INC NEWS - transfer tax

pat carstensen pats1717 at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 17 10:11:18 EDT 2007


A couple points:
* Assuming that transfer tax substitutes for some of the property tax, 
people who stay a long time (rough guess, 10 years) in their houses win and 
people who move frequently lose (and to the extent it encourages people to 
stay in the same house, the remodeling industry wins and realtors lose).

* I would like to see a transfer fee that cuts in over time -- say adds 0.1% 
each year over a couple years.  Sellers would have saved in property taxes 
more or less what they pay in transfer taxes.  Phased implementation 
generally minimizes shocks to system.

* Whether the buyer or seller mostly ends up paying depends on the market.  
If buyers are bidding up the prices, the transfer tax is going to be 
incorporated into the price.  And the real estate agents will get 6% of a 
slightly bigger number. (-:

* I would also like to see a discount for affordable housing.

* The transfer tax is tied to "Medicaid take-back" where the state would pay 
all Medicaid costs but is taking 1/2 cent sales tax from us to do so.  This 
is a better deal for the poorest counties than the richest ones, and I've 
learned to look with extreme suspicion on all promises of something being 
"revenue neutral."

Regards, pat


>From: TheOcean1 at aol.com
>To: mmr121570 at yahoo.com
>CC: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>Subject: Re: INC NEWS - P.S.
>Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:54:28 EDT
>
>
>
>Excellent after thought and reply Melissa.
>
>If you do the math, the gradual tax increases add up to much less impact on
>anyone, than the one time hit by this sale tax. Must be considered from the
>senior citizen's tax perspective also.
>
>Let's confer off line and see if we find a happy balance.
>
>Bill
>
>In a message dated 7/16/2007 10:24:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>mmr121570 at yahoo.com writes:
>
>An  afterthought:
>
>If Durham County/City can't impose transfer  taxes,
>won't senior home-owners have to pay (just like the
>rest of us)  anyway...through increased property taxes?
>The money has to come somewhere.
>
>I was just interested in your opinion on  this...
>
>Melissa
>
>--- Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
> > No worries, Bill.
> >
> > I totally understand  your position. And I would
> > definitely prefer an impact fee, solely on  new
> > developers, over a transfer tax on all property
> >  sales.
> > But at this rate, all the land in Durham County will
> > be  developed before the state allows the counties to
> > even impose an  impact tax. This is the only reason I
> > feel that we should take what we  can get now, even
> > if
> > it means a 0.4% transfer tax. That's a  pittance
> > compared to the increase in property values that our
> >  senior citizens (all citizens) should have
> > experienced
> > over  the last decade, particularly in the city.
> >
> > But I have no  problem agreeing to disagree on this.
> > I
> > respect your  experience, knowledge, and heart, and
> > I'll always value your  opinion/advice.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Melissa
> >
> >
> > --- TheOcean1 at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > >
> >  >
> > >
> > > I hate to disagree so strongly  with one of my
> > > favorite community activists,
> > >  but I must.
> > >
> > > In fact, after reading your  Melissa's letter, I'd
> > > suggest using the email
> > >  addresses below for exactly the opposite purpose,
> > to
> > > ask  our representatives to
> > > oppose this bill.
> >  >
> > > Here's my reasoning:
> > >
> > >  While the county's impact fee was recently over
> > > ruled, I think it  was well
> > > aimed at new construction.
> > > It is  after all, the new families moving in that
> > > create the new burdens  on
> > > our school systems and infrastructure. This tax
> >  has
> > > a much greater effect on
> > > the SELLER of  property, than the newcomer moving
> > in,
> > > as it is passed to  the
> > > seller in the selling price of real estate.
> >  >
> > > Even Melissa recognized this, with the  exception
> > she
> > > tried to include of
> > >  historic properties. But it's an "all or nothing
> > at
> > > all"  bill, and that
> > > exception can not be incorporated. Sorry  Melissa,
> > > but would you still support  this
> > >  bill if you knew that your friendly amendment
> > can't
> > > be  incorporated?
> > >
> > > For that reason, far too much  of this new burden
> > > would be borne by senior
> > >  citizens selling their almost historic home they
> > > built years ago,  as  they try
> > > to raise the needed funds to move to a  retirement
> > > community, while  they pass
> > > their  homes to up and coming families. Those new
> > > families will   renovate those
> > > older homes, while they add to the burden.  Their
> > > entire  neighborhoods will
> > > experience  great gains in property values as
> > > multiple  properties  change hands
> > > in this way, and in each case it will be  the
> > exiting
> > >  senior citizen who's once
> > >  again paid the toll. This time, it happens at the
> > > time  they  can least afford
> > > it, at the tail end of them paying their  "share"
> > of
> > > the  burden, thirty years
> > >  after their children stopped adding to it.
> > >
> > >  No, I do NOT support this bill, and I hope others
> > > will join me  in
> > > opposition.
> > >
> > > If  Melissa's amendment could be included, then I'd
> > > agree she's right  on
> > > target. Taxing new construction logically  places
> > the
> > > burden where it's being
> > >  created, but as it is crafted, this bill unfairly
> > > burdens our  senior citizens,
> > > and discourages renovation and  revitalization of
> > > areas of North Carolina, such
> >  > as East Durham.
> > >
> > > Let's not discourage the  private sector from
> > > undertaking the expensive and
> >  > risky investment they've shown willingness to
> > make,
> > >  in the most historic
> > > sections of Durham, while we unfairly  whack our
> > > elders with the expenses of  folks
> > >  who've noticed that our city tops a lot of lists
> > as
> > > a  smart place to live.
> > > Let the incoming plants pay for the  new top soil
> > > required.
> > >
> > > Join me  in opposition and let our representatives
> > > know how you feel.
> > >
> > > Bill Anderson
> > > (apologies to  Melissa)
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated  7/16/2007 8:36:49 P.M. Eastern
> > > Daylight Time,
> > >  mmr121570 at yahoo.com writes:
> > >
> > > Please  see the  forwarded message below. And
> > please
> > > write your  legislators  regarding the right of
> > local
> > >  governments to impose transfer taxes and/or
> > impact
> > >  fees.
> > >
> > > I have also attached the letter I sent to the
> > > members
> > > of the General Assembly who represent  Durham
> > County
> > > --
> > > in case  you need some  help to get started.
> > >
> > > The email addresses for  Durham  County
> > > Representatives
> > > are:
> >  >
> > > Larryh at ncleg.net, Paull at ncleg.net,
> > >  Mickeym at ncleg.net,
> > > Winkiew at ncleg.net, Boba at ncleg.net,
> >  Floydm at ncleg.net
> > >
> > > Thank you for caring :)
> >  > Melissa
> > >
> > > Melissa  Rooney
> > >  mmr121570 at yahoo.com
> > >
> > > Note: forwarded message   attached.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >  >
> >
>______________________________________________________________________________
> >  > ______
> > > No  need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
> > > with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile.  Get started.
> > >  http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >  >
> >
>______________________________________________________________________________
> >  > ______
> > > Be  a PS3 game guru.
> > > Get your game  face on with the latest PS3 news and
> >
> > > previews at  Yahoo!  Games.
> > >
> >  http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121
> > >
> >  > X-Apparently-To:  mmr121570 at yahoo.com via
> > >  209.191.68.144;
> > > Mon, 16 Jul 2007  16:06:20 -0700
> >  > X-Originating-IP: [4.79.194.36]
> > >  Authentication-Results:  mta371.mail.re4.yahoo.com
> >
> > >  from=capstrat.com;
> > > domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
> > >  Received: from 4.79.194.36  (EHLO
> > > outbound.mailmanager.net)  (4.79.194.36)
> > > by  mta371.mail.re4.yahoo.com with SMTP; Mon,  16
> > Jul
> > > 2007 16:06:19  -0700
> > > Received:  from mail.mailmanager.net
> > > (mail.mailmanager.net   [4.79.194.37])
> > > by outbound.mailmanager.net (Postfix) with   ESMTP
> > id
> >
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>______
>Need  a vacation? Get great deals
>to amazing places on Yahoo!  Travel.
>http://travel.yahoo.com/
>_______________________________________________
>INC-list  mailing  list
>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL 
>at
>http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


>_______________________________________________
>INC-list mailing list
>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list

_________________________________________________________________
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=hmtextlinkjuly07



More information about the INC-list mailing list