Perhaps it is meaningless theatrics, but it’s not out of line to think that someone with a million dollars a year in income wouldn’t have some property they would pay tax on. And Bibliophage’s proposal of a million dollar home in NYC and one in Miami is really not all that “lavish” for someone with a million dollars a year of income. I know my (one) home cost more than 2x my salary when I bought it, as do most people’s, I suspect, or we wouldn’t need 30 year mortgages.
His property tax quotes were not at all absurd, 50k is about 5% of 1 million and while that’s slightly above average, it’s not completely out of line. My property taxes before the 2008 property value implosion were actually more than 5% of my annual income (again owning only one modest 1,700 square foot home on 1/3 of an acre).
We’re talking past each other at this point.
Having a ginormous property tax bill is absolutely not a function of the income you make, so it’s pure theatrics to express that burden in terms of income percentage.
Having a ginormous property tax bill is also not an inescapable tragedy that randomly befalls you. As a buyer it’s basic due diligence to understand the tax situation you’re getting into. As an owner, if you believe it’s too onerous (by whatever measure is meaningful to you personally), then your recourse is to sell the property.
It’s just disingenous to say “the gubmint is taking half my income”. They’re not. They’re taking an assessed fraction of an asset you decided to buy. It’s only related to your income by virtue of the fact that both figures are numbers.
What the fuck? 5% is not a “ginormous” property tax bill. It’s pretty typical. For you to handwave it as “someone who is disingenuously representing their overall tax burden because they have stupidly loaded up on properties” is pure unadulterated bullshit. It represents a small fraction of their overall tax burden, and ABOUT THE SAME PERCENTAGE as many urban dwellers in this country. If you’re REALLY that put out by it, remove that 5% and console yourself with the fact that they would “only” be paying 45% in taxes. That’s still a number that would have me saying “Holy crap I pay half of my income in taxes!” when I wrote the check at the end of the year.
I was pleased when I moved to Northern Virginia (and worked in DC) that I was exempt from DC taxes… since it seems inconvenient.
But would the same thing be true if I spent 6 months in NY (185 days) and split the rest of my time between California and Vermont (while conducting significant business in Hawaii and DC). I suspect that I’d be submitting a number of part-year resident or non-resident returns. But I don’t know how it works out between states – I understood that the Virginia/DC rule was unusual.
It sorta is, because the usual advice is to buy a home that’s around 3x gross income. If someone is stupidly buying a home that’s 30x their income, that’s on them, but it’s not unreasonable to include a “normal” house when talking about taxes. If the property tax rate is 1.5%, then at a 3x multiplier that’s similar to an extra 4.5% income tax.
I think that including property taxes gives a false impression of the percentage of your income you’re paying in taxes but for a different reason. Renters are paying their landlords property taxes, or else the landlords would sell. In fact, in many cases sole owners pay less than a renter-landlord combination because of homestead exemptions and the fact that property tax is deductible. Landlords property taxes are also deductible but are paid for by after-tax income from the renter.
But even disregarding that, it paints a misleading picture of the tax burden of the middle-class and richer to count the taxes on the property they own but not the taxes the lower-middle-class and poorer are in effect paying when they rent. You can say sure, many things are taxed like that, but paying for housing is unavoidable, so it seems churlish to tell the poor that their landlords property taxes aren’t being paid by them.
I’ve gotten the impression ( although I haven’t had this issue with every possible permutation) that even when there aren’t agreements, every state will give you credits for income taxes paid to another state. You would for example, file a part year resident or non-resident return in Hawaii, DC , California and Vermont - and then get credits on your NY tax return for the taxes paid to the other states.
Seems fair for a renter to count the property taxes their landlord is paying as part of their tax burden. If you’re going to count up taxes, it should include all similar types.
As for having a generally clear picture of tax burden, that’s a reason to include sales tax as well: since it’s flat, and lower-income people spend a higher fraction of their income on things subject to sales tax, the tax system ends up being much less progressive than it might seem. Including it would show that relatively speaking, lower-income people actually do pay significant tax.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
I didn’t make any factual claim there; I made only a comment on reasonableness when it comes to what might be included in one’s tax burden. It’s something on which reasonable people may differ.
[Moderating]
Dial it back, @crazyjoe. Factual discussions don’t need to be this heated.
It may imply this to the “poor people don’t pay taxes” crowd, but of course we’re smarter than that here and understand how tax burden works. Two people who pay X% of their income in taxes do so regardless of what kind of taxes they are.
We’re also well into GD territory after getting a GQ answer and I requested the thread closed for this reason @Chronos
Clarifying the parameters of the question is hardly debating. You yourself brought up non-income taxes (right after the “it washes out” bungle):
We can work out the math with or without whatever taxes you or anyone else is interested in.
I’m sorry you feel that way. Obviously nobody is moderating for GQ content at this point, so the floor is open to work out whatever tangents interest you. I’ve gotten the information I requested, so I’ll be moving on.
You brought up non-income taxes when you clarified the OP in your second post to the thread. Thus, they cannot be a tangent. Especially since they were never excluded by this supposed famous person or by your OP.
LOL This isn’t Quora where the question is closed because the OP doesn’t want to talk about it anymore. Questions develop a life of their own and facts are free to continue to be added.
The phrase “nobody is moderating” and “nobody is moderating the way I want my thread to be moderated” do not mean the same thing. We have always allowed some flexibility in GQ once the OP has been addressed factually. How much flexibility depends on the topic.
In any event, since this has basically devolved into bickering, we’re done here. If the three of you want to continue your bickering, feel free to open a thread in GD.