News
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Politics
3 tax plans are in play
State lawmakers look at new homestead exemptions as a route to lowering taxes.
By ALEX LEARY
Published May 28, 2007
TALLAHASSEE - Consensus has become an empty word around here.
On the day property tax talks were suspended, legislators insisted they were this close to consensus.
Three weeks later, no consensus.
But for the first time since the debate began, lawmakers have general agreement. In concept, legislators have decided they want to create some type of super homestead exemption that would phase out Save Our Homes, the 3 percent cap on assessments that has been a blessing and a burden.
The trick now is deciding which of the three super homestead exemption plans to pursue when the Legislature's top tax negotiators meet again June 4.
One plan would provide a flat percentage discount for all primary homes statewide. Another would create a tier of percentages that diminish as value grows. The third would link tax discounts to the median value of all homes in a given county.
The median value approach - first proposed by House Democrats - has gained support in the Senate, and even House Speaker Marco Rubio, R-Miami, seems intrigued, though he wants to make the exemption more generous.
"It seems to give the most help to the people who need it most and not devastate too badly local government, " said Sen. Steve Geller, D-Hallandale Beach.
"It's a step in the right direction, " said Pinellas County Commissioner Susan Latvala, who has organized county government opposition to other proposals. "It certainly addresses the issue that one size doesn't fit all."
Even so, much remains unknown.
With the June 12 special session approaching, there are no numbers, no percentages for discounts, attached to the plans. Cities and counties do not know the scope of the budget cuts the tax plans would trigger. Rubio wants as much as $5.6-billion in cuts next year, including all property types. The Democrats' proposals put the figure at $4.1-billion.
Also, lawmakers have yet to address tax breaks for non-homestead property, the businesses and second homes that have picked up an increasing share of the tax burden as Save Our Homes has suppressed tax bills for primary homes for more than a decade.
"Clearly, we can't solve one face of this Rubik's Cube and then worry about resolving the remaining sides, " Rep. Dan Gelber, the House Democratic leader, wrote in a letter to top Republicans Thursday.
Legislators say they must pick one of the three plans, then establish how deep the cuts should be. They hope to have consensus by June 4. The prevailing plan probably would be coupled with a rollback of local property tax bases and a cap on future tax collection.
- - -
Property tax talks were officially suspended a few days before the regular session ended. Despite a standoff between the Senate and Rubio over his plan to eliminate taxes on primary homes for an increased sales tax, both sides said they were closer than ever to agreement.
"I'm as optimistic as I've been since we first started on this, " Rubio said at the time. His comments were confusing then, but less than two weeks later he dropped the sales tax swap.
Instead, Rubio embraced an idea conceived by Rep. David Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs, that would provide a set of tax exemptions based on a percentage of home value.
Rubio proposed giving homes worth up to $300, 000 an 80 percent exemption. From $300, 000 to $1-million, a home would get a 70 percent cut. Anything over $1-million, 30 percent.
The advantage of the stacked approach is percentages can be adjusted to provide more or less relief for particular economic groups. The current homestead exemption is fixed at $25, 000 - an amount most agree is outdated given the rapid rise in property values.
Using a percentage also allows flexibility. If the housing market gets hot, the tax break grows; if it cools, the break decreases.
The flat percentage is the simplest of the three options being considered. But the more expensive a home is, the more benefit in raw dollars the homeowner receives. As a result, lower- and middle-income homeowners may be disinclined to vote for the plan when it comes up for referendum. All three plans involve changing the state Constitution, which means voters must approve.
The House Democrats' plan for an exemption based on the median value of a home was ignored by Rubio and the Republican-led House during the regular session. Now it is being heralded as the fairest plan of all.
Calculating exemptions on a county-by-county basis means a county that experiences huge runups in home appreciation would see its median value rise, which would raise the tax exemption.
The original proposal calls for an exemption based on half the median value. That also softens the blow to local governments in counties with a small tax base because their median prices would be low, and so would the tax cuts.
Rubio has shown interest in the Democrats' idea, with a twist. He recently asked staff to calculate savings based on using 75 percent of the median value, not 50 percent.
"I think we can play with the numbers. But I am getting convinced we need to tie this to median value as opposed to hard numbers, " he wrote in a memo to staff. "Otherwise it will require constant adjustment."
The median approach has its own challenges. Because lower value homes drag down the exemption, there could be resistance to affordable housing projects. And it could pit counties against each other.
Imagine the Villages, the huge retirement development that straddles Lake, Marion and Sumter counties. Residents in identical homes could be paying different taxes because the median values are different in each county.
"That does indicate some constitutional vulnerability, " said Rep. Dean Cannon, the Winter Park Republican heading up negotiations for the House, "but there's a lot of positives."
When lawmakers resume formal talks June 4, they face pressure to pick an exemption method, then choose how big the cut should be. Counties and cities will have to evaluate the impact as well.
All of which makes a tight deadline for negotiators who said they want to have a final plan ready to vote on at the beginning of the special session.
Fast Facts:
Exemption options
Three ways to expand the homestead exemption:
Flat percent: Give every home the same percentage deduction in the taxable value. Upside: Simple. Downside: Gives the biggest tax cuts, in dollars, to the most expensive homes.
Tiered percent: Create a scale of deductions in taxable value that shrinks as homes get more expensive. Upside: Allows for lots of flexibility to provide tax cuts to particular economic groups. Downside: Complicated, and as home values change so do the percentage deductions applied to them.
County median: Link the tax exemption to the median home value of each county. Upside: The tax exemption is based on the local housing market. Downside: In neighborhoods that straddle county lines, the tax rates could vary widely.
[Last modified May 27, 2007, 22:04:06]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by Philip
|
06/08/07 09:27 AM
|
|
I hope there is a huge class action suit brought against the State in the near future. This foolishness of "save our homes" has cost out of State people their future retirement homes. What a MESS our legislature has made in this State.
|
|
by Alex
|
06/07/07 09:22 AM
|
|
Solve the FRAUD which exists in the present homestead system. We ALL know how many thousands have homestead status but have a principal home elsewhere. The Pinellas "assessors" claim they don't have the personnel to check on fraud. What a JOKE.
|
|
by Eugene
|
06/07/07 09:18 AM
|
|
I would like to remind Susan Latvala that we live in a "resort" area and to NOT FORGET the non-homesteaders who do not use the services yet pay the highest taxes. She "doth protest too much" but does NOTHING. Lets roll back her salary ..
|
|
by Tim
|
05/30/07 10:47 AM
|
|
Somewhere recently there was a balance. Find it and adjust to meet it. Policies should promote home ownership and mobility. Taxes on property are higher in FLA because there is no income tax. It's gotta come from somewhere. Deep cuts kill services.
|
|
by Mary
|
05/29/07 02:09 PM
|
|
Thank you, William, you said it all! That's it in a nut shell! And, not only do they each want a different set of services, but done by municipal workers being paid 1919 wages, and NO benefits!
|
|
by Thomas
|
05/29/07 09:40 AM
|
|
All plans are simple until you try to explain how they work and realize the Ramifications. Vote intelligently and don't let them Ram something down our throats.
|
|
by Tinl
|
05/29/07 02:36 AM
|
|
Lower property tax, provide additional exemption to senior citizens and military retirees with disabilith, raise sales tax so the incoming winter folk and visitors pick up some of the cost
|
|
by william
|
05/28/07 10:40 PM
|
|
The problem we have is an entitlement mentality that demands high levels of service but wants tax cuts.
|
|
by chris
|
05/28/07 10:30 PM
|
|
Now everyone knows why local governments haven't reformed the proprty taxes. It isn't as easy as all that.
|
|
by Obnoxious Democrap Protester
|
05/28/07 09:37 PM
|
|
Has anyone thought about what we as Democraps are going to be able to complain about once GW is out of office? I think we should vote Republican just so we have something to do. I like protesting on the corner of dale mabry/kennedy. Whos wit me?
|
|
by DM
|
05/28/07 09:34 PM
|
|
Taxing income and personal property ie expensive boats and cars is a sure fire way to kill the golden goose. The issue is GOVT spending folks. 2 solutions are sales tax plan=economic freedom or EVERY property owner participates in SOH cap program
|
|
by barbara
|
05/28/07 09:24 PM
|
|
On the homestead. Some people with a homestead still claim their voting places at another states They just get a drivers license in florida and the other mate does not its a big scam.the homestead is not the way to go for everyone to be treated righ
|
|
by barbara
|
05/28/07 09:17 PM
|
|
I have a condo in Clearwater for 20 years and a home in mass. last year when the taxes went up so high I was appaled.I do not have a homstead in Florida. I love Florida please do not go up on are taxes like you did last year.
|
|
by RushL
|
05/28/07 07:57 PM
|
|
Yea, I agree with John. Why should I pay any taxes at all on my $28 million house. Exempt the whole thing from taxes. Good idea.
|
|
by Joe
|
05/28/07 07:12 PM
|
|
What is so difficult about this? Any logical person would lower the mill rate so that taxes don't skyrocket out of control.
|
|
by John
|
05/28/07 06:52 PM
|
|
I agree with Gov Crist, double the homestead exception and that would reduce taxs
|
|
by Jamie
|
05/28/07 05:58 PM
|
|
Is there an adequate tax base for a state income tax? Also, maybe taxing personal property might something to consider. There are alot of expensive cars and boats in the state that could generate some decent revenue.
|
|
by Ann
|
05/28/07 05:52 PM
|
|
How about a plan like California's? 1% property taxes on your assessed value, no exemption, plain and simple.
|
|
by John
|
05/28/07 05:47 PM
|
|
Forget all these plans, lets go back to the original plan. Eliminate all property taxes for 2.5% more in sales tax. Pure & simple, no need for Save-Our-Homes, portibility, ect..
If they won't put it on ballot, 611,019 signatures should do the trick.
|
|
by Tagg
|
05/28/07 05:44 PM
|
|
Forget income tax, this crisis is about local governments overspending the publics money. Cut the spigot at the source at property taxes will drop dramatically. Cut & cap local spending is the key solution.
|
|
by Buster
|
05/28/07 05:34 PM
|
|
Think about this; taxes are raised on a federal level, unemployment creeps back up, businesses slow down, 4 million illegal aliens in Florida are added to the welfare/medicaid burden-in other words Hillary is the prez. What about your tax break now?
|
|
by Chuck
|
05/28/07 04:44 PM
|
|
What in the World is going on.Why can't they see that Florida needs a State income Tax to get them out of this jam that they have themselves in.Maybe they are too close to the fire to see that.Wake up Gentlemen.It will then be easy to help us out on.
|
|
by Joe
|
05/28/07 04:41 PM
|
|
The property's and people most affected with huge tax burden and the people who yelled the most THE NON-HOMESTEADED AND NON-CAPPED owner...YOU MUST REDUCE AND MAKE A FAIR PLAN FOR ALL...Or you can forget the 70 million baby boomers coming to Fl
|
|
by Bob
|
05/28/07 04:33 PM
|
|
Plain and simple....a reduction for all property's to 2002, maintain the Homestead of $500 to $600 a year for person's residing in FL.....put a 3 % cap on ALL PROPERTY'S regardless where you live...Put 3% cap per yr. on ALL MUNICIPAL GOVT. BUDGETS
|
|
by RON
|
05/28/07 04:16 PM
|
|
So there has to be a vote to change the Constitution. Where is there any relief for non-homestead owners? Isn't this Taxation without Representation? I pay $6000 a year, my neighbor's identical town-home bill is $1100.
|
|
by Sarah
|
05/28/07 02:19 PM
|
|
Save Our Home I will fix it cause thats what my American Plan was :-( I want a nice home not old one I bought, I should have chance without being hassled like rich do, cause I dont have that money yet, why cant I have chance for my American Ownhome?
|
|
by Tom
|
05/28/07 01:02 PM
|
|
So has all this fuss and bother really been to eliminate the Save Our Homes amendment?
Reducing school and government spending must be in the mix or it's wasted effort.
|
|
by Daniel
|
05/28/07 12:29 PM
|
|
I for one like the increase in sales tax & doing away with the property taxes. With a sales tax everyone pays for services not just property owners. Since they can't seem to agree, the voters should decide in a special election, NOT a special session
|
|
by wayne
|
05/28/07 11:25 AM
|
|
how will any of these plans benefit the snowbirds who have homes and spend 6 months a year
|
|
by rick
|
05/28/07 10:37 AM
|
|
What did the R.E Tax bring in at 2001,2002 the city and cty gov seemed to run ok Then 2004-2006 porperty walues went up over 40% and alot of people bought bigger homes producing more tax money were is that money and why did taxes not go down
|
|
by Sarah
|
05/28/07 10:37 AM
|
|
Sounds like John will agree with what ever Speaker Rubio says only because he is the same person. Or he is a drunken sailor
|
|
by JB
|
05/28/07 10:24 AM
|
|
I don't think tax assessment should be based on home value. It's simply not fair that I should pay more living in a $300,000 home and driving an $8,000 automobile than the guy on the next street over living in a $150,000 home driving a $40,000 SUV.
|
|
by jim
|
05/28/07 09:31 AM
|
|
So, If the taxable value of a home goes down, what or who controls the counties from raising their tax millage to make up for the money they loose?????
|
|
by William
|
05/28/07 09:30 AM
|
|
One thing is clear listening to the Clearwater City govenment budget deliberations -- there is a lot of waste, redundancy and greed within local government. The first requirement should be fixng this.
|
|
by John
|
05/28/07 09:22 AM
|
|
What will happen to our property? We do not live there, do not have a house there, do not use any of the resources that taxes pay for, yet we pay more taxes than both occupied houses on both sides of the property.
|