Comments by "dlukton" (@dlukton) on "California Plans to Double Taxes" video.

@ALCAN52 Prop 13 helps those (of any age) who have owned the house for a long time... and it helps those who have inherited a house from their parents. But it doesn't help boomers who have only recently purchased a house in California. Any way you slice it, the resulting taxes are totally irrational. If it were up to me, I'd impose a statewide property tax at a rate of 0.5%, with the counties permitted (but not required) to add on another 0.2% tax. (And I'd make BIG changes to the income tax if I had the power to do that).
5
California has started to lose its tax base; the aggregate incomes of those leaving is greater than the aggregate incomes of those entering the state. Any further tax burden increases will accelerate that trend.
2
Yeah, prop 13 has created an absurd tax system.
2
@brianmolstad1255 The issue is that of the extent to which taxpayers will be willing to remain and continue paying taxes... especially those who are paying at least $10,000 per year in taxes.
1
The tech company executives will happily pay the 18% income taxes.... as will the Hollywood liberals. Nothing will deter those groups of people from staying in California. But as for everyone else, yes.... these tax proposals, if enacted, will accelerate the exodus of taxpayers from California.
1
@kennethroth6757 And so? Is there a change to prop 13 that you would favor... if it could be done in such a way as to be revenue-neutral? (Not that the politicians in California would support any tax law changes, if they were revenue-neutral).
1
@timpoolsbeanie2296 Sure, prop 13 is great for anyone who's owned a house in CA for the last 20 years. The issue, however, is whether it's so great for someone who has just now purchased a house. And really my point is about a REVENUE-NEUTRAL alternative to prop 13, i.e., how much lower could the property tax rate be if there were no cap on the rate at which the assessed property value could increase?
1
@timpoolsbeanie2296 Yeah, I think that that is at least rational; but I would have preferred to see it happen in a revenue-neutral way (not that I would ever expect the California politicians to make tax law changes that are revenue-neutral).
1