[rollei_list] Re: OT Estate Tex (was Re: Copyright Law)
- From: Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 08:04:28 -0500
Richard -
While there are a small number (in percentage terms) of exception, in
the vast majority of the cases property tax is progressive. You (and
I) lived in a rarefied world of atypical locations/appreciation till
the bubble burst, but relatively few experience these inequities
compared with the total pool of folks who own property. In other
words, this is another top 3-4% scenario, just like the Estate Tax
is...
While the US tax system is certainly not perfect, it is certainly
generally progressive...
Eric Goldstein
--
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:12 PM
> Subject: [rollei_list] OT Estate Tex (was Re: Copyright Law)
>
>
> Hi Austin -
>
> Then for the benefit of the rest of our readers who are likely not so
> conversant in US Estate Law, let's get accurate information out there.
> The tax to which you refer only effects the very wealthiest of all
> Americans, the top 3-4% I would guess. The US tax structure is
> basically a progressive one, and those who are able to pay more are
> generally called upon to do so with their income tax, property tax,
> and estate tax. At least that the law intends.
>
>
> Eric Goldstein
>
> While I agree with you in general I don't think property tax is really a
> progressive tax. While it increases with the value of the property that is
> not always consonant with the wealth of the owner and certainly not with
> income. A case in point is the tremendous increase in assesed value of real
> property in the period from around the early 1960s to the 1970s. The
> valuation was increased because property values, especially those for homes,
> was driven up by speculators. The result was that many could no longer
> afford to live in homes they had owned for many years. This was one of the
> main reasons that the notorious proposition 13 was passed in 1978. It
> prevented an increase in tax value of a primary residence until it was sold.
> Prop 13 had many other sections and was IMO bad legislation but the
> limitation in the increase of property tax on private homes did make some
> sense. If incomes were tied to home values there would have been no problem
> but it isn't always the case.
> Commercial property is different although steep increases in property
> taxes can drive some business out of existance.
> IMO income tax is the only really progressive tax. However it has become
> such a bugaboo to politicians that they will propose any sort of hidden tax
> or regressive tax, like sales taxes, instead. Government does need income
> because the citizens demand services but people think it should all be free.
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
