View Single Post
Old 01-24-2019, 12:21 PM   #51
tummyman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 406
Thanks: 54
Thanked 293 Times in 96 Posts
Default

Somehow I think this subject got a little off track. I just read HB682 that was the original question. What I se is that the proposal increases the fees when you apply for a dock permit from $200 to the new amount of $400 plus changes the added fee of $2 per sq. ft of area to $6 for a permanent dock, and a fee change for seasonal docks from $1 to $3 per sq. ft of area changed. This is a fee that you pay to DES if you want a dock, or change your existing dock for whatever reason. It has nothing to do with property taxation. As I read it, let's say you want a permanent dock that is 6X40 or 240 sq. ft. The fee currently is $680. If this bill is passed, the fee would go to $1840....a substantial change. Or, if the permit is requested for a seasonal dock, the fee would go from $440 to $1120. These are substantial fee increases and not tax deductible. If you want to add a dock section of 6X10 ft, the fee for a seasonal dock would go from $$260 to $580. Same issues will happen if you apply for a permit to repair your dock, but that fee goes from $200 to $400 only. Message here....if you plan to do any repairs or expansion, get your permit requests in now before the fees change, as I believe the permits are valid for 5 years. BTW, theres is also a section (IVB) in HB682 that is not a complete sentence that may cap the fee at $300, so there may be more twists and turns.

The second item that this topic elicited responses to has to do with taxation of these structures. It is obvious that the taxation of a dock varies by town. Some towns do not tax at all. And taxation may or may not be shared as a Federal tax deduction, since property taxes are capped at $10,000. Separate topic.

Disclaimer....I am no lawyer and what I wrote above is just my best interpretation of what I read in HB682. Remember, these "bills" are written so folks have no idea what the legislature is doing. I certainly think others need to chime in to validate or refute the data I presented.
tummyman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to tummyman For This Useful Post: