Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless
...If an individual town's tax collector wanted to assess two very IDENTICAL properties, for example, property A at $100,000, and property B at $200,000, based on the reason that property A was owned by a local family who lived and worked locally, while property B was a second home owned by someone who lived and worked in the Boston area, the tax collector could do this...
|
For the final time, no the "tax collector" could not do this.
Perhaps you should carefully read the Supreme Court case you cite.
The case you cite does not back up your false claim and actually makes a sttrong case against your and Tommy Thompson's cases, where for a number of years you enjoyed lower taxes because your properties were not fairly assessed. From the decision you cite:
We agree that the plaintiffs failed to present statistical data that provided a comprehensive and reliable picture of the actual operation of the statewide property tax system. In our view, however, the absence of such evidence is fatal to their claim. What the plaintiffs proved was that the taxing system is flawed. What they did not prove is that the flaws resulted in a systematic pattern of disproportionate taxation. Nor did the plaintiffs prove that the flaws produced such substantial inequality that the inequality must be deemed intentional.
I too regularly read the news sources you cite. And never I have I read that any community could or did tax non-residents at a higher rate than residents. Being that such a situation would be highly illegal either before or after Evelyn Sirrel lost her case it would have stood out clearly not only to me but to the thousands of non-resident property tax payers who would/should have immediately filed abatements and suits against any town or city claiming to do the same.
I have no issue with folks that understand that their local property taxes are a direct reflection of the community's propensity to spend. I encourage folks to continually speak out about the spending where they are taxed, whether that individual is a resident or non-resident. Likewise I have no issue with folks that want to debate the merits or fairness of proprty taxes versus income or sales taxes. Healthy debate on all these topics is a necessary function of a free society.
I do take issue with those folks that for years took advantage of their fellow neighbors by enjoying artificially low taxes by being grossly underassessed. Those same folks that only raised their voices when individual towns and cities correctly made adjustments to equalize values by creating false controversies around misleading statements such as "view tax" and "ax the view tax". Unfortunately when you live in a free society there are always the irresponsible few that really try to live that life literally, that is an attempt to "live free" at the taxpaying expense of the rest of their collective neighborhood.
Unfortunately for the rest of us rooted in reality, there is no free ride.
Sorry Don, my apolgies to the webmaster for prolonging a discussion sure to stray from the original "Lakes Region" intent of this fine website!