Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dickie B from HB
If Jeff and all the others are so happy about paying exhorbitant RE taxes, then I say that they are welcome to them. But we both know that there are better solutions.
DB
|
I wasn't going to respond to Eki because the information doesn't make sense and I didn't want to get into a messy debate. I want to make VERY CLEAR that I am not doubting EKi's tax bill. Instead I am pointing out that it is not in sync with publicly available information. Either the property is under assessed or we are comparing Arizona oranges to New Hampshire apples.
Here is a pointer to the Scottsdale, Arizona web site RE property taxes.
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/taxes/realproptax.asp
Here is the pertinent info:
Residential:
A home with an Assessor’s full cash value of $100,000 is multiplied by the assessment ratio to determine the assessed value. The residential assessment ratio is 10%, so the assessed value would be $10,000. Applying the current rate of $8.4766 per $100 of assessed value, the
approximate tax would be $847.66 based on $8.4766 x ($10,000 / $100).
In summary,
Scottsdale says it gets about $850 tax on a $100,000 house.
If Eki is only paying $400 then the property value must be less than $50,000 if a fair assessment was done. A property worth $50,000 would be taxed in the ball park of $340 in Moultonborough (2006 rate $6.71 per $1000). In Laconia the tax would be about $780 ($15.51 per $1000). This is hardly an
exorbitant difference, and my town is actually a better deal. The NH median tax rate for 2006 is about $17.41 per $1000 for a tax of $870. The highest tax in NH would be $1950 in Newport which has a $38.93 per $1000 tax rate (OUCH). I wouldn't want to live in Newport.
In addition, Arizona's sales tax is about 8% and income tax goes from about 2.6% to 4.6% depending on what bracket you're in. I don't know about Arizona's dividend taxes, capital gains tax, and estate taxes, none of which apply in New Hampshire.
As to working in Massachusetts and paying their state income tax, I do as well. Mass doesn't allow an offset for NH property taxes even they are now collected at the state level. Why not? They have a good deal and don't want to give it up. They would probably be very unhappy to lose the income from all the NH residents if we did institute a state income tax. However, these are Mass taxes, not NH taxes. By working in Mass you get the worst of both worlds. However, I would venture to guess that most NH people do not work out of state and do not pay state income tax.
So, overall it seems that the more money you earn and the more you purchase the less benefit you get from Arizona's "better" property tax.