a fraudster bilking his paritioners out of their hard earned money.

Point is, I don’t think churches should pay taxes on their profits because they’re supposed to be nonprofit. But, they absolutely should pay property tax if every other property owner has to pay it.

Maybe I am lost in translation. Here is a snippit from the above mentioned website:

Revenue
$122,251,609

Expenses
$101,876,282
Net Income
$20,375,327
Net Assets
$252,869,787

I see net income as a profit. Am I wrong in my assumption? Again I am not talking about the little church on the corner. This is, in my opinion, big business. They are claiming to be non-profit but the outliers show and make money. A lot of it compared to others in the area.

But as to the property tax portion of your comment I agree whole heartedly that if I have to pay, so should everyone else.

 

[Ingomike]

It's a tax on some who benefit from the services.

I've been looking for a comprehensive list of all the things that property taxes fund in my county and have been unable to find one online so far. I seem to remember seeing a breakdown on the back of my assessment or bill at some poing; will check the paper files in a bit.

That said, most of the things that have been referenced (police, fire, roads, schools, libraries, etc.) for which property tax funds are typically used benefit everyone living in, and many traveling through a county.

As for things that only benefit property, I'm sure a fee system could be devised, if people cared to do so.


A usage fee could be calculated based on the acreage of the property, the soil type, the square footage of non-natural surfaces with a runoff factor (concrete, asphalt, gravel, etc.).

Drainage is another thing that could be easily argued benefit more than just property owners in a given jurisdiction; I think the same is true of nearly every service property taxes fund.


I've seen that, and it is regrettable; I certainly don't agree.

While I agree solutions for how the funds would be replaced would need to be found — and it's a worthy discussion to have — I don't think that's the first step toward meaningful change toward elimination of property taxes.

As I believe you stated (or maybe I'm thinking of HoughMade's post), it's a political issue. It requires a political solution, which requires a critical mass of public sentiment against property taxes as a funding source.

I truly believe that someone could devise a detailed plan to replace property tax funding for every one of Indiana's 92 counties and, unless enough people pushed their legislators to adopt it (i.e. sufficient political will), nothing would change.

The core issue is not lack of solutions for fund replacement, but lack of interest/awareness. Until enough people and/or legislators agree that property taxes are an improper way to fund whatever, there will be no motion toward elimination.

Having suggested replacement funding sources will, of course, be required for such political will to gain traction, especially with those who would be tasked with the work of implementing the change.


This is where I think you're losing people. I may have missed it, but I've not seen anyone arguing to end property taxes and eliminate all or even most of the services. It is true that I think some of the things for which property taxes pay shouldn't be funded by taxes of any kind, but that is a different discussion.

My issue with property taxes is that I believe them to be an immoral means for government funding. It has ever been so in one form or another since feudal times at least, and it would likely take time on the order of decades to reach that end, if it's possible. That said, I think it's time to relegate property taxes to the dustbin of history.

This is the best post made on this topic and I want to reflect on your points and discuss further.

 

[jamil]

Maybe I am lost in translation. Here is a snippit from the above mentioned website:

Revenue
$122,251,609

Expenses
$101,876,282
Net Income
$20,375,327
Net Assets
$252,869,787

I see net income as a profit. Am I wrong in my assumption? Again I am not talking about the little church on the corner. This is, in my opinion, big business. They are claiming to be non-profit but the outliers show and make money. A lot of it compared to others in the area.

But as to the property tax portion of your comment I agree whole heartedly that if I have to pay, so should everyone else.

Having been on a church board, I can say the funds we brought in from donations that didn't pay church expenses, (property upkeep, utilities, etcetera) go into a general fund. The property wasn't lavish. Not ornate or ostentatious. No one was gaining wealth through the church. From the general fund we had budgets for things like mission projects, community outreach, scouting, the K-8 church school, a food bank we operated, etcetera. That's what non-profits should do.

I don't think their income should be taxed. Whatever they clear in expenses they use to help people in need. But their property? They consume government just like anyone else. I think they should pay property taxes as long as every other property owner has to.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Do you see a lot of properties in Indiana that are worth way less than their assessed value? Maybe we should flip your script, I would buy 95% of the properties in Indiana at assessed value because I have rarely seen property assessed over what it actually was worth…

Yes. And I can think of several people who would love to sell their property at appraised value.

So those that do not own property should pay for services to property?

According to you, renters pay the property tax. Correct? So therefore they are paying for services to property they do not own. So by your logic rental property should be exempt.

I have called county surveyors office a few times and received good service every time. It is interesting the number of complaints from NWI area.

Mind if I ask what exact services you received? Only thing I know of that they do that is applicable to the general public is store copies of legal surveys. That were done at the property owners expense and not funded through property taxes or any other tax. And provide them upon request.

And one more question, you believe that people should pay for the services received. Who requires more of the services provided by property taxes, the older couple with no children living with them who live in the $1.5 million mcmansion on the lake/river with a postage stamp sized lot or Mr and Mrs Methican American with 7 kids in their double wide on 3 acres?

 

[BE Mike]

My property taxes increased by 21% this year in Floyd County.

 

[bobzilla]

Fairer than it was does not mean it’s good. It should not be based on market value.

If I had my druthers, local government and schools should just run bake sales to get their funds. Or they can beg for it. Turn tricks. Sell influence. Whatever. Okay, not really, but there are other ways to raise funds for local governments than to tax people’s property every year.

The problem with letting schools "beg for money" is that the DoE has dictated that all children should have access to schools, period. Public schools are required to accept anyone and anything in their district, even when they are dangerous, violent children that have no regard for anyone or anything but their wants. When you require that to happen, you also have to provide a place for them to go.

It's a vicious cycle and for the teachers of those children (one of which I've been married to for 22 years and had to watch her come home with bruises, cuts, scrapes, black eyes and bruised tailbones) it is hard. At least some still do it because they like to help. Oh, wait, this is INGO. ATAB.

 

[Ingomike]

Yes. And I can think of several people who would love to sell their property at appraised value.

Not to Denny here but assessed value. I rarely see assessed values above market value.

According to you, renters pay the property tax. Correct? So therefore they are paying for services to property they do not own. So by your logic rental property should be exempt.

I made the point in this thread that it is fortunate for homesteaders that renters do not understand the system any better than some here. I suspect if the renters made a stink the legislature would cave and maybe even the courts then homesteaders would have something to complain about.

Mind if I ask what exact services you received? Only thing I know of that they do that is applicable to the general public is store copies of legal surveys. That were done at the property owners expense and not funded through property taxes or any other tax. And provide them upon request.

I have called the county three times over the years concerning drainage issues with their drainage system. They usually did a temporary fix then fixed it permanently later on. Good counties will fix what is their responsibility pretty quickly. The problem is few know what is their personal responsibility and the counties responsibility. The surveyors office maintains the surveys that allow the private surveyors to do their work and works with them when the mistakes are found to correct the issues.

And one more question, you believe that people should pay for the services received. Who requires more of the services provided by property taxes, the older couple with no children living with them who live in the $1.5 million mcmansion on the lake/river with a postage stamp sized lot or Mr and Mrs Methican American with 7 kids in their double wide on 3 acres?

So many variables here. I have addressed the school thing a couple of times and prefer it be removed from property tax but there are those that believe property owners benefit from an educated population, which was the historical rationale for putting it on property tax in the first place. The even better question would be if those without kids should pay for educating the children of others. No easy answers which I suspect is a source of frustration for many here…

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Not to Denny here but assessed value. I rarely see assessed values above market value.

My bad, that is what I meant. I'd be shocked if I got within 10k of my assessment. And that is with the way the market is now. First year after buying the house, it was assessed at iirc 30-40k over purchase price. And more than that for the appraised value. Hell I had a house fire and according to the assessor the value went up. Before any work was done. The fire is the only reason that I could get anywhere near the assessed value.

I made the point in this thread that it is fortunate for homesteaders that renters do not understand the system any better than some here. I suspect if the renters made a stink the legislature would cave and maybe even the courts then homesteaders would have something to complain about.

I thought it was you in either this thread or another who stated that the renters are the ones that pay the property tax because they pay the landlord. If it was someone else, my apologies.

I have called the county three times over the years concerning drainage issues with their drainage system. They usually did a temporary fix then fixed it permanently later on. Good counties will fix what is their responsibility pretty quickly. The problem is few know what is their personal responsibility and the counties responsibility. The surveyors office maintains the surveys that allow the private surveyors to do their work and works with them when the mistakes are found to correct the issues.

That would be the drainage board not the surveyor wouldn't it? And yes they maintain the surveys that the private surveyors perform.

So many variables here. I have addressed the school thing a couple of times and prefer it be removed from property tax but there are those that believe property owners benefit from an educated population, which was the historical rationale for putting it on property tax in the first place. The even better question would be if those without kids should pay for educating the children of others. No easy answers which I suspect is a source of frustration for many here…

Even taking out the school part, who do you think uses more resources?

 

[Ingomike]

My bad, that is what I meant. I'd be shocked if I got within 10k of my assessment. And that is with the way the market is now. First year after buying the house, it was assessed at iirc 30-40k over purchase price. And more than that for the appraised value. Hell I had a house fire and according to the assessor the value went up. Before any work was done. The fire is the only reason that I could get anywhere near the assessed value.

Older home or newer?

I thought it was you in either this thread or another who stated that the renters are the ones that pay the property tax because they pay the landlord. If it was someone else, my apologies.

In a rental property situation the only party that puts cash on the table is the tenant, therefore the tenant pays the property tax through the conduit of the landlord that collects money and writes the check. When you go to the store do you pay the sales tax or the retailer?

I am truly baffled by the inability to recognize simple business and the claim that if the property was vacant the landlord would have to pay but an unrented property is not a rental property in any legal sense it becomes a second home or investment property until such time as the owner rents it again.

That would be the drainage board not the surveyor wouldn't it? And yes they maintain the surveys that the private surveyors perform.

I believe different counties are structured differently, in some the elected surveyor oversees the drainage also. They do more than “maintain the surveys from private surveyors”. There are monuments to maintain corrections to make. Technology is constantly making their accuracy better.

Those used to the orderly lot number deeds have no idea what goes on out in metes and bounds world. Had a friend that bought some land, short version, the sellers had paid tax for 60 years on phantom 2.5 acres on a legal description that was submitted about a 100 years ago. They had to work out what and the county people were heavily involved.

Even taking out the school part, who do you think uses more resources?

The meth heads cause problems so the couple needs more police protection.

Joking aside that is though to sort out for sure to me. You have a strong belief as to who uses more resources?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Older home or newer?

You could say older, 1918 is what they have listed.

In a rental property situation the only party that puts cash on the table is the tenant, therefore the tenant pays the property tax through the conduit of the landlord that collects money and writes the check. When you go to the store do you pay the sales tax or the retailer?

I am truly baffled by the inability to recognize simple business and the claim that if the property was vacant the landlord would have to pay but an unrented property is not a rental property in any legal sense it becomes a second home or investment property until such time as the owner rents it again.

I pay the sales tax. It's itemized on the receipt. Haven't rented very many times but I don't recall seeing the monthly lease amount followed by an amount for property tax.

Multi unit apartment, half occupied. Are the tenants responsible for the property tax on the other half? How about if it was fully occupied and someone moves out and it takes a couple of months to find a new tenant?

I believe different counties are structured differently, in some the elected surveyor oversees the drainage also. They do more than “maintain the surveys from private surveyors”. There are monuments to maintain corrections to make. Technology is constantly making their accuracy better.

I'm just going by the IC.

Those used to the orderly lot number deeds have no idea what goes on out in metes and bounds world. Had a friend that bought some land, short version, the sellers had paid tax for 60 years on phantom 2.5 acres on a legal description that was submitted about a 100 years ago. They had to work out what and the county people were heavily involved.

The meth heads cause problems so the couple needs more police protection.

Joking aside that is though to sort out for sure to me. You have a strong belief as to who uses more resources?

My opinion is even exclusive of schooling, the meth heads most likely use more resources. But as you said the meth heads cause the problems, is they are the reason for increased need for the police, not to mention the much higher probability of needing the FD.

 

[firecadet613]

You could say older, 1918 is what they have listed.

I pay the sales tax. It's itemized on the receipt. Haven't rented very many times but I don't recall seeing the monthly lease amount followed by an amount for property tax.

Multi unit apartment, half occupied. Are the tenants responsible for the property tax on the other half? How about if it was fully occupied and someone moves out and it takes a couple of months to find a new tenant?

I'm just going by the IC.

My opinion is even exclusive of schooling, the meth heads most likely use more resources. But as you said the meth heads cause the problems, is they are the reason for increased need for the police, not to mention the much higher probability of needing the FD.

100+ year old house is likely the exception, not the rule.

My 20ish or so year old house is appraising at 62% of purchase price (purchased a few years ago) and the one we just sold (approx same age) is about 75%...

 

[ductape]

I just read through all 13 pages. Bottom line here as I see it, we need some relief. I live in Clark. We like to refer to it as "Little Cooke County". Since they closed the local ammo plant, big businesses have grown like weeds. The taxes they pay are overwhelming. With that said, I'd think the county could cut those of us that are residents here a bit on our property taxes. I pay state, county income tax etc. I live in the sticks, so no sewer, no garbage pick up, and I hardly ever see any police, though I'm sure they're out there some where. I am over 65, have lived here over 50 yrs, and I get the feeling I am paying more of a fine than receiving any benefit. Something really needs to give. As for the money coming from somewhere else for services, oh it's there alright. If they'd start building schools to be functional rather than some kind of competition between each, that would probably benefit the students more. Just my 2 cents.