I found this while looking for information about intentionally progressive property tax schemes. Not too surprising to find that expensive houses tend to be undertaxed (because they tend to be appraised below their true value), but I didn't have it in my mental model of wealth inequality, either.
Many more inexpensive homes turnover, so a more accurate appraisal is generally easier to obtain. The wealthier you are, the more resources you can devote to challenging your appraisal. When taken together, you get a situation where more expensive properties are likely to be less current with respect to the market and the affluent can then find more comparable under-appraised properties to base an appeal off of.
Don't get me wrong, it makes me super mad that my rich neighbors want to sell their homes for 10 million bucks but are fine being appraised at a million. I'll also comp to being in the same boat, but I really wish there was a way to more accurately keep all properties properly appraised so as to keep taxes fair. Particularly when school budgets fail due to the community not paying what they owe.
There is nothing new here though. The affluent will always be able to game the system (any system) more effectively.
From a skim, I see nothing about wealthier homeowners having broader political influence - to systematically (vs. one-off) encourage such less-than-fair assessments, and discourage reform.
Similarly, nothing about the incentives for residents (voters) in an area to use regressive property taxes as a poll tax - whether trying to prevent the less-well-to-do from living there, or to gear up gentrification for their individual benefit (higher real estate value).
3 comments
[ 5.9 ms ] story [ 18.9 ms ] threadDon't get me wrong, it makes me super mad that my rich neighbors want to sell their homes for 10 million bucks but are fine being appraised at a million. I'll also comp to being in the same boat, but I really wish there was a way to more accurately keep all properties properly appraised so as to keep taxes fair. Particularly when school budgets fail due to the community not paying what they owe.
There is nothing new here though. The affluent will always be able to game the system (any system) more effectively.
Similarly, nothing about the incentives for residents (voters) in an area to use regressive property taxes as a poll tax - whether trying to prevent the less-well-to-do from living there, or to gear up gentrification for their individual benefit (higher real estate value).