LACONIA Tax Increases

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by kjkam

The gripe I've always had with the assessments is that a property on a private road, with no city services (trash pickup, plowing, road maintenance) is valued by the assessors office same as properties with town services. Wouldn't it make sense that a property that has to pay for those services in addition to the standard tax bill be worth less than ones that didn't? This is true when it comes to selling the property, but not is the eyes of the assessor....

The assessed value has nothing to do with what town services you use and what town services are, or are not, provided to you. The value is based on only one thing: What they feel your house is worth if you were to sell it. If you feel your house is worth less than what the town has it assessed for then by all means appeal your assessment. If there are other homes that you can cite that would provide examples of why the value placed on your home is incorrect you may win.

To answer another post: There was no advance notice of the value change from Laconia. I thought that they would or should send something out in advance but that did not happen.

[kjkam]

If you look at the assessments around lagua bay there are some significant discrepancies. It really comes down to the have and have nots. Those that have a vote seemed to have faired better than those that don’t have a vote (or those areas that are previewed to have the least voting residents), for the most part. And if the city is just now figuring that their assessment of waterfront property was 30% too low, who was asleep at the switch on that? And remember they didn’t change the assessment on the structures for the most part, just the land. Look at real estate comps, they didn’t go up by 30% this year.
And yes the value of my property is tied to the amount of services that are received from the city, because in addition to all the maintenance, trash, snow removal the taxes are still the same as others, so someone looking to purchase the property has to factor in all those costs

[greeleyhill]

Here are some helpful links to see how your assessed value may have differed from say, your neighbors and others in Laconia. Some increases were very large while others actually went down slightly. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason - it all seems arbitrary to me especially when I compare land value and improvement value. The old to new report shows the increase year over year.

https://www.laconianh.gov/160/Assessing

...and this link gives you more detail on your assessed value but you can also look up others if you have the address:

http://gis.vgsi.com/laconianh/Search.aspx

You may be inspired to file for an abatement but if any of their information is inaccurate (which much of it will be) then they can reassess you property for an even higher value (for example, if the square footage or acreage reported is less than what it actually is).

[ITD]

The assessed value only decides what percentage of the amount of money the town decided to spend you have to pay. Increases in your assessment due to market improving generally doesn't increase your taxes UNLESS for some reason your property increases more in value than others. The increase in your taxes is due to the town spending more money. This could be town elected officials spending more money or it's decided by town meeting depending on where you live. Politicians love it when people blame increasing property values for their deeds, it lets them off the hook. Don't be fooled.

[FlyingScot]

If you're worried about your lake tax bill know, keep your fingers crossed, and write to your Congressmen to urge him to vote NO on the current Republican tax plan. if it passes, property taxes will no longer be fully deductible on your federal return.

The details are still being hammered out, but most reports say that only the first $10,000 will be deductible. So if your primary residence has $10,000 or more in taxes, and your lake house has another $10,000, you will lose $10,000 in deductions. It will have the same cash impact as your lake taxes increasing by $3,300 (assuming a 33% tax bracket).

[ITD]

Originally Posted by PeterG

If you're worried about your lake tax bill know, keep your fingers crossed, and write to your Congressmen to urge him to vote NO on the current Republican tax plan. if it passes, property taxes will no longer be fully deductible on your federal return.

The details are still being hammered out, but most reports say that only the first $10,000 will be deductible. So if your primary residence has $10,000 or more in taxes, and your lake house has another $10,000, you will lose $10,000 in deductions. It will have the same cash impact as your lake taxes increasing by $3,300 (assuming a 33% tax bracket).

When you get to a certain point your deductions go away now, just saying.

[trackeer]

Regardless if the all things remain the same and they re-evaluate properties the end result is a higher tax bill if the property values increase, regardless if the town spends or intends to spend the money to be collected.
The only thing they can say, is, See we didn't raise the Tax Rate, but did one better and re-evaluated the property values to reflect recent sales, 25-35 percent is a pretty big hit if your property happens to be one of those they decided to increase.
The long and short of it, Laconia jammed the taxpayers that have the least over all impact on the cities services, Schools etc., and better those who live in Association Controlled Properties, talk about your cake and ice-cream., and even better most aren't voting residents.......

[rsmlp]

Originally Posted by PeterG

If you're worried about your lake tax bill know, keep your fingers crossed, and write to your Congressmen to urge him to vote NO on the current Republican tax plan. if it passes, property taxes will no longer be fully deductible on your federal return.

The details are still being hammered out, but most reports say that only the first $10,000 will be deductible. So if your primary residence has $10,000 or more in taxes, and your lake house has another $10,000, you will lose $10,000 in deductions. It will have the same cash impact as your lake taxes increasing by $3,300 (assuming a 33% tax bracket).

This response is misleading. The counter point is that marginal tax rates will go DOWN so that your overall tax bill will be lower. The people is really whacks are from high income tax states-certainly NOT NH.

[Woodsy]

Trackeer.....

Laconia didn't jam anyone.... The real estate market for the lake has low inventory and high demand, especially for the waterfront homes.

If you want to blame somebody for an increase in your assessment... blame the flatlander out of state buyer who is willing to pay the 20%-30% premium over and above the assessed value to own waterfront property. It is not people working and living in Laconia that are buying these houses.

Woodsy

[rsmlp]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Trackeer.....

Laconia didn't jam anyone.... The real estate market for the lake has low inventory and high demand, especially for the waterfront homes.

If you want to blame somebody for an increase in your assessment... blame the flatlander out of state buyer who is willing to pay the 20%-30% premium over and above the assessed value to own waterfront property. It is not people working and living in Laconia that are buying these houses.

Woodsy

Assessed value does not necessarily equal MARKET value. And anyways Lakes Region RE hasn't been an easy mover recently from what my RE friends say.

[Woodsy]

RSMLP...

Sorry if my post was unclear...

You are right.... assessed value doesn't equal market value. But the post that started this was about an increase of 15%-35%+ jump of assessed value. (with waterfront homes taking the bigger percentage of the hit). The only reason the assessed value jumped is because the waterfront homes that have sold (market is tight, high demand and not a lot for sale), have consistently sold for 20%-30% higher than what they were assessed for.


Woodsy

[kjkam]

Perfect example of the tom foolery going on

Barton's Motel, 4.2 acres of water front property had it's assesment just for the value of the property go down from $726k to $531K.

Margate hotel, 4.8 acres assessed value of just the property again went down from $1.3M to $1M

How are those properties valued at $126k to$208K per acre, but residential property on the other side of the lake, had their valuations increase as much as 42% with an average value of $1.5M per acre of land?

[Woodsy]

Commercial vs. Residential.... 2 totally different things! You need to compare apples to apples.

Woodsy

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by kjkam

Perfect example of the tom foolery going on

Barton's Motel, 4.2 acres of water front property had it's assesment just for the value of the property go down from $726k to $531K.

Margate hotel, 4.8 acres assessed value of just the property again went down from $1.3M to $1M

How are those properties valued at $126k to$208K per acre, but residential property on the other side of the lake, had their valuations increase as much as 42% with an average value of $1.5M per acre of land?

For many reasons you cannot compare residential to commercial for assessed values. Much of the assessed commercial value is determined by zoning and permitted use of the property, it is not based solely on size of the land and the structures on it.

[DickR]

Originally Posted by kjkam

......
How are those properties valued at $126k to$208K per acre, but residential property on the other side of the lake, had their valuations increase as much as 42% with an average value of $1.5M per acre of land?

For residential waterfront property, the biggest bite comes just from having that lake frontage. There is another bump from extra frontage (eg. 150' vs 100') or from extra land area, but on a per-acre basis that bump divides out to be less. Thus larger residential parcels typically would be seen as having a lower per-acre assessment than smaller ones. Just being on the lake is most important to those with the ability to buy such a property.

A good number of long-time lakefront property owners couldn't afford to buy their own properties at today's prices. The idea that the value of a property reflects ability to pay a tax on it is severely flawed. While it may be somewhat true at the time of purchase, it becomes less so as time passes. Even just retiring on a fixed income changes that. Inheriting a property bought long ago by parents and trying to keep it in the family can be rather difficult. Since high valuations of lakefront property are driven by sales to those who want it and can afford to pay, your own property tax is thus one you pay on the basis of someone else's buying power, not your own. If we were starting over in deciding how to assess taxes, and you proposed paying your share according to how much buying power someone else had, you'd be laughed out of the room.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by rsmlp

Assessed value does not necessarily equal MARKET value. And anyways Lakes Region RE hasn't been an easy mover recently from what my RE friends say.

Lakes region waterfront RE has been strong lately. If you're not on the water then it's not quite as good.
It just goes to show that the top earners are still going strong and will only get stronger under this administration. The gap continues to get wider between middle class and the very rich.

[kjkam]

The land values of anyone on pagus bay on a residential road saw in increase of 41.9% across the board, only exceptions
Wiers Boulevard, residential saw a 6-10% increase (most were 6.2%)
Union Ave Residential (not many) still got the 41.9% increase

The big winners, Commercial land values took some big hits (most also saw reductions in the value of the improvements as well)
Margate 76 Lake St -24%
Margate 84 Lake St -9%
Bartons -27%
Lazy E -10%
Naswa -31%
Lakehouse Cottages -28%
Old Gas Station/ motel next to bridge -33%

Commercial seems to have some variability, where residential was a flat 41.9% across the board

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Trackeer.....

Laconia didn't jam anyone.... The real estate market for the lake has low inventory and high demand, especially for the waterfront homes.

If you want to blame somebody for an increase in your assessment... blame the flatlander out of state buyer who is willing to pay the 20%-30% premium over and above the assessed value to own waterfront property. It is not people working and living in Laconia that are buying these houses.

Woodsy

Ha!!!
I blame no one for the property value increase, I simply state that the City essentially did a money grab based on a unsustainable real-estate market. This is a City that operates apparently Hand to Mouth, I have had many conversations with the cities head of Roads etc., his comments leave me to believe there is no money for him to operate his department properly.
As for flatlanders etc., that is a story older than my time here in NH, a second HA!!!! yes I didn't expect Laconites to be buying Lake Front in Laconia, thankfully for the Flatlanders the Laconia folks have them to help support their obviously financial screwed up City.

[Major]

Originally Posted by trackeer

Ha!!!
I blame no one for the property value increase, I simply state that the City essentially did a money grab based on a unsustainable real-estate market. This is a City that operates apparently Hand to Mouth, I have had many conversations with the cities head of Roads etc., his comments leave me to believe there is no money for him to operate his department properly.
As for flatlanders etc., that is a story older than my time here in NH, a second HA!!!! yes I didn't expect Laconites to be buying Lake Front in Laconia, thankfully for the Flatlanders the Laconia folks have them to help support their obviously financial screwed up City.

I blame the City Council and the Laconia Planning Board. For better or worse, Laconia has decided to pursue federal tax dollars through building section 8 housing. The people who take advantage of this type of housing require services and the infrastructure needed to address the issues they cause. We built a palace at the County Complex on North Main Street ($8,000,000) to help address these issues, after building palaces for the fire department, the middle school and the police station. We are spending $17,000,000 on the Colonial theater. For what, for the section 8 people who live downtown? I doubt they are interested in the theater.

Laconia would have been better served by following Meredith's model and by not investing in section 8 housing. You get what you subsidize.

I grew up in Laconia, and unfortunately regret building our home there.

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by Major

I blame the City Council and the Laconia Planning Board. For better or worse, Laconia has decided to pursue federal tax dollars through building section 8 housing. The people who take advantage of this type of housing require services and the infrastructure needed to address the issues they cause. We built a palace at the County Complex on North Main Street ($8,000,000) to help address these issues, after building palaces for the fire department, the middle school and the police station. We are spending $17,000,000 on the Colonial theater. For what, for the section 8 people who live downtown? I doubt they are interested in the theater.

Laconia would have been better served by following Meredith's model and by not investing in section 8 housing. You get what you subsidize.

I grew up in Laconia, and unfortunately regret building our home there.

....and over $400k for the WOW Trail to date.

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Major

I blame the City Council and the Laconia Planning Board. For better or worse, Laconia has decided to pursue federal tax dollars through building section 8 housing. The people who take advantage of this type of housing require services and the infrastructure needed to address the issues they cause. We built a palace at the County Complex on North Main Street ($8,000,000) to help address these issues, after building palaces for the fire department, the middle school and the police station. We are spending $17,000,000 on the Colonial theater. For what, for the section 8 people who live downtown? I doubt they are interested in the theater.

Laconia would have been better served by following Meredith's model and by not investing in section 8 housing. You get what you subsidize.

I grew up in Laconia, and unfortunately regret building our home there.

Let me be clear, I am NOT advocating all folks from Laconia are the dredge we see in Downtown, I've been at the lake for the better part of 30 Years and in NH almost my whole life and have many friends in Laconia.
My conversations with folks at the City clearly indicates to me the lack of cohesive management, a PT Mayor and City Administrator who seems impossible to connect with, at least the Cities Road person makes himself available even if the conversation is almost pointless.
Like you I am so sorry I purchased my little home in Pickerel Cove, yes I did say little, 900sf of living space, hardly Governors Island property and now a tax bill of 6600 bucks a year on a private road.
Perhaps it's time those who receive the least from the city consider the proposition suggested sometime back, The Weirs in NH, or maybe move my property line over a mile or so and be in Meredith.
You are absolutely correct, the Theater by the way I just discovered the place this year, had never been over there, very nice, yep but can't afford to fix the cities streets, Laconia is a Joke....

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Major

I blame the City Council and the Laconia Planning Board. For better or worse, Laconia has decided to pursue federal tax dollars through building section 8 housing. The people who take advantage of this type of housing require services and the infrastructure needed to address the issues they cause. We built a palace at the County Complex on North Main Street ($8,000,000) to help address these issues, after building palaces for the fire department, the middle school and the police station. We are spending $17,000,000 on the Colonial theater. For what, for the section 8 people who live downtown? I doubt they are interested in the theater.

Laconia would have been better served by following Meredith's model and by not investing in section 8 housing. You get what you subsidize.

I grew up in Laconia, and unfortunately regret building our home there.

BTW, from one Army member to another, Thank You!!!!

[kjkam]

Does anybody remember sometime in the 90s about the north side of Pagus Bay and Wiers Beach forming their own town?

[Major]

Originally Posted by trackeer

BTW, from one Army member to another, Thank You!!!!

Same to you trackeer! When I was a kid (13-15), I used to take my 14 foot Glastron with a giant (oversized) 40 horse Johnson motor to Pickerel Cove to waterski when Paugus Bay was too rough. The boat could barely fit through the culvert.

Obviously, most residents of Laconia are good, hardworking people. However, as you recognize, there is an element downtown that detracts from the City's ability to attract businesses. Presently, "there are 14 low income housing apartment complexes which contain 619 affordable apartments for rent in Laconia." (affordablehousingonline.com) My wife, who isn't timid, called me the other day from Church Street. She was picking up a prescription for her mother from Genesis, and was being followed by a tweaker with a backpack. She was genuinely scared, and called me just in case. Unfortunately, that is all too common an experience downtown.

And jetskier, I am glad you mentioned the WOW trail. I read in the Daily Sun about an incident (some sort of crime, robbery maybe) in which the perpetrator got away on the WOW trail. That is what our $400,000 paid for!

We need a comprehensive plan to eliminate section 8 housing from downtown in an effort to attract businesses. Unfortunately, I am afraid improvement is impossible until this happens.

[Woodsy]

Trackeer....

How do you figure it was a "money grab" by the city? The state law indicates at what percentage of valuation a city or town must maintain. The city has no control over the real estate market nor do they have any influence on the contractor Vision Appraisal and the values they come up with. If your property appraised 15%-40% higher... that's because some of your neighbors sold out and cashed out. Vision has to have the comps to back up their appraisals. You can always file for an abatement if you feel its appraised too high.

It doesn't matter if you believe the real estate market to be sustainable or not. It traditionally rises & falls in a cycle. The corresponding appraisals will also rise & fall accordingly (although there is a year or two lag time). The City will raise and lower the tax rate as the cycle dictates. The current tax rate has dropped...

I am happy you are able to own waterfront property... however, I do not have much sympathy for you when it comes to taxes. The big fish gobble the little fish, and this is especially true when it comes to desirable real estate like waterfront property. Your property value has risen thanks to the bigger out of state fish gobbling up the property owned by the smaller out of state fish. Supply & demand drive the marketplace... and waterfront property is in HUGE demand.

Woodsy

[Redbarn]

Just to throw my experience in. My value went up by over 30 percent, from ~280 - to over 400k. Not water front, no water access, partial water view. Obviously I don't agree with the numbers, but my opinion doesn't matter.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Redbarn

Just to throw my experience in. My value went up by over 30 percent, from ~280 - to over 400k. Not water front, no water access, partial water view. Obviously I don't agree with the numbers, but my opinion doesn't matter.

That's a pretty big hike with no waterfront or water access! I would be surprised if the value really went up that high. Do you think it would sell for this value and do you think that the increase will have a negative affect on Laconia home values?
I know when I was looking to buy 4 years ago I wouldn't look at anything in Laconia because of the taxes.

[Woodsy]

Redbarn..... if you feel you are valued wrong... you should ask for an abatement! make them show you where they got that valuation!

Woodsy

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Trackeer....

How do you figure it was a "money grab" by the city? The state law indicates at what percentage of valuation a city or town must maintain. The city has no control over the real estate market nor do they have any influence on the contractor Vision Appraisal and the values they come up with. If your property appraised 15%-40% higher... that's because some of your neighbors sold out and cashed out. Vision has to have the comps to back up their appraisals. You can always file for an abatement if you feel its appraised too high.

It doesn't matter if you believe the real estate market to be sustainable or not. It traditionally rises & falls in a cycle. The corresponding appraisals will also rise & fall accordingly (although there is a year or two lag time). The City will raise and lower the tax rate as the cycle dictates. The current tax rate has dropped...

I am happy you are able to own waterfront property... however, I do not have much sympathy for you when it comes to taxes. The big fish gobble the little fish, and this is especially true when it comes to desirable real estate like waterfront property. Your property value has risen thanks to the bigger out of state fish gobbling up the property owned by the smaller out of state fish. Supply & demand drive the marketplace... and waterfront property is in HUGE demand.

Woodsy

I believe the Tax rate is regulated not so sure about the property values, as for BIG fish gobbling little fish, it would seem your of the old school and mentality. Success shouldn't be rewarded with paying more because it happens you can, we've worked very hard for our money, because we worked hard and bought a small house on the water makes us more liable than those who own homes off the water??? Move our house off the water and it's lucky it's worth 150K.
As for an Abatement, lmao, really, I wouldn't let that woman that runs the accessors department into my house. It was bad enough several months after we bought she went over to the house and looked in the windows, that conversation didn't go to well. Otherwise the burden for abatement falls on the owner.
Otherwise Woodsy, you should count your blessings that the there are those who can afford to help support your community, without them Laconia would have bigger problems than they do now.
Otherwise there was a push at one point to make the Weirs a Self Supporting Community back many moons ago, folks felt they were paying big bucks and getting nothing back from the city, doesn't look like much has changed huh, Woodsy.........

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by Major

Same to you trackeer! When I was a kid (13-15), I used to take my 14 foot Glastron with a giant (oversized) 40 horse Johnson motor to Pickerel Cove to waterski when Paugus Bay was too rough. The boat could barely fit through the culvert.

Obviously, most residents of Laconia are good, hardworking people. However, as you recognize, there is an element downtown that detracts from the City's ability to attract businesses. Presently, "there are 14 low income housing apartment complexes which contain 619 affordable apartments for rent in Laconia." (affordablehousingonline.com) My wife, who isn't timid, called me the other day from Church Street. She was picking up a prescription for her mother from Genesis, and was being followed by a tweaker with a backpack. She was genuinely scared, and called me just in case. Unfortunately, that is all too common an experience downtown.

And jetskier, I am glad you mentioned the WOW trail. I read in the Daily Sun about an incident (some sort of crime, robbery maybe) in which the perpetrator got away on the WOW trail. That is what our $400,000 paid for!

We need a comprehensive plan to eliminate section 8 housing from downtown in an effort to attract businesses. Unfortunately, I am afraid improvement is impossible until this happens.

Hi Major,

That is exactly the problem...I spent some time discussing this with a Council member. You can't put high end businesses in with Section 8...it does not work and will never work.

My wife had a great idea...buy the church (ex: Holy Grail) and convert it to performing arts....it would be a fraction of the cost of the current Colonial Theater project and it is in a better location.

You look at the garage falling down, the potholes, taxes going up (via assessments) and you have to wonder about the priorities in the town. Personally, I could not believe that the mayor still wants to spend $10k to study removing the tracks for the WOW trail when the state has indicated that will never happen. That is another waste of money.

I don't mind paying taxes when it goes to good use, but....

Just my 2 cents.

Jetskier

[Redbarn]

I called. They said I can ask for an abatement but she would require access to the house right now she "is using photos from homeaway". I was pretty surprised they go that far to see the inside of your house.

And it definitely did go up that much.

[Biggd]

Sanbornton has really high taxes also. My inlaws passed away a few years ago and had a place in Sanbornton with no water rights but within walking distance of the town beach on Winnisquam. I could have bought it off the estate fairly cheap. I chose to buy a much bigger and nicer place in Meredith on Waukewaun with water rights and a dock space for twice the price mainly because the taxes were $1500 cheaper and it was close to the town center.
One of the other siblings bought the Sanbornton house and he complains about the taxes at every family function. He also said that his insurance has almost doubled because he is so far away from the fire station.
It's been 3 years now and my taxes have gone up $300 per year and his has gone up $600. It will affect home values at some point if they keep increasing taxes more than the surrounding towns.

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Redbarn

I called. They said I can ask for an abatement but she would require access to the house right now she "is using photos from homeaway". I was pretty surprised they go that far to see the inside of your house.

And it definitely did go up that much.

Hey, That woman would go to most any length to see into your house, we bought and several months later, she had gone to the property and left a card they we're there. In a following phone call she slipped up and was pretty clear she was looking in windows.....so don't be surprised how they will go.

[Woodsy]

Trackeer...

It is not that I think you should be punished for being successful. I certainly do not think that. Its great that anyone is successful enough to be able to afford waterfront property.

Nobody.. wants to pay taxes. Especially when there seems to be very little return. Police/Fire/Plowing

But... because the property you bought is on the water... and as they don't seem to making any new waterfront, it becomes a highly desirable property. This increases your property value exponentially. (market driven factor) You get to reap the reward of the increase when you decide to sell. But you can't have it both ways... you cannot reap the reward of an exponential increase in property value without the corresponding increase in taxes.

The City of Laconia does pretty good keeping the budget under the tax cap of 2.5%.

Woodsy

[FlyingScot]

If you accept the general idea that people with more valuable homes should pay more in property taxes, then you should not be surprised that waterfront homes get socked. As Woodsy points out, they're not making more waterfront... Also, you should accept the assessor visiting the inside of your home. She needs to confirm that you have not added a $100K kitchen, just for example.

If you don't accept the general idea that the rich should pay more, then--at least for communities like Laconia where there is a huge gulf between waterfront and non-waterfront properties--your implied solution would cause a complete collapse in local government funding as less fortunate non waterfront owners would not be able to cover the increased burden of per capita taxation. But maybe that's your goal?

[kjkam]

How do you defend that the waterfront property that is commercial has seen significant reductions, where residential has seen increases, same issue of valuable property that they aren't making more of, 4 acres of commercial water front able to house an income producing business is worth less than a .75 acre lot with a single home on it?????

[Woodsy]

Supply and demand.... There is a HIGH demand for residential waterfront. There is almost no demand for commercial waterfront. Especially "seasonal" commercial waterfront.

Woodsy

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Supply and demand.... There is a HIGH demand for residential waterfront. There is almost no demand for commercial waterfront. Especially "seasonal" commercial waterfront.

Woodsy

I guess folks we can argue the fairness of Taxation as long as your not the one on the side of the increases, that said seems a mentality based on the Have's and Have's Not.

I for one have no issue paying my fair share as long as my fair share includes the services that come with the taxation, hardly seems fair the City chooses to raise the taxes around our little cove but chooses to ignore the basic needs of road repair that belongs to the city, police patrols, etc etc

As for letting the cities accessor into my home, why, she looks in windows and walks private property as well access's a private road to get there. She should learn to fly a drone and peak in windows all around the lake.

I like Live Free or Die, apparently some folks prefer the Bernie Sanders approach, "If I don't have it why should you, and if you do, your gonna pay and wish your Didn't"

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Major

Same to you trackeer! When I was a kid (13-15), I used to take my 14 foot Glastron with a giant (oversized) 40 horse Johnson motor to Pickerel Cove to waterski when Paugus Bay was too rough. The boat could barely fit through the culvert.

Obviously, most residents of Laconia are good, hardworking people. However, as you recognize, there is an element downtown that detracts from the City's ability to attract businesses. Presently, "there are 14 low income housing apartment complexes which contain 619 affordable apartments for rent in Laconia." (affordablehousingonline.com) My wife, who isn't timid, called me the other day from Church Street. She was picking up a prescription for her mother from Genesis, and was being followed by a tweaker with a backpack. She was genuinely scared, and called me just in case. Unfortunately, that is all too common an experience downtown.

And jetskier, I am glad you mentioned the WOW trail. I read in the Daily Sun about an incident (some sort of crime, robbery maybe) in which the perpetrator got away on the WOW trail. That is what our $400,000 paid for!

We need a comprehensive plan to eliminate section 8 housing from downtown in an effort to attract businesses. Unfortunately, I am afraid improvement is impossible until this happens.

And sadly, folks on that little cove are contributing another 60K+ to the cities coffers for nothing in return......

[ITD]

Don't be asking for stuff in return because if that happens your taxes will really go through the roof. Personally I like to complain about prop taxes to whoever will listen, but it really is a rich person's problem and people really don't care.

[garysanfran]

That anyone thinks it's OK for the government to tax one out of their home...Just incredible class warfare I see on this forum at times. Always wanting to punish the successful.

How about this...If you come from nothing, get rich and employ more than 10 employees, you pay nothing in taxes. In fact, society will recognize you as someone who contributes to the greater good...Watch the response to this!!!

[Major]

Originally Posted by garysanfran

That anyone thinks it's OK for the government to tax one out of their home...Just incredible class warfare I see on this forum at times. Always wanting to punish the successful.

How about this...If you come from nothing, get rich and employ more than 10 employees, you pay nothing in taxes. In fact, society will recognize you as someone who contributes to the greater good...Watch the response to this!!!

You have my support! I would qualify, except for the "rich" part!

[kjkam]

Back in 1991 when Wiers beach was looking to secede, Wiers accounted for 30% of the tax revenue and 8% of the services, Wonder what that number would look like today?

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by garysanfran

That anyone thinks it's OK for the government to tax one out of their home...Just incredible class warfare I see on this forum at times. Always wanting to punish the successful.

How about this...If you come from nothing, get rich and employ more than 10 employees, you pay nothing in taxes. In fact, society will recognize you as someone who contributes to the greater good...Watch the response to this!!!

Um I will amend your suggestion just a tad but I like it.... that being you are allowed to deduct what you pay in taxes for employees up to 100% of your business tax burden. If you employ 10 people paying them scrap wages you shouldn't necessarily get a free pass, think of it as incentive to employ as many as you can an pay that as much as possible to get the most amount of business tax write offs to become tax free. Anything above and beyond are issued in tax credits that can be used to pay for further investment into the business or can be issued to employees as annual tax free bonuses. Owners would only be able to issue themselves a maximum of 25% of the total pot of annual bonus money handed out which would be reportable to the IRS.

Part time and 1099 employees don't count, this way it incentivizes businesses to actually hire people full time.

This way you are rewarding successful businesses that contribute, not the individual owners per say.

[Woodsy]

Class warfare? Are you for real? Punishing?? How is it punishing? Every property owner in Laconia pays the same $21.03 per thousand/value. If you happen to own a more valuable property, it taxed accordingly. This isn't a punishment. It is the same in all 50 states. Your property tax is based on the assessed value of your home.

The difference is New Hampshire has voted time and time again not to raise money by levying an income tax or a sales tax. This works in favor of NH residents, not so much for out of state flatlander 2nd home property owners who are paying an income tax and a sales tax in their home state.

I have no sympathy for the poor guy who whines about his taxes on his 2nd home... #1stworldproblems

Woodsy

PS: If you want to adjust the business tax rate as an incentive to hire more employees... I am all ears!

[trackeer]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Class warfare? Are you for real? Punishing?? How is it punishing? Every property owner in Laconia pays the same $21.03 per thousand/value. If you happen to own a more valuable property, it taxed accordingly. This isn't a punishment. It is the same in all 50 states. Your property tax is based on the assessed value of your home.

The difference is New Hampshire has voted time and time again not to raise money by levying an income tax or a sales tax. This works in favor of NH residents, not so much for out of state flatlander 2nd home property owners who are paying an income tax and a sales tax in their home state.

I have no sympathy for the poor guy who whines about his taxes on his 2nd home... #1stworldproblems

Woodsy

Woodsy,

Your beating the dead horse, it's not about the Tax rate, nodda to do with the extreme increase in Home Values which in turn will drive our Tax Bill, geesh.
It's called Merry Christmas from Laconia, 60K in home increase based on your logic I'm gonna hit a gold mine and in the mean time if I don't sell I'll be paying more than my fair share for basically nothing, sounds like a plan.
Simple Math.

Higher value pay More, didn't they teach that at the Bernie Sanders school of Socialism.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by garysanfran

How about this...If you come from nothing, get rich and employ more than 10 employees, you pay nothing in taxes. In fact, society will recognize you as someone who contributes to the greater good...Watch the response to this!!!

Actually, that's kind of the way our federal tax system works today, or at least we're halfway there. Capital gains on the business you've implied are only 24%, and way less than that if it's QSBS eligible. That's why Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

I leave it to others to opine on whether this is appropriate.

[Major]

Originally Posted by PeterG

Actually, that's kind of the way our federal tax system works today, or at least we're halfway there. Capital gains on the business you've implied are only 24%, and way less than that if it's QSBS eligible. That's why Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

I leave it to others to opine on whether this is appropriate.

Unfortunately, the capital gains tax rate doesn't apply to LLPs, where income passes through to the partners. I wish it did. To answer your question, I think it's appropriate. In my business, my capital is used to create income (and jobs). In exchange for this risk, a lower tax rate seems appropriate. Earning a profit isn't a given outcome. I could lose my capital. In exchange for the risk of investing capital, a lower tax rate seems reasonable.

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by Major

Unfortunately, the capital gains tax rate doesn't apply to LLPs, where income passes through to the partners. I wish it did. To answer your question, I think it's appropriate. In my business, my capital is used to create income (and jobs). In exchange for this risk, a lower tax rate seems appropriate. Earning a profit isn't a given outcome. I could lose my capital. In exchange for the risk of investing capital, a lower tax rate seems reasonable.

You are absolutely correct. Those who have not owned their own business cannot understand the financial responsibilities, pressure and stress with the ups and downs of particular industries and the economy. A lower tax rate is without a doubt reasonable to help keep you going and your employees working. Many many many times I had to reinvest and or borrow money corporately and personally to keep my people working during downturns and seasonal swings.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[trackeer]

FYI,

For those NH residents and their Primary residence as a veteran, any veteran, can now apply for some tax exception, this is new this year for all veterans and is $400 towards your 2018 Tax bill, again this is for your primary residence only and for Veterans in NH at their primary residence, it will or I was told it will go up every year and match any veteran benefit in place now.

As for a Business owner, which we are ones, if not for some Tax Incentives being in business would hardly be worth the effort, as a small biz goes. I guess that saying goes, if it was so easy everyone would do it.
Tax incentives are flung around this time every year, buy a new truck, invest in equipment, take a huge write down for your 17 taxes, one way the wheels keep spinning and biz's invest and grow.

[Major]

Originally Posted by joey2665

You are absolutely correct. Those who have not owned their own business cannot understand the financial responsibilities, pressure and stress with the ups and downs of particular industries and the economy. A lower tax rate is without a doubt reasonable to help keep you going and your employees working. Many many many times I had to reinvest and or borrow money corporately and personally to keep my people working during downturns and seasonal swings.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

My brother, who owns a small business in the Lakes Region, and who employs anywhere from 5-20 people, stays awake at night worrying about keeping his employees going through the winter. I know he makes less money to keep a greater number of employees going through the winter. A lower tax structure would make this easier.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by rsmlp

This response is misleading. The counter point is that marginal tax rates will go DOWN so that your overall tax bill will be lower. The people is really whacks are from high income tax states-certainly NOT NH.

My post is not misleading, and it is critical to the property tax discussion--over 30% of NH filers claim the property tax deduction.

It is true that some people will see their marginal rates go down as the brackets are reduced, but others will see their marginal rates go up. See link below to find out where you stand.

The details are still being hashed out to reconcile House and Senate plans, but all sides agree that many people, especially those with high salaries and high property taxes, will see their payments to the IRS increase.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tax-b...arison-2017-11

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by PeterG

If you're worried about your lake tax bill know, keep your fingers crossed, and write to your Congressmen to urge him to vote NO on the current Republican tax plan. if it passes, property taxes will no longer be fully deductible on your federal return.

The details are still being hammered out, but most reports say that only the first $10,000 will be deductible. So if your primary residence has $10,000 or more in taxes, and your lake house has another $10,000, you will lose $10,000 in deductions. It will have the same cash impact as your lake taxes increasing by $3,300 (assuming a 33% tax bracket).

While this may be true I don't like the concept of capping deductions of any local state taxes being paid...as this results in double taxation. If you look at this nationally, NH represents a very small percentage of the population and also has if not the highest, one of the highest property tax rates in the country. I give the congress credit for doing their best to target tax cuts where they will do the most good, but no plan is perfect either.

Furthermore - it's quite possible that this turns into a wash - while you may not be able to write off as much property tax, the tax relief elsewhere may offset that and then some. As you say the devil is in the details.