Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Politics
How would proposed change affect you?
By JENNIFER LIBERTO
Published June 12, 2007
Where do we stand right now? Lawmakers meet Wednesday to begin debating a two-part plan to lower property taxes. One part would force local governments to roll back their tax rates and the other part would create a big, new homestead exemption. Will the new 'super' homestead exemption eliminate the Save Our Homes cap? For most people, yes. Some longtime homeowners, especially in places where property values have risen very sharply, will be better off keeping the Save Our Homes cap that limits the growth of taxable value to 3 percent a year. In those cases, homeowners will be allowed to keep the Save Our Homes cap (and the lower tax bill) until they move. The $25, 000 homestead exemption also would disappear. So, how would the 'super' homestead exemption work? Under the proposal, 75 percent of the first $200, 000 in home value would be exempt from taxation. Then another 15 percent of the next $300, 000 in home value would be tax exempt. A minimum exemption of $50, 000 would be guaranteed for homes worth less than $200, 000. Would I get to choose between Save Our Homes and the new exemption? No. The state or county tax appraiser would move you into the tax plan that saves you more. If your tax savings would be greater under the new 'super' homestead exemption, you would lose your Save Our Homes cap. And this homestead idea requires a statewide vote? Yes. The tax exemptions for primary residences, homesteads, are outlined in the state Constitution, which can be modified only through a popular vote. The plan, like all constitutional amendments, would need a 60 percent majority. When do we get to vote? If three-fourths of the Legislature passes it (that's 30 senators and 90 House members), then the question would go to voters on Jan. 29 along with the presidential primary. If lawmakers fall short of that, it's possible the tax plan could end up on the general election ballot on Nov. 4, 2008, which could be done with a smaller majority of the Legislature, three-fifths (24 senators and 72 House members). When they talk about "rolling back" taxes for cities and counties, what exactly would get rolled back? The "rollback" refers to the revenue that cities and counties collect from property taxes; it's not the entire budget. Local governments also raise money through such things as fees and franchise agreements with cable companies, which wouldn't be affected. Still, property taxes are an enormous part of a local government's revenue stream, and property taxes also fund an array of specialty taxing districts for such things as mosquito control and hospital service. All of those tax-raising groups would have to roll back their tax rates. What about school districts? School districts would be exempt from the rollback. But I thought I heard complaints about cuts to school districts; what's that about? Although school districts wouldn't have to roll back their tax rates, they wouldn't be immune from the effects of the "super" homestead exemption, which would bring in a lot less money for all government functions. Under the plan, school districts would lose more than $7-billion over 5 years. Top lawmakers pledge to restore that lost money when the Legislature does its annual budget during the regular session next spring, but Democrats are doubtful. When is the soonest I would see savings under any of this? November. Local governments will be completing their budgets later this summer, and if the rollback program is approved, those budgets will be smaller than they were this year. How much money would I get back under the rollback? There are tons of variables for individuals because each city and county has many different taxing districts with many different tax rates. But lawmakers have calculated a statewide average of $174 for homeowners. Commercial land owners would save $941. Can my local government refuse to lower my tax bill and override these plans? Yes, but it's difficult. Depending on the cuts they want to override, they will need anywhere between a simple majority to a unanimous vote. Also, if they want to raise your taxes, they would have to ask first by a public referendum. Times staff writer Alex Leary contributed to this report.
[Last modified June 11, 2007, 23:45:57]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by Manny
|
09/05/07 03:08 PM
|
|
Now lets see, I think I can spend $174 in less than 1.74 seconds.
|
|
by Brittany
|
09/05/07 03:03 PM
|
|
Instead of sending relief to all these other countries maybe some of that generosity needs to come to us THE TAX PAYERS. When is the last time you seen another country help pay our taxes..
|
|
by Fred
|
09/05/07 03:01 PM
|
|
The "Super Homestead" is suppose to save us money. What happens 25-30 years down the line when the market value of our home reaches 800,000 or more. how much will " Super Homestead" save us.
|
|
by Rachel
|
09/05/07 02:54 PM
|
|
$174... let's see, maybe I'll take a vacation with all that money. the rich stay rich and well we know how the rest goes. They just need our vote.
|
|
by Linda
|
06/14/07 11:37 PM
|
|
some of us live on a fix income it is hard for us with high taxes ...maybe we should all put our homes on the market because $174 is nothing
|
|
by Harry
|
06/14/07 04:05 PM
|
|
$174 - are they crazy, on a 12,000 tax bill - Potitical Garbage
|
|
by John
|
06/13/07 05:13 PM
|
|
Ray, this years tax cut does not need voters vote. It's statutory. I say raise the statutory roll-back to 2002-2003 and we can worry about the other cuts in next session.
|
|
by Ray
|
06/13/07 07:54 AM
|
|
My guess Citizens are not going to accept the cuts in services and the result will be that revenues will be kept at the 07 level using the super majority. The state will blame the locals and the locals will say that they gave a modest cut.
|
|
by lee
|
06/12/07 10:59 PM
|
|
Mr. Rubio you dropped the ball. It was and still is a good idea. Like the ins fiasco so is this tax relief a joke.
|
|
by Anonymous
|
06/12/07 10:52 PM
|
|
Time to start the war, a revolution.
|
|
by Joshu Jones
|
06/12/07 09:26 PM
|
|
$174 for you, but $941 for the developer. Slash your services. Wake up, folks! This benefits the very weathy and they are just throwing us a bone to get our support. Every GOP sponsored tax cut is ALWAYS like that! When will the middle class wise up?
|
|
by Matt
|
06/12/07 07:46 PM
|
|
Maybe we should all refuse to pay our taxes. What would they do with no monies to put us in jail.
|
|
by Houston
|
06/12/07 04:46 PM
|
|
This says it all:"Can my local government refuse to lower my tax bill and override these plans?
Yes, but it's difficult."
|
|
by Shana
|
06/12/07 04:34 PM
|
|
$174?? They would increase the fees for something and that money would go to them anyway. This is eerily similar to the promises of the insurance special session. What happens if the the "super homestead exemption" doesn't pass? What a joke!
|
|
by Rod
|
06/12/07 04:20 PM
|
|
$174???....on a tax bill in excess of $4500...keep it...two for two (insurance and taxes)...please stay away from the real problems, eh?
|
|
by jay
|
06/12/07 04:10 PM
|
|
CUT FIRE & POLICE SERVICES? CUT THE FAT OUT OF THE BUDGETS INSTEAD. LET THE FAT CATS WITH THE BENEFITS CONTRIBUTE TO PLANS SIMILAR TO WHAT THE NORMAL PEONS HAVE IN THE WAY OF BENEFTIS. CUT CELL PHONES AND CARS, UNNECESSARY BUILDING, FAT BENETITS!
|
|
by Herb
|
06/12/07 03:49 PM
|
|
It's kind of funny how everyone jumped on the "cut taxes" band wagon. Now the road is bumpy and no one knows where the wagon is going! Serves them right, I just hope they do the right thing! We deserve a break, but don't hurt the schools.
|
|
by Ned
|
06/12/07 03:07 PM
|
|
How do you spell tax relief
r-e-c-a-l-l
|
|
by Eliz
|
06/12/07 02:32 PM
|
|
I am all for cutting govenment services IF only they would cut the deadwood. In St. Petersburg they prefer to cut good employees and keep the sycophants. Deputy mayors and incompetent management won't get the boot... but real workers will. Politics!
|
|
by S E JONES
|
06/12/07 02:06 PM
|
|
PLEASE REMOVE SOH FROM ALL PROPERTIES AND LET EVERYONE PAY THEIR FAIL SHARE.I AM A SINGLE MOM/HOMEOWNER AND 174.00 WILL NOT DO ANYTHING TOWARD THE OVER 4,000 I MUST PAY IN TAXES. WE THE PEOPLE NEED REAL TAX RELIEF!
|
|
by Cathie
|
06/12/07 01:44 PM
|
|
I sold a larger house to move to a smaller house 2 years ago. If my Save Our Home Cap had transferred I would have been ok. My mortgage payment went UP. Too late for me...I have to give up my house - $174 won't cut it.
|
|
by Chuck
|
06/12/07 01:41 PM
|
|
Your examples on page 10A go from $60,to $800. you failed to include homes between $100.and $200.the price range that most recent homes were purchased at, and the taxes have risen the most. lets face it we need to clean house starting with local gov
|
|
by William
|
06/12/07 01:03 PM
|
|
As the owner of a second home in CLearwater I see nothing in any of the proposals that will benefit owners of second homes. Property taxes in Florida are absolutely insane!!! We will not be making Florida our permanent home.
|
|
by Ray
|
06/12/07 12:57 PM
|
|
My homeowners insurance just went from $796.00 to $1120.00. What happened to the alleged savings???? I fear taxes will work out the same way. Stop the lip service Charlie.
|
|
by Ed
|
06/12/07 12:55 PM
|
|
As usual, nothing good. Prediction: the fool Polititions left after ALL the incumbents have been thrown out will preside over a low-populace state filled with empty, decaying buildings. Try taxing your kin - the only ones left.
|
|
by Chuck
|
06/12/07 11:53 AM
|
|
Please will someone out there tell them to get a State Income Tax started.Thats the only way out of this mess.Someone listen.STATE INCOME TAX is fair for everyone.Someone please wake up.
|
|
by Deb
|
06/12/07 11:49 AM
|
|
Hundreds, if not, thousands of firefighters stand to lose their jobs if this passes.
|
|
by zeke
|
06/12/07 11:43 AM
|
|
my taxes went from 900.00 5 years ago to 4000.00 now. yes, please keep the 174.00!
|
|
by Joe
|
06/12/07 11:38 AM
|
|
Without the Save Our Homes 3% cap, is there a new cap for the super cap?
|
|
by William
|
06/12/07 10:28 AM
|
|
I don't wish to loose the save my home exemption. This limits how much taxes can increase each year. I feel Pasco county has been frugal with their budget. We need relief from high insurance rates in Pasco Co. At least that is what hits me hardest.
|
|
by Whodat
|
06/12/07 10:20 AM
|
|
Since my taxes went down from last year a rollback would actually increase them. A better solutions would be 20% of the value of the home then increase sales tax by 2% to make up for lost income due to the decrease in property tax
|
|
by Paul
|
06/12/07 09:53 AM
|
|
The market will correct itself. The property tax issue is a complete smoke screen for the real issue: property insurance. Those guys made 60 billion profit last year. Tell me that ain't obscene and I'll sell you some swamp land.
|
|
by Perry
|
06/12/07 08:48 AM
|
|
Taxes dropping like a rock? Only thing dropping will be the governor's poll ratings. What a joke.
|
|
by JACQUE
|
06/12/07 08:22 AM
|
|
MAKE TAXES EQUAL. INCREASE SALES TAXES TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR BIGGEST BUSINESS IN FLORIDA. (FREE MONEY) YOU WON'T LOSE SERVICES. WE NEED TO TAKE THE GLUT OUT OF THEM OR ADD IN GROWTH AREAS. SAVE OUR HOMES MEANS STUCK IN OUR HOMES. CHANGE IS GOOD.
|
|
by David
|
06/12/07 08:16 AM
|
|
$174.00? My single mom daughter finally managed to purchae a house three years ago. This yeat her taxes trippled to $5800.00 and you want to reduce it by $174.00? Keep it !!!!!!!!!!
|
|