Property taxes are the least progressive of all tax structures and have little correlation to a taxpayer's ability to pay. Texas, like other states that boast no income tax, the tax most aligned with an ability to pay, lean hard on property taxes. Perhaps this town should hit up those wealthy that own second homes and have an income that supports paying taxes accordingly, or at least give large exemptions for homestead and low income owners. In Florida, a similar 'no income tax state', property tax appraisals may not rise more than 3% per year on owner occupied principle residences and not more than 10% on rental, commercial and second home properties along with favorable exemptions for elderly low income, veterans and principle residences. Income taxes are the real answer, but the powerful and wealthy will never let that happen as long as they control things in Texas and elsewhere.
44
My New Mexico friend has a "straw bale" house which seems a lot better than adobe. She built a frame with big logs, filled the space in between with bales of straw and had the straw covered (quickly) with a special sealing material. Regular adobe has to be constantly maintained but the waterproof covering on the straw bails has held fine for my friend for 20 years now. Like the bales her walls are 1 foot thick so it is very insulating. Her house is 12 feet high in the north and 8 feet high in the south and covered with a metal roof that collects rain in her cistern -- she also has solar panels. My friend spends $200 a year for propane and that is enough for hot showers and washing dishes. Her house is cool in the summer when she opens her small north facing window.
21
What do property taxes pay for and why do home owners pay ad valorem taxes? Marfa is a town of fewer than 2,000 permanent residents and the City has a multi-million dollar budget. Similarly, the Independent School District, with perhaps 300 enrolled kids, also has a multi-million dollar budget. Blame Judd. Blame gentrification. Blame (putting it impolitely) “Whitey”. Consider this: Might it be the case that the people behind these “evil tax increases” are in fact...”locals”? As in: Marfa’s city, county and school district (and their respective boards/councils?) Last time I checked, people pay taxes to support city & county government functions (like it or not & for better or worse).
Newsflash: Marfa’s (and Texas’) tax structure is increasingly unsustainable for “ordinary” citizens. Marfa is but one example. So maybe the Presidio County Appraisal District (arguably at the behest of the Texas Comptroller) persists in pursuing the flawed implementation of a failing tax policy. The issue is much more complicated than “Tax the rich” or “It’s because Texas doesn’t have an income tax” thinking will solve. In my opinion it is a question of whether sensible, modest governance (and budget management) is attainable at the local (or any) scale. One wonders: How does a community hold its municipal and county agencies accountable for their budget actions? Can it? More to the point: “Is Sanderson the new Marfa?”
20
Personally, I think America uses property taxes to pay for a lot of things that would be better paid for with taxes that more fairly reflect the taxpayer’s ability to pay: income taxes, sales taxes, and (gasp) estate taxes.
That said, if we’re going to have property taxes, the only fair way to do that is based on property values, done by competent appraisers. Appraisals are done by comparing the property in question to similar properties that have sold, and making adjustments for disparities. The key is finding truly comparable properties. If it’s true that adobe houses in Marfa sell at a premium, that should be reflected in the comps. You can’t adjust for such a thing, any more than you can adjust for views or location etc.
11
Move into a trailer! You've saved on state tax all your life. Now don't complain if you haven't saved that money for your old age. Heavens! When will folks finalky start taking responsibility for their lives?
1
I first visited Marfa in about 2001 during Christmas. I loved it. There was a great book store but about half of the town was still abandoned.
I returned the next year--Christmas too--because I found it refreshingly simple, and trips to Big Bend National Park were not far.
But the Western charm didn't seem to last.
Although I'm an artist, it's now become one of the least interesting destinations I'd like to return to, given the changes, updates and increased costs (resulting in higher taxes, as this article states).
Please, not another Santa Fe.
23
Sad that residents are paying the price of Marfa's having become a hipster art destination. When I visited there in 1995, it was to see the Judd installation, which was little known and not often visited; the site was closed and the town fairly deserted, so my friend and I trespassed onto the site and just peeked into windows to see some of the Judd stuff. The main attraction in Marfa then was the "mystery lights" that one can sometimes see at night across the plain from the highway just outside of town--advertised by big banners hanging on motels in town, "See the mystery lights!" We drove out there, and we saw them. One of my favorite memories of West Texas!
13
The core issue here is the reliance of the State of Texas on local property tax to fund schools. The result is fundamentally unfair, particularly for the elderly or those who have had homes for many years.
The courts have consistently held that the property tax system is unfair. The legislature has cobbled together "fixes" that have high property value districts (think big cities) give a large portion (sometimes more that 50%) to the state to give to other school districts.
The rule referred to in this article refers to the use of independent appraisal districts, who should properly estimate value (all the more difficult as sales prices are not disclosed in Texas).
The appraisal district sets the property VALUE. The governmental entity (school district or county, etc) sets the tax RATE.
What is unique here is setting a value based on a building material, and not on square feet, or improvement value.
24
@C. Carrington-I believe the elderly in many districts can apply for a property tax freeze at age 65.
5
If you want to leave the world behind and hide in Marfa you need to pony up... privacy and bragging rights have a price. Sounds like a new "Marfa" town needs to be discovered for those lacking the cash...it will happen as it always does and those that get pushed out of Marfa will have a place to hide - on the cheap! Maybe New Mexico has another town that needs art and culture to save it from further abandonment.
5
There's a market solution to this. Adobe has become an expensive building material, so builders should start using fauxdobe.
4
Fauxdobe is made in China and tariffs have caused prices to skyrocket.
4
I actually went and did a small documentary project in 2015 on this very issue. An apartment fire had made several local families homeless, all of which were below the poverty level in income. There was almost nowhere for them to go due to the fact that a lot of long time residents, who were friends and family of these people, had moved out of Marfa due to property tax increase. About 12 families were displaced.
I sent the images and story to the Times in 2015 but never heard back. Here's one of them- https://www.instagram.com/p/3eqORgHPHd/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=1dsifq6b92m1p
17
@Richard Sharum I fought that apartment fire. It was the biggest structure fire we'd seen in decades. Thanks for sharing.
17
Yet corporate America was given huge tax breaks by the Republicans - they have better lobbyists.
And of course they told us "everyone" would win.
My life hasn't changed at all in the 2 years it's been in place. Real estate went up in value but now appears to be sinking and slowing down. But the corporations and Trump's 1% crowd are thrilled - they should be, they got it all! When will the Trump base wake up?
23
To me, this paragraph towards the end of the story is the worst part of this bizarre twist on the gentrification dilemma
"While the adobe homes in Marfa are now yielding more tax dollars for Presidio County, the local schools can’t expect any windfall. Despite the living conditions of many of its 350 schoolchildren, the Marfa district is now considered “rich” by Texas standards because of the new tax revenue, and thus must refund more than $400,000 to the state for use in districts with less money."
So the poor local people in the modest adobe homes dealing w/higher taxes are sending kids to a school which is not benefitting from the increased taxes. The irony.
48
Stories like this make me so sad. I miss the Texas I grew up in, that wasn't very cool but was full of cool people.
6
Having no state income tax, Texas relies property taxes and other vehicles to fund the coffers. So high-income Republicans get a tax break while retired pensioners in modest homes see their property tax sky-rocket.
22
Here in Marfa we have two problems with property taxes and it’s not increased valuations. First, and everything else being equal, the adobe premium disproportionately shifts the tax burden to owners of mud block homes. When their values go up more than those of comparable homes, they pay a higher share of taxes. The second problem is that a least one local taxing jurisdiction is not content to maintain its current tax revenue by lowering its property tax rate to off-set increased values; a year ago it actually increased its rate to just below the point that would have required an election thus increasing its budget substantially. I lied, there’s also a third problem; locally we call it the auto-suspension tax – you see those increased City taxes have not fixed our miserable streets.
11
This report distressed me on several levels. Do we agree that people in their 70's and 80's who have lived in a 3 room adobe house with what appears to be no air -conditioning and "who knows " plumbing should suddenly be assessed very steep property taxes based on " style" ? If they lived in a trailer park with an ugly " manufactured home" this would not happen. And the tiny little falling apart adobes are not the beautiful new ones on an acre with a pool, high walls, probable multiple bathrooms and imported tile.
Where I live now people over 65 are allowed to apply for a property tax freeze. The freeze can be lifted if significant remodeling takes place or if the homeowner's joint income begins to exceed $65,000. But my center city neighborhood has gentrified with $1,000,000 houses being built several to a block and counting. The county has run around quite fast to increase everyone's assessment averaging in the new house values. So my freeze, acquired last year, is at a higher valuation than 18 mos ago.
But revaluing would not take place if I painted it. That is completely draconian. And counterproductive.
I foresee older people being driven from their homes in many places by this new game of gotcha. And younger people, rather than being moved to sympathy are openly saying: " We want their house and we can afford it. Out of the way, old folks. It's the market. Get used to it. " Bad side effects are guaranteed.
Light shone by the Times though. Hope it helps.
28
@Consuelo One solution is to have enough adobe houses built so the young and the old do not have to compete for the same houses, so the old do not have to hope that the young will decide to live elsewhere, and the young to hope that the old will be forced to move because of the tax burden.
These houses are cheap to build, so it shouldn’t be difficult to build more. Why it is actually difficult is where the real problem lies. Certainly not in the fact that we tax properties according to their real value.
2
I don’t really know why that particular issue deserves national coverage- property taxes are rising, Ghosh, who would have known that. Alone in Queens, NYC, property taxes increased by about 300-400% in the last decade or so. New York State had to come up with statutory prohibitions for property tax increases. But, Americans have the widespread phantasy that an organized community can function properly without any revenue. Reminds me to the whiskey wars.
4
@Tom Mix
There's an intrinsic irony in an inexpensive building material causing a disproportionate rise in the taxable value of a property. As far as property taxes, which are regressive, as a means of furnishing revenue are concerned, there is something distasteful and counterproductive about levying confiscatory taxes on people merely for the continued privilege of living in their own home. There are all kinds of economic activity, which could include the eventual sale or rental of property, that could provide tax revenue without displacing residents. Property taxes should certainly be means tested.
14
Yes, but my point was that even in Marfa , Texas, people don’t “merely live in their homes”. They use roads to get there, which need to be maintained, there are schools to be paid for, law enforcement, etc. etc. who should pay for all that ? You can certainly debate whether a property tax is, from a tax policy perspective, the best way to finance that. But in a state which prides itself for levying no income tax, what choice do you have? One could increase sales and use taxes, somewhat. But that would likely not generate enough revenue and would also disproportionately increase taxes on people who don’t own real property.
6
Slightly off-topic, but I would add that Marfa is an "art mecca" only in the imagination of people who have never been there. The surrounding natural beauty, on the other hand, is lovely and impressive.
15
@Don
As an artist myself, I know the beauty of art lies in the eye of the beholder. And, having never been to Marfa myself, I must confess that many others disagree with your jaundiced view of Marfa art. Perhaps for you, Marfa isn't an art mecca. For others, it's not so simple. Many find artistic beauty in Marfa and credit it for the town "remaining on the map." Dare I caution the "kitsch art" police?
https://www.npr.org/2012/08/02/156980469/marfa-texas-an-unlikely-art-oasis-in-a-desert-town
2
@Don, agreed. I took my first trip there very recently, and found it completely overhyped. It reminded me of Santa Fe a bit (a small, boring Santa Fe), where there are tons of white artists and galleries in the square, but native Americans sitting in a dark and narrow walkway selling silver jewelry. It reminds me of what is happening in east Austin.
16
In the 1970s Americans slowly began 'eating their own' with everyone and their brother deciding their 'home sweet home' was merely an easy way to make a quick 'killing' in real estate. Fast forward to the 21st Century and housing in any American city of merit is increasingly out of reach of the 'common' man.
7
@Emma Jane Indeed. People have either missed, or decided to ignore, the fact that the value of your property rising only makes you richer because it makes the person buying it poorer.
Rising property prices is an intergenerational transfer of a scale that often dwarfs (depending where you live) other socialized transfers such as pensions. Unlike other transfers however, it tends to favor people who are rich (because they are more likely to own one or more properties, and to live where property prices rose the most), and be paid by people who are poor. Yet even tax-shy people tend to be fine with it.
1
Same problem as in many places, made even more obvious by the fact that the houses in question are basically the cheapest to build you can get, making them being too expensive even more obviously a symptom of something gone wrong.
The problem is that supply is not matching demand. Yet with land probably not in short supply in a Texas small-town, and adobe houses being as cheap and easy to build it gets, why is this town not building more of these houses?
Taxes rising when property values increase is very normal, since richer people should be taxed more in a fair tax system. However most people would be better off being employed in the construction of new adobe houses (or providing services to the construction workers), and being able to cater to more people coming, than benefitting through the sale of their house (when they have one, which is becoming more and more a problem). Lower tax (by house) on a larger number (of houses) is also a more acceptable fiscality.
4
In Texas, local governments have relied forever-and-a-day on the shabby tactic of "property appraisal district" boards (always unelected) to increase tax revenues by increasing property values which allows elected officials to escape blame for increased tax rates while cities rake in the cash. Even worse is when lying politicians claim they they "cut" property taxes when they haven't. A favorite government stunt is to decrease the tax rate while exponentially increasing property values (last year your tax was 5% on a $250K valued home - this year, they graciously reduced your tax rate to 4% but now your home is now valued at $400K). It's a big joke.
13
It seems like raising taxes on adobe alone will backfire. People will start building with other materials, trailer houses will be trucked in, and the town will lose its historic beauty and charm. Do they really want vinyl siding and double-wides to replace the adobe?
16
That strategy incentivizes people not to make improvements. What are these people getting for there tax money anyway?
8
Who can afford to pay higher tax better? The people here or the corporations making Billions in profit and raking in Millions of welfare subsidies from us on top of that?
There are plenty of corporation in Texas making a lot of money from Texas and its people who should be more than happy to pay up whatever it takes to make sure all of Texas is properly funded.
12
@magicisnotreal If you get richer (because your house is worth more), you pay more. That is perfectly normal, no need to argue that someone else should pay more instead. There is always someonle else who should pay more taxes.
If anything, that is a good incentive for people to want property values to stay low, which would be a good thing for society overall.
2
@Bob Robert
The "vallue" of the homes was artificially increased due to a mandate from the State to raise more tax.
My point is that if the state needs more tax there are far better places to look and it is also passively a knock on republicans who are only against tax when it comes to those who should be paying a lot more than they do which is often 0.
8
@magicisnotreal As the article explains, the tax was not artificially raised: it had just been artificially maintained low.
You can complain about some people not paying enough taxes (and be right), but taxing properties according to their real value rather than a fake one from 20 years ago is still something we should do.
And no need to talk about Republicans and Democrats here: some things are true whatever your side is. Actually many things are, but that’s a different topic.
2
I suspect (and with good reason), that the American dream has turned sour--leaving, little more than a bitter taste in the mouth. Yesterday, we were informed about the prositution which flourishes, with the aid of the police in cahoots with landlords, in appartment houses in Brooklyn. And, today we are given this to mull over. Flowers no longer bloom in formerly luxurious neighborhoods all across the land--from sea to shining sea. What will we be told of tomorrow? Is it too late? Can the American Dream be rescued ? What does the future hold when people are frightened and panic-stricken and where hysteria and paranoia now reign. God help America--God, we need you now. Don't desert us in this dreadful hour in our history!
2
The residents of Marfa are getting their due. Presidio county is an overwhelmingly Democratic and now they're seeing their taxes rise. What's new or news worthy about that?
4
@Kurt Pickard The article says the state of Texas made them raise their property taxes and the state is overwhelmingly Republican.
16
@Kurt Pickard Did you even read the article? The explanation for the high property taxes is spelled out in black and white letters, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the political make-up of the county. The demand for these adobe homes in an adobe-limited market has caused the market values to skyrocket, resulting in a mandated increase in the property valuations at the direction of the state comptroller's office. To turn this into an issue about political party preference is fallacious and ignorant at the very least.
10
@Kurt Pickard Funny that the article also mentions that the city is actually more prosperous, which is why they are paying more taxes. And that these taxes will pay for the rest of the state…
2
@Ben P thread. In Austin property tax is 2.25%. On a $500K house that might be paid off, one still pays $11K yearly. Yes, Texas has no state income tax, but high sales tax. The real taxes are the soft ones--- State, county, and city fees and licenses-- everything from building permits to fishing licenses. You are paying for it somehow though you only have an inkling because your paycheck doesn't seem to go as far as it once did. The cost of business has tons of embedded taxes that are past to you the consumer. The Right of Politics knows this, but wants to distract you to focus only on income tax. You are getting fleeced a thousand ways. The only way for this to change is for folks to get involved in their community at every level-- local, state, federal. Speak out no just for yourself, but for EVERYONE.
10
Gentrification has benefits and costs. Marfa residents need to research what happened to Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard, Cape Cod, the east end of Long Island, the coastal islands and beach communities of North and South Carolina, parts of Miami, and closer to home, the Phoenix Basin, Santa Fe and Taos, New Mexico. It's a very old story that happens again and again but always has the same ending.
13
They would have my sympathy except that I live in NJ where the property taxes are thoroughly extortionate no matter how your home is constructed.
4
CT is no bargain either - Thanks outgoing Gov. Malloy. Unfortunately the replacement Democratic governor will continue the states slide over the abyss.
1
Death come in many forms....There is a reason for the saying Death and Taxes- Being Taxed to Death is a Very Real Reality- The Democratic Party Monopoly in California has raised Taxes on Gas and Vehicle registration ...and there was no Vote of the people on it ....we have Prop. 13 to thank for not having our property Taxes abused by this Tax and spend Party ....that just takes the taxes and gives themselves raises and Criminal absurd Pension fund retirement plans.
2
I own my home in an upscale area of Dallas. Yes I have an over-65 exemption and homestead exemption, typical TX breaks for homeowners. Still, my taxes are WAY lower than what these poor people are paying for extremely more humble, much smaller homes.
18
A great example of how set of facts can be spun several ways.
+ war on adobe
+ war on Hispanics
+ war on the poor
+ rising real estate values mean higher taxes
+ local politicians too greedy
+ state politicians leaving holes in budget that need to filled locally
+ state politicians diverting locally-raised tax revenue to schools outside the area
+ arty "out-of-towners" ("the other") pushing up cost of living
What's the "real" story? Hard to say. To me, the adobe spin is the least compelling. If adobe sells for more per foot than other homes, in a state like Texas where properties are re-assessed annually based on market value, the taxes will be higher.
I learn as much from the comments section as I do from the story.
17
@MR
Our county hasn't reassessed our properties since 1972. The county commissioners were voted out back then. The taxes still rise, however our schools refuse to adjust the tax rate if the actual appraised values increase by a given factor. Therefore there is a great disincentive to reassess.
4
This isn't an artists gentrifying a town problem so much as a state mishandling funds problem.
Why should people get away, year after year, with low taxes and higher property assessments? Schools face very real problems with this situation and it's not fair.
8
Adobe remains the best building material in the southwest.
We built our adobe home just "up the road" in Fort Stockton. Here's a photo montage of how we did it.
https://imgur.com/a/NUHlB
7
@Pecos 45
You are very fortunate. In California, such construction would not pass seismic codes. I understand the need for building codes, but the cost of housing in California is too high for many. It is one reason I'm leaving. Leaving the old-growth redwood forests behind for the high desert of Nevada, where it is much less expensive to live.
3
This sounds like the very old method of taxing homes based upon the number of windows they had. Wealthier people had more windows. But taxing adobe is just stupid and lazy. The tax should be connected to the value of the home with discounts for the elderly and disabled on fixed incomes. The reality is that regardless of whether a state has an income tax, you're going to pay it somewhere. A progressive income tax would be inherently more fair. And assessing a house at a higher rate because the owner paints it is a disincentive to maintain and improve one's property. Make common sense common again!
25
@CW A tax is always a disincentive to do something, yet people still try to earn more money despite income taxes, buy stuff despite sales tax, and fill their tank despite fuel taxes… They will keep on wanting to live in nice houses (which if anything is one of people’s highest priorities) despite whatever property tax you throw at them.
Property taxes also have very strong advantages: 1) they create an incentive for homeowners to maintain a good supply of new housing to keep property prices low. 2) They make foreigners (or out-of-towners) with no fiscal revenues in the area to contribute to the community. 3) They are difficult to avoid and hence fairer: you can’t move your house to Delaware.
@Bob Robert Mostly good points. In a high-cost housing area like mine, without some income basis taken into consideration, older folks can be forced out of their homes because they can't pay the increasing taxes on a home that is rapidly appreciating. That's why Prop 13, with all its warts, passed here. I've never personally observed that people who already own homes want to keep property prices low (#1). Most want them to appreciate as it is usually their largest asset.
1
@CW Well you can’t argue both ways: either people are happy that their property is appreciating even if it increases their taxes, or they are only selling reluctantly, and in that case they would have been better off with property prices staying low. The more taxation relies on property taxes, the more likely we are to be in the second situation.
Instead we are indeed usually in the first situation, with many people fighting against the building of new housing because it is good for the value of their property. Not many people are being “forced out” of their house, and even when are they are not thrown in the streets, but rather they are cashing in a massive five- or six-figure check. So I don’t think we should worry too much about them; after all a fiscal policy which purpose it to allow relatively poor people to live in million-dollar houses is neither fair nor good value for money.
My Dad lived in an adobe house in El Paso in the 1920's. They had a bad flood one year and the house just melted away!
My grandparents and he and his siblings had to salvage what they could and move to higher ground.
Guess adobe and flooplains aren't a good idea together.
6
This is one reason why Texas needs a state income tax so more of the state funding comes from the rich.
34
I pay approximately $4200 a year for a 975 sq ft home valued at close to 1.3 million dollars. I have a great view to the pacific. Walk maybe 100 yards to the sand. It's great.
3
@Sparky How is this related to adobe houses in Marfa, exactly?
10
As you reflect out loud on the strikingly high rate of property taxes in Texas, bear in mind that there's no state income tax down here. They're not exactly the same, in terms of consequence, but for someone like me, and probably most residents, the total tax burden tends to be roughly the same.
10
@Jack Daw The total tax is always the same: the total tax depends on what public services are provided. Whether you decide to collect the revenues to pay for these services as income tax, fuel tax or property tax is irrelevant.
Increasing property taxes would allow to decrease other taxes, and create positive incentives to maintain property prices low. Property taxes are also difficult to avoid, would shift the tax base to foreign investors, while creating a disincentive to leave properties empty.
States need to approach tax revenue with a PID algorithm - that is - PID = the sum of (proportional, integral and derivative) incomes. Each should contribute roughly a third of the tax revenue, but there's a multiplier for each revenue source to fine tune the stream for each tax. Essentially, the proportional tax affects the poor - especially states which tax food; the integral tax affects the middle class, who own the majority of homes; the proportional tax effects the rich, who pay according to income. (There's a reason why many high tech companies are based in WA.)
A proportional tax is derived from income - as the taxpayers income rises, so does their income tax. The integral tax is a value of property tax - this tax increases slowly, and should reflect a property's value over time. The derivative tax is a tax on sales - and since sales is derived from income and need, this is the most volatile source of taxable revenue.
Unfortunately for states which have no income tax, the derivative and integral multipliers have to set very high to offset the lack of proportional income. During a recession, derivative income goes way down; lose your job, and the integral income (along with your house) goes away.
Maybe if the D's are able to turn Texas, they will commit political suicide by passing an income tax - but it will be worth it. And the R's will probably realize the value of having a third source of tax revenue.
13
@Dave S I like the lesson, but not altogether following the D vs R logic. D's effectively control Washington and we have no income tax. The only sources are the volatile, regressive sales tax, and our ever-increasing property tax. Maybe we like to call ourselves progressive here, but in fact we're just pretending?
4
I have no sympathy for Susan Kirror or the other artists who have moved to Marfa. The artists are the people who drove prices of adobe homes thru the roof, and made taxes double or triple. It used to be that the only attraction of Marfa were the "Marfa Lights," a sci-fi like nightly ghost of lights in the sky where there shouldn't be lights. East Texas was never meant to be an art mecca. Luckily, we have been to Marfa when it was raw. The original Texans who lived here are being driven away. How sad.
13
@Kathleen This is a free country: you move wherever you want and can’t be blamed for it.
The only people who should be blamed for driving prices through the roof are the people who prevent more houses to be built to follow the increased demand. Gentrification is an urban planning issue.
3
Sounds like Santa Fe, NM. This scenario occurs everywhere in this country that attracts people, for whatever the reason. Usually there is something appealing: landscape, art, local culture, hipness. After awhile what was attractive changes and becomes a caricature of itself. The affluent move in and then are resented by the locals who get marginalized by them.
Marfa was put on the map by Donald Judd, a truly interesting and creative artist. Plus, it has the mysterious “Marfa Lights.” It was bound to become yet another darling of outsiders. Yet, it is a fascinating place!
27
If the appraisals really reflect FMV, and all property is also appraised fairly, what is the argument against it? It causes worse problems if you defer taxes, give myriad exemptions, or otherwise try to add one group over another. A better solution is to have an income tax and real property transfer tax
8
@Lane Wharton Taxing transfers instead of just ownership of property is just pushing the tax in the future (a hypothetical future, since it is easily avoided by registering ownership to a company in a fiscal haven, and selling the company instead; something you and me might not do but that the super-rich surely would!), and creates a disincentive to move.
Besides, at what rate would you need to tax a transfer to bring the same amount of tax money as a yearly property tax?
1
It might have helped people in higher tax/higher income areas to get the picture if they also knew that about 25% of the residents of that Texas county (Presidio) are poor according to Federal Guidelines.
The median per capita income -again, in the county, which would better reflect the income of older residents in the village, is $16, 326/ household $33,453. The ( previous, I guess) median value of housing was about $62,000.
Contrast that to ,e.g., Hempstead ( Town) where the median per capita income is $39,290 and household income over $97,000. And median home value ( any home unit, not just houses) is $412,000.
The problem is that relying strictly on property taxes to support local schools leaves poor districts everywhere underfunded.
Increasing all property taxes without regard to income can force some into homelessness - and in a small town, disrupt the community. The lower the income, the less elasticity in the budget: At the lowest, every penny is already being used.
27
Some predict energy efficient/solar homes will be heavily taxed next. In NY Solar Electric residential installations are often not taxed or tax deferred for a number of years.
3
The poor and working people always pay for the luxurious lives of the wealthy. Of course, the schools will see no benefits because wealthy outsiders don't care about local schools. That's the price of growth.
52
For those people who are saying how high their taxes are.......well move to Marfa and see what the job market is like, especially for over 50’s. See what your annual salary will be and then look at you taxes.
15
I would say, they are voting for the wrong people, probably Republicans!
21
Perfect example of "taxation without representation " and the endemic- institutionalized and OPPORTUNISTIC corruption of politics............as state and local politicians are able to "SQUEEZE" their constituents by "REVALUING ADOBE" !
Check out the rise in salaries and "expenses"of the state and local administrations .during the course of the tax increases........could this be just coincidental ?
All this in the land of the TEA PARTY( of Boston) and the consummate political hypocrite Ted Cruz...wake up Texans !
14
The assessed value of a home is irrelevant in a vacuum -- if everyone's assessed home value doubles but the total tax revenue need remains constant, the tax rate goes down, and everyone pays the same tax dollars. The unemphasized part of this story seems to be that the non-adobe homeowners' assessments did not go up, or at least not as much, so they are getting a relative benefit to the detriment of the adobe homeowners. Is that fair? Yes, in the sense that the non-adobe homeowners are presumably being taxed on fair assessments of their homes, and to fail to increase the assessment on the adobe homes would be to give the adobe homeowners a benefit to the detriment of the non-adobe homeowners. Whether taxing folks based on assessed home values is fair, that is an open question. But once you have that system, you need to apply it equally.
7
@george
If you can locate a thriving jurisdiction where "the total tax revenue need remains constant," please let us know.
11
Texas taxes city residents at astronomical levels relative to those in the country or small towns. If they are shocked by a $4,000 tax bill, they should come to Austin. My homeowners tax was around $12000 this year, with a good chunk of the taxes flowing out to school budgets in the small towns of the state. It’s no wonder that low tax republicans live well in rural areas....us city folk are paying for their privilege.
100
@Ben P, I'm sure your paying for the quality of life in Austin. In a state like Texas with no income tax, the money has to come from somewhere.
16
Try living in a house half the value of yours with $12,000 a year in property taxes. And state income taxes. And 10.24% sales taxes. Then complain. That’s why we are all moving to Texas: it’s still a relative bargain.
9
Actually, Austin's city and county taxes are less than half of our property tax bills, 55% is school tax. Out of the approximately $1 BILLION dollars collected by Austin ISD in 2018 $544.5 MILLION was sent to the state of Texas to be used in other school districts. The system known as Recapture or Robin Hood was supposed to level the playing field between property rich and poor districts. Because of gentrification Marfa has fallen into the "rich" category and is now sending money to the state, too. However, since the state continues to cut school funding "rich" districts are sending more every year. Next year Austin is expected to send around $650 MILLION.
Austin, by far pays the most into the recapture budget. In 2018 Texas collected a total of $2.1 BILLION. Meaning Austin is footing around 25% of the Recapture system, and coincidentally about 25% of our property tax leaves Austin ISD. All the while Austin schools struggle with inadequate funding and homeowners, especially elderly and the working poor, are being forced to sell because they can't afford the taxes.
This system has been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution, but state lawmakers have very little incentive to change it. Not surprisingly, the most liberal city in conservative Texas is paying the most!
45
Marfa is so uncool. The hipsters have ruined a nice small town. Want to find a pretentious artist who thinks they are the definition of the new school? You will find lots of them in Marfa. A nice little town taken over by posers of the provocative.
59
@Jeff And everyone wears black.
6
@Jeff
But why should the poor (who are largely Hispanic) have to shoulder a burden brought by the white man (a.k.a. gentrification)?
14
I would have posted sooner, but it took me a while to stop laughing at what these people consider high taxes. For those of us who live in the New York suburbs, Marfa — tax-wise — looks like heaven on earth. Many of their annual levies wouldn’t cover a month on Long Island.
14
@LIChef
Neither would their income, so I guess you think they have Marfa taxes and NY incomes....
44
@LIChef Excuse these folks for living on fixed incomes or working service industry jobs that cater to the bustling tourism industry the town is fortunate to have. When your taxes increase 400% in under 5 years, there is very real reason to seriously consider the implications this might have, and brushing these concerns off as laughable is ignorant to say the least.
9
I pay $7600/annual property tax for a 2000 sq ft home in North Shore Milwaukee. I wept openly when I read this bigly sad story!
6
On the surface, this seems capricious and unfair however overall taxes in Texas are still much lower than other states all things considered. That being said, it still takes about a 35%-40% tax rate to support most modern economies and meet most citizen expectations regarding services. That tax rate includes high sales taxes and other charges not specially called 'taxes' like toll roads or the fact that most teachers in Texas contribute hundreds of dollars of their own money to subsidize their own classrooms with supplies.
11
Would the tax hikes demanded by the state have anything to do with the endless tax cuts and exemptions given out by the Republican government in Austin?
A $5,000 property tax on a 3 bedroom adobe in a small west Texas town? That is outrageous.
Texas presents itself as a low tax haven, but it seems they are just shifting the tax burden from state to local government.
130
You should try living in "tax free New Hampshire." A real joke. While we have no income tax or sales tax we have crushing property taxes. The tax structure remains unchanged since the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when people's wealth was their farmland. Years ago people flocked here from Massachusetts (aka Taxachusetts) but now I look that way and think it is much more equitable. NH also has a similar tax structure as TX wherein towns with a larger tax base have to send money to those with a smaller tax base. In my small town (a suburb of Dover) we have virtually no services and I pay over $700 per month. $700 per month....no trash pick up, nothing. And finally comes the issue in Marfa of gentrification, the scourge the one percenters impose on the rest of us.
65
@Pete, Those 1%ers already pay about 50% of Federal income tax. This a way to collect taxes from the rest.
4
The 1%ers make 80% of the money and have been given enormous tax cuts when they should have gotten increases.
47
@Pete
I thought the tax revenues in NH were supplied and/or augmented by state liquor stores
2
I have never understood how cities get away with raising property tax values on properties that have not changed hands. A property is worth what you paid for it. If it's not for sale, it hasn't increased in value. If someone is able to spend $500,000 for a home, that is the value they should be taxed at. If you paid $50,000 and are retired or disabled, you shouldn't be taxed at the up and coming rates.
52
@Tamara Teacher salaries along with those of municipal workers continue to rise. Goods and services that a city requires also increase in price. CA tried that with Prop 13 and while it locked in the tax nut for oldsters, it was patently unfair to new home buyers. Your argument discounts the effects of inflation.
16
@Tamara
When people have lived in a home more that two years they can sell it and protect up to $500,000 in capital gains taxes. This is a major benefit. If they are not paying real estate taxes on the true value of their home, they are getting local services for a big discount if not for free. Would you rather live in a place that sends an annual bill for fire and police and emergency medical protection which you won't get if you haven't paid that bill? I remember reading a horror story several years back where a local fire department stood and watched a house burn because the owner hadn't paid his annual fee! If we want government services we have to pay for them some way or another. Otherwise, keep your garden hose handy as well as your first aid kit and your gun for home protection.
13
And here "we" all sit out on the left coast in California, where we also have managed to create a State in which most if not all Americans cannot afford to live. This really is no 'sense of place' 'home' or real community here, just people hustling real estate that only the 1% can afford. And the taxes are fully off the charts to make matters worse and evil.
When 'real estate' becomes a commodity on the global stock market exchange, then it morphs into something more akin to legalised drug dealing. In many very uber wealthy enclaves out here even schools have closed as per lack of students. Maybe there is something wrong with our species, that makes it 'easier' to remain infantile and juvenile and then be rewarded for it?
34
@Ephemerol I don't know where you live, but I might recommend starting small and saying hello to your neighbors, then being brave and saying hello to the people who indeed comprise your community. It's there, and you're home - you just don't know it yet. Find it, create it. Volunteer. Be the adult in the room. You have much to look forward to!
8
One more proof that property tax has big problems. Graduated income tax would balance the budget and not kick poor people out of their homes.
72
Guy’s taxes go from $678 to $987—which is still low no matter where you live—and we are supposed to think high taxes are chasing him out? Seems like his main problem is his $4,000 in back taxes, which hints that maybe he doesn’t like paying taxes at all.
16
@dejordy on a fixed income it's an unaffordable increase, nearly 30%>
16
Hints that maybe you didn't read the article.
13
@No Namby Pamby True. A broader question is whether folks have a "right" to live in the same house for a long time regardless of their income and regardless of the shared government costs allocated to them. As a society we can say yes, and those with "variable" incomes -- generally meaning younger and more able people -- can subsidize the costs of those on "fixed" incomes, to whatever extent we as a society agree is fair. Or we can say no, and those with "fixed" incomes can be forced to live wherever they can afford, and to move if necessary. One part of this puzzle is the "dream of homeownership in America" -- we often do not talk, in that context, about all of the responsibilities that home ownership entails, including the responsibility to pay for the (always increasing) share of government costs that we attach to one's home (though we seem very ready to discuss the benefits we convey on homeowners, like the mortgage interest and property tax deductions). One different approach would be to shift away from property tax, and to pay for that shift by eliminating all mortgage interest and property tax deductions.
3