Connect with us

California

Is California really a low property tax state?

Published

on

Is California really a low property tax state?


Is California really a low property tax state?

Spoiler alert: the answer to that question is no. But even if you suspected this to be true, it doesn’t hurt to understand why. 

Prior to the passage of Prop. 13 in 1978, the average property tax rate in California was about 2.6%. In addition to this high tax rate, California, like most states, imposed the tax annually on the market value of property. Because California’s real estate market was robust throughout the 70’s, market values grew rapidly, and property tax bills skyrocketed.

Prop. 13 cut property taxes in a very significant way. It reduced by more than half the property tax rate – capping it at 1% – but also limited increases in taxable value to 2% annually.

Advertisement

The fact that property taxes were cut so dramatically might explain why so many assume that California is a low property tax state. This assumption – more of a myth now – is perpetuated by tax-and-spend interests who argue incessantly for higher taxes.

But here are the facts: 

When it comes to total property tax collections, California ranks 19th out of the 50 states, according to the authoritative Tax Foundation. The “per capita” calculation is important because it refutes the argument advanced by progressives that California does not generate sufficient revenue for local government services. 

In response, tax-and-spend interests point to another Tax Foundation metric, which shows California ranking a relatively low 33rd in property taxes paid as a percentage of owner-occupied housing value. But this doesn’t prove that the state is tax-starved. It demonstrates that Prop. 13 achieves two seemingly conflicting policy outcomes: Generating above average revenue for local government services while protecting homeowners from being taxed out of their homes.

California’s “effective” property tax rate is less than one percent (.75%) because of Prop 13’s 2% limit on annual increases. (The longer one stays in a house, the more likely that the market value will exceed the assessed value). Contrast this with Texas where the “effective” property tax rate is 1.68%, almost double that of California. Taken in isolation, one would have to wonder why so many Californians are moving to Texas. The answer is simple: If property taxes were all that California collected, Texans would be moving here, not the other way around. (Texas has a top income tax rate of zero while California’s is the highest in the nation at 13.3%). More importantly, because housing is far more expensive in California, two identical houses, one in Houston and one in the Bay Area, could have wildly different property tax bills rendering meaningless the “effective” tax rate measurement. 

Advertisement

The Tax Foundation explains this: “Some states with high property taxes, like New Hampshire and Texas, rely heavily on them in lieu of other major tax categories. This often involves greater devolution of authority to local governments, which are responsible for more government services than they are in states with greater reliance on state-level revenues like income or sales taxes.” No sane Texan would trade that state’s total tax structure for California’s. 

Another major consideration in determining if California is a high or low property tax state is something missed by all the traditional comparisons. Those comparisons only measure the traditional ad valorem (based on value) property tax which, as mentioned above, is limited to one percent in California. But California imposes many more taxes and levies that appear on the property tax bill beyond the ad valorem tax. And those add up. Don’t believe us? Just look at your property tax bill. 

Parcel taxes and a myriad of bond levies appear on virtually every property tax bill issued in California. In many jurisdictions, the “below the line” taxes and fees exceed the ad valorem levy. In 2014, the California Taxpayers Foundation compiled data on the prevalence of parcel taxes revealing about $2 billion statewide. Since that report is a decade old it is likely that that figure has doubled. 

While California homeowners might not fully understand all the complexities of existing data related to property taxes and all the comparative metrics, the best test is to simply ask, do you want to pay higher property taxes?  How many Californians would answer that in the affirmative? 

Advertisement

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

California

Operation Hands Down disrupts Central California gangs – Inside CDCR

Published

on

Operation Hands Down disrupts Central California gangs – Inside CDCR


CDCR staff assisted local, state and federal law enforcement agencies May 28 for Operation Hands Down, a large-scale gang takedown.

Overall, 43 search warrants were served at different locations throughout the San Joaquin Valley.

This marked the culmination of a two-month undercover operation focusing on Mexican Mafia and Sureño gang members committing various crimes.

Crimes included homicides, firearms trafficking, narcotics trafficking, shootings, robberies, assaults, sex offenses against minors and organized violence within custodial facilities.

Advertisement

Operation Hands Down results in 69 arrests

Results:

  • 69 arrests
  • 73 guns, many high-capacity magazines, rounds of ammunition seized
  • narcotics, cash confiscated
500 pounds of methamphetamine was seized. Photo courtesy Fresno County Sheriff’s Office.

The drugs included 55 pounds of methamphetamine, three pounds of cocaine and a small amount of fentanyl powder. Nearly $165,000 was seized, which derived from narcotics trafficking, firearms sales and organized street gang taxes.

The arrests of these men, women and children are expected to have an immediate impact on lowering violence across California’s Central Valley.

“By disrupting these criminal organizations, we are confident our hard work will deliver a sense of peace to residents who deserve to feel safe in their communities,” according to the agencies.

The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Multi-Agency Gang Enforcement Consortium (MAGEC) thanked the numerous law enforcement agencies for their assistance throughout this investigation.


Multiple agencies focus on disrupting gangs

In total, more than 500 law enforcement members participated.

Advertisement

Some of their specialized assignments are: Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT), Crisis Negotiation Team (CNT), Air Support Unit, K-9 Unit, Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), Incident Management Team (IMT), Dispatch Unit, Crime Analyst Unit and Fresno County Jail Correctional Officers.

Participating agencies / task forces included:

  • California Department of Justice Special Operations Unit
  • Federal Bureau of Investigations
  • Fresno County District Attorney’s Office
  • Homeland Security Investigations
  • CHP
  • CDCR
  • California Department of Fish and Wildlife
  • U.S. Marshals Service
  • Police departments from Clovis, Coalinga, Fresno, Kingsburg, Madera, Reedley, Sanger, Selma and Visalia
  • Tulare County Sheriff’s Regional Gun Violence Enforcement Team (TARGET)
  • Kings County Sheriff’s Major Crimes Task Force (MCTF)
  • Madera County Sheriff’s Office
  • Merced County Sheriff’s Gang and Narcotic Enforcement Team (MAGNET)

This remains an ongoing investigation. Anyone with information that can help detectives, report it by contacting the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office at 559-600-3111. You may also contact Valley Crime Stoppers at 559-498-7867 or www.valleycrimestoppers.org. You will remain anonymous and may be eligible for a cash reward.


Follow CDCR on YouTube, Facebook, X (formerly Twitter). Listen to the CDCR Unlocked podcast.

See more stories on joint operations.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

California

The US$4.25 trillion question: who will face off for California governor?

Published

on

The US.25 trillion question: who will face off for California governor?


The race for California governor in November will be a battle between a Democrat promising to cement the state’s status as a stronghold of liberal policies and a Republican pledging to dramatically reverse course in America’s most populous state.

Republican Steve Hilton, a former Fox News commentator backed by President Donald Trump, has won enough votes to advance to the general election, Associated Press determined on Tuesday. He will face Democrat Xavier Becerra, a former state attorney general and health secretary under President Joe Biden.

The winner will succeed Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom to lead the state that is home to roughly 39 million people, Hollywood, a booming tech industry and a vast farming region that helps feed the nation. By itself, California represents one of the largest economies in the world at US$4.25 trillion.

Newsom, one of his party’s top foils against the Trump administration, was widely seen as eyeing a run for president himself in 2028.

Advertisement

The next governor will have to take on stubborn issues including a high cost of living, housing shortages and homelessness.

Hilton is banking his campaign on voters being frustrated enough to do something they have not done in two decades: elect a Republican to statewide office. The last time that happened was when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger won a second term in 2006. Hilton has campaigned as an outsider who would bring change after more than 15 years of one-party rule.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California insurance commissioner race is set: Kim vs. Allen

Published

on

California insurance commissioner race is set: Kim vs. Allen


By Levi Sumagaysay, CalMatters

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

For the first time since California insurance commissioner became an elected position, two Democrats will vie for the job in November.

Advertisement

The top two vote-getters in the June primary were former San Francisco Board of Supervisors member Jane Kim and state Sen. Ben Allen, who received about 27% and 20% of the vote, respectively. One of them will succeed Ricardo Lara, the former Democratic lawmaker who has served two terms as insurance commissioner. Lara has presided over the Insurance Department in the past eight years, during which the state saw its deadliest and most devastating fires. 

Kim or Allen will be taking on complicated, enormous challenges that have implications for local communities, people’s ability to buy homes and start businesses, and the state’s economy. 

In the past few years, insurance companies stopped writing new policies or renewing old ones, especially in high-risk areas, citing increasing wildfire risk from climate change and inflation that followed the COVID-19 pandemic. This caused homeowners to turn to the last-resort FAIR Plan, which is mandated by law to provide fire insurance. The plan, run by an alliance of insurers, has grown to more than 684,000 policies in force as of March, an increase of 152% since September 2022. It has warned about its ability to keep paying claims after major disasters.

Proposition 103, a law approved by voters in 1988, means that among many other things, the elected commissioner has the power to approve rate increases. It has kept the state’s rates from rising too much over the years — Californians’ homeowners insurance premiums have hovered around the middle of the pack nationwide — but that could change. Last year, the commissioner put in place regulations that include new factors insurers can use when setting their premiums, such as catastrophe modeling and reinsurance costs. Some companies have applied for and received approval to raise their rates, so they’re starting to write policies again.

Keeping insurance available but affordable will be the most pressing issue for either Kim or Allen, whose responsibilities will also include regulating auto, pet and some aspects of health insurance, plus workers’ compensation. 

Advertisement

Another problem that will need plenty of attention: making sure insurance companies pay their claims in a timely manner that helps communities to rebuild. The L.A.-area fires shed a light on insurer practices that delay and deny claims, as well as underinsurance and the lack of standards for smoke damage, which have held up recovery. Pending legislation — such as those authored by Allen, whose district was hit by the fires last year — and lawsuits will address some of those issues. Well-organized fire survivors who called for Lara’s resignation over his department’s response to their concerns will surely keep up the pressure on his successor.

Here’s a look at each candidate’s record and how she or he would approach the job, based on their interviews with CalMatters and what they have said publicly, including at candidate forums.

Jane Kim

Kim’s proposal to create “natural disaster insurance for all,” inspired by a program in New Zealand, has gotten a lot of attention. She plans to fund such a system with a portion of policyholder premiums that insurance companies would collect and divert to the state. The state would then guarantee fire and flood coverage, while insurance companies would continue to cover other risks.

Naysayers, including consumer advocates, wonder why she hasn’t released any specifics about how much capital such a fund would require. Kim told CalMatters that it would need to be studied, but that at its core her proposal would generate revenue. 

Opponents of her proposal also say it’s a bad idea to shift catastrophic burden onto the state, pointing to what they say is the failure of splitting off earthquake insurance from homeowner insurance — most California homeowners now have no insurance coverage.

Advertisement

“We (taxpayers) already are on the hook,” Kim said. “When insurers and utilities refuse to pay, they just pass it on to us anyway. Sharing the risk is important.” 

Kim also told CalMatters that an idea Merritt Farren, a Republican candidate for commissioner, proposed — that the state create a reinsurance authority to encourage insurers to write policies in the state — “may turn out to be a more efficient model.” 

Among Kim’s shorter-term priorities if she wins: 

  • Create public dashboards to show how insurance companies are spending policyholder premiums, and that show their record on claims.
  • Expand eligibility for a program that provides low-cost insurance to drivers who make less than $38,000 a year. 
  • Tie a company’s ability to sell auto insurance in the state to its willingness to write homeowner policies.
  • Make the FAIR Plan more transparent by requiring that its list of board members be public, and that its board meetings be public.
  • Freeze rates when policyholders file claims.

The former San Francisco elected official, an attorney, touts among her accomplishments free community college for the city’s residents; the first $15 minimum wage ordinance in the state; and a tenant-protection ordinance to avoid unjust evictions. She worked as the California director for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2020 U.S. presidential campaign and most recently as California Director for the Working Families Party.

Kim has a long list of endorsers, including many unions such as SEIU California. Besides Sanders, another U.S. lawmaker, Rep. Ro Khanna of Silicon Valley, has also endorsed her.

Ben Allen

The state senator, who will be termed out of the Legislature, wants to bring together the state, insurers, builders, local governments and firefighters to work on risk-reduction strategies.

Advertisement

“I think that’s ultimately going to be the way that we get ourselves out of this mess,” he told CalMatters.

What he calls a comprehensive approach includes thinking about where people live and build: “We shouldn’t be building new construction that is irresponsible in high-risk areas. We should be looking for ways to carefully and sensitively encourage people to pull back from high-risk areas.”

If he wins, Allen’s other plans include:

  • Create a consumer advocate position within the insurance department, and increase staff to handle customer service. 
  • Require insurers to explain claim denials and provide real-time reports of delays and outstanding claims after a disaster.
  • Increase oversight of the FAIR Plan and make sure it complies with commissioner orders.
  • Ban the insurance commissioner and staff from working for the industry immediately after they leave the department.

Allen has played up his experience as a legislator, including writing and passing bills related to holding insurance companies accountable. For example, a law he wrote now requires insurers to pay 60% of policyholders’ contents coverage without a detailed inventory, and gives consumers more time to provide that inventory. He also touts writing Proposition 4, the bond measure approved by the state’s voters in 2024 “for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention and protecting communities and natural lands from climate risks.”

Other pending bills authored by him include one that would require insurers to give homeowners 90 days notice before they intend not to renew their policies, along with a clear explanation. Another would penalize insurance companies that fail to correct their practices after the insurance department finds that they have violated laws and regulations.

Allen also has many endorsements, including the two leaders of the state Legislature, Senate Pro Tem Monique Limon and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas. U.S. Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, both from California, unions and the Consumer Federation of California also endorse him.

Advertisement

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending