Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space

"A community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most intrinsic and enduring characteristic." [Katz, EPA] This blog focuses on place and placemaking and all that makes it work--historic preservation, urban design, transportation, asset-based community development, arts & cultural development, commercial district revitalization, tourism & destination development, and quality of life advocacy--along with doses of civic engagement and good governance watchdogging.

Saturday, March 13, 2021

Homes in poor neighborhoods are taxed at roughly twice the rate of those in rich areas

The Washington Post calls our attention to a study, "Reassessing the Property Tax," by Christopher Berry of the University of Chicago.  From the abstract:

Using data from millions of residential real estate transactions, this paper shows that assessments are typically regressive, with low-priced properties being assessed at a higher value, relative to their actual sale price, than are high-priced properties. Within a jurisdiction, homes in the bottom decile of sale price face an assessment level, as a proportion of price, that is twice as high as that faced by homes in the top decile, on average. As a result, the property tax disproportionately burdens owners of less valuable homes. Such regressivity is evident throughout the US. This result cannot be explained by measurement error in sale prices, or by explicit policy choices, such as assessment limits. Rather, regressivity appears to result from limitations in the data and methods used in assessment.

The author believes this isn't deliberate, but that probably isn't fully true.  There are policy decisions that impact relative assessments, at least in some cities.

For example, New York City has a residential property tax assessment methodology that pools condominiums and cooperative apartments with multiunit rental buildings, thereby undervaluing owner occupied properties, while traditional single family housing and small apartment buildings are valued in line with current property value ("Make New York City Property Taxes Fair," Regional Plan Association).

Wealthy property owners and real estate interests don't want to change the system ("De Blasio Delay Plus Pandemic Means Property Tax Reform Appears Off the Table This Year," Gotham Gazette).

In other cities like Philadelphia and Baltimore, new and converted housing is taxed at a much lower rate, usually for the first ten years of ownership, creating a similar dynamic to that of New York City, where higher income residents pay lower taxes compared to legacy residents.

Labels: , , ,

5 Comments:

At 11:24 AM, Blogger Mari said...

When you live in a condo or a co-op there is a monthly fee that you cannot take off on your taxes.
My cousin bought a condo for his family in NYC. The monthly condo fee is above $2K a month.
The other issue is how property is assessed. DC changed things many years ago applying more weight to the dirt under the structure than the structure. So even if my house is in worst shape than the neighboring house and would sell for way less on the market, the land is taxed the same.
The last sentence in your post " where higher income residents pay lower taxes compared to legacy residents" needs better framing. Is it that they are paying a lower rate? Because homestead deductions tend to put legacy homeowners at a lower rate than newer residents. Despite having a smaller structure than the neighboring townhouse, I pay Baltimore City pretty much the same because the land is considered more in how the property is assessed.

 
At 10:03 AM, Blogger Richard Layman said...

I see your point. Because higher priced houses tend to not be fully valued when it comes to assessment and lower priced houses are.

And I should have said "on a percentage basis, higher priced houses _tend_"

 
At 10:02 PM, Blogger Mari said...

I took a look at the Berry report cited by the Post. Equity is subjective. The other problem, which the author acknowledges, then I suspect forgets, is that assessors are not privy to factors that buyers are.

Another issue is getting a house ready to sell does impact the price one get. There are plenty of things people get used to living in a house that a new home buyer wouldn't tolerate.

Then there is the locality issues. My Baltimore house is assessed at a price higher than what I could actually sell it for. It was assessed at nearly $80k when it was a shell that I bought for around $30k. My Florida property is nice enough to break up the tax bill to point out how much is going to schools and at what rate that tax is at, and how much is going to protect the watershed, etc, etc.

What is fair is subjective. The voters and vocal citizens determine what is fair in their feedback. This wouldn't survive a local community meeting and it isn't designed to.

 
At 9:54 AM, Blogger Richard Layman said...

Crazy though that your assessment is higher than market value? How is that legal?

 
At 5:53 PM, Anonymous h st ll said...

when i bought the house in Anacostia it was assessed at almost 2x what i paid. I tried to appeal, and the assessor said "are you saying your house is in poor condition?" so i let it be...

wish i hadn't sold it but i still did well for 6 yrs of ownership...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home