Posted on 02/23/2005 2:04:36 PM PST by Rebelbase
~~~~Her modest mortgage isn’t the problem; it’s rising property taxes that keep her up nights. Her little house in Alexandria, Va., has more than doubled in value since it was built in 1999 and is now worth a half-million dollars, forcing her monthly house payment, which includes real estate taxes, up from $515 to $954 in the past 18 months — chiefly because of higher taxes.~~~~
(Excerpt) Read more at thestate.com ...
A woman gets a Habitat house then has her property's value soar so high she can't afford to pay the property tax.
If they can't raise taxes they can raise the assessed value. Same difference, only one requires a vote, the other doesn't.
I have little doubt that if she wanted to sell her house the sale price has in fact doubled since 1999; the real estate market around here actually is that nuts.
Tell her come to Texas where that same house would be $2900 a year. Its a ripoff!
But let's ask all her neighbors, with homes of comparable value, who are busting their butts to pay the higher real estate taxes..why she should get a free ride..
FedGov inflates home values via the GSEs then the StateGov taxes you for the inflation.
Real nice.
When I lived in the Chicago area the taxes on my small condo were $3500.
I wonder about those makeover shows; when they put those new houses up, how can the people afford them?
And doesn't the value of all the houses around them go up?
Her neighbours are not encumbered by such restrictions. If they need a home equity loan to fix plumbing they can do it, this lady can't.
This flies in the face of the H F H purpose. To provide affordable housing for those willing to invest the effort. I am a big believer in H F H. One way to stop the cycle of welfare and help these people get a real life. They can't sell these homes so why should they be assessed out of context? Despicable.
Thats why I cant stand those shows. They show the real costs and liabilities incurred. Similiar to Oprah giving out 'free' cars
I really despise those city subsidized subdivisions.
I don't know what lot values are in Alexandria but in my area the city will condemm a city block, bulldoze it and sell the lots for $12,000 each. A comparable lot in a nearby subdivision sells for $20,000. The idea is that the builder's are supposed to pass the savings onto the buyer in a lower sales price. Does that happen to the tune of $8,0000? No, more like $3000. The builders pocket the difference.
I've wondered something similar, like aren't they liable for a tax on the house, similar to winning the lottery ?
Always was curious on that one
I bet a smart real estate attorney could set up a loan for her to pay off the mortgage and then sell the house.
One house doesn't make a market. (unless you're an appaiser trying to justify a high sales price.)
If Habitat cared about the homeowner they would make a new agreement. the fact that the owner has done what was expected should not be a burden - but the new people running Habitat do not have the sense of Religon that was the basis of this program under the founder Mallad Fuller.
Your argument fails on several established legal grounds...A house encumbered by a lien does not qualify for a reduction in R/E taxes..cnsider a house with a one million $ value on the open market, empty..yett here is a tenant in ther now, paying $100 .month, and who has an ironclad 30 year lease..the hosue would sell now, probably for $250k..because of the encumbrance..and it would be valued that way for estate tax purpose were the owner to die..yet there is NO abatement for R/E taxes...I could extend your argument to say that homeowners without kids shouldn't have to pay school taxes..
Property taxes really need to be changed. Its driving me out of my house. I have to save $300 a month just to pay property tax at the end of the year. It really sucks to be single and own your house. If I were married with kids, I'd get about that amount back every year.
Correction:
Thats why I cant stand those shows. They DONT show the real costs and liabilities incurred. Similiar to Oprah giving out 'free' cars
thats nuts. i'm not sure which is the lesser of the two evils: the deed restriction or the tax assessment.
based on the combination of the two it seem that HFH should be responsible for tax increases for the 20 years it is under the restriction.
Property taxes are evil.
If you can't afford 950/month in basic housing, you can't afford housing. No surprise then, is it, that those who couldn't afford it then can't afford it now? The issue isn't cheap housing. It's low wages. These people just don't make enough money.
exactly,
if the house has doubled in value, she's got mucho equity so sell it and buy a house where you can afford the property taxes!
and in my province, you can appeal the assessed value but you have to have proof that the assessment is too high....and if you can prove via appraisals or an analysis of property values in your neighbourhood, that the assessment is too high, they are reasonable and will usually settle with you, so you don't have to go proceed with the appeal.....
What was H F H doing building a $80,000 house in a $250,000 neightborhood in the first place?
Good point. It's like the 500 lb gorilla in the corner of the room everyone pretends not to see.
Block busting.
oh I didn't see the restrictions on selling the house,
hmmm, well this can't be the only person with one of these houses with same problem,
"She took a second job and works seven days a week but is still afraid she might lose her house.
Taxes on that home would be about $450 a year here in Mississippi.
Depends on where you live. The habitat houses around here sell for between $75,000-$85,000.
I understand that. The article featured someone who can't handle 900/mo. I'm saying if you can't muster 900 for housing, you can't afford housing. Maybe you can in Pueblo, Colo or some other remote place, but anywhere where there's jobs, housing is gonna cost. You gotta go out and make some $$$.
Habitat's 20 year right of first refusal is a scam. The normal holding period on a house is around 7 years.
Does anyone really own their homes? If some states have figured out how to manage their budgets without property taxes, then the others should also be able to do it. It will only change when the people get mad enough to do something about it.
and you know what else, the house insurance and plus the fact every thief in the US knows the lay out of your house and where all the new appliances are located.....
when I see shows like Overhauling and Pimp my Ride, I always think, OK I give that car three days before it is stolen (esp when you see the neighbourhoods some of the car owners live in) and how is that 16 year old kid going to be able to afford the insurance on that car now and again every thief in the hood knows you got a Playstation, DVD and $8000 stereo in your car etc....
(plus we all know the sportier the car looks the higher the insurance)
they should do the Pimp my Ride followup and let us know how many of those cars been stolen already
I wonder how much her credit card, cable tv and car payments are?
"It really sucks to be single and own your house."
Tell me about it. Property taxes are killing me!
I don't think so. From the article:
Habitat for Humanity of Northern Virginia argues Habitat homes shouldn’t be assessed at market rates because deed restrictions prevent their owners from selling the homes for profit or getting home equity loans until the 20-year mortgages are paid. If Habitat homeowners sell their homes before 20 years are up, they must sell them back to Habitat for the amount they cost — $80,000 to $120,000 in most cases, Cleveland said.
I actually agree with that statement: homeowners without kids shouldn't have to pay school taxes. Government has no business in the education business in the first place. (but that's another discussion).
Maybe Virginia needs to pass a Prop 13 (like California) so the greedy government can't keep raising property taxes as astronomically as they do.
Yeah, let's screw the neighbors that didn't take welfare, and got their homes by paying their hard earned money on the open market. That's not despicable
Ha! Don't get me started.
Yes I was thinking that myself,
for example, if the house was originally assessed as $250,000, why doesn't the HFH agreement at least reflect the original assessed value and razorback is right, don't be building a $80,000 house in a $250,000 neighbourhood or HFH needs to get some kind of agreement in place with the municipality first on the issue of property taxes or they need to assess their candidates with increased property values in mind........
and nice scam for HFH if they can buy back houses worth $500,000 for $80,000, so what does the next purchaser pay HFH, $80,000 again or what?
what if the original purchaser was able to get on their feet and made improvements in the house, do they get credit for that?
Or california where that same house-- if purchased today-- would have a tax bill of about $5,000 a year.
Now THAT'S a rip-off! If it weren't for prop 25, many, many folks could simply not afford their property taxes here.
Prop 25 is a MAJOR incentive for me to stay in the little, cheesy house I bought 9 years ago when the prices were "reasonable."
Wages are based on "value offered." Employers on the whole cannot afford to pay people more than they are worth long-term and remain in business (private employers, that is.) Employees on the whole will not work long-term for someone who underpays them relative to the value they have to offer.
If someone's wages are too low, the value they are offering is too low...
"Home ownership requires more than the down payment. Paying taxes is part of ownership, along with maintenance costs. If you can't afford the upkeep then you can't afford the house."
Amen to that! I've bought, fixed up and re-sold four houses in 25 years and always bought much less house that I could've afforded for the "wiggle room" needed for increased taxes, broken water pipes, a furnace that dies on the coldest day of winter, etc.
HFH is a feel good, do nothing organization, just like any other hand-out program.
Poor people do NOT need to be given houses and all the responsiblities they entail. They need an education, job skills, budgeting skills and limits on the number of kids they bring into poverty. (I know; everyone loves a baby.)
If I were this woman, I'd sell that house back to HFH and get the heck outta Dodge. Take the $100K or so she's eligible for, invest it wisely in the market, or in an education for herself hopefully resulting in life-long self-sufficiency.
Of course, she has no money management skills, so that's a moot point. Another example of the endless cycle that continues when you give people what makes YOU feel good, and not what they really NEED.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.