Re:Recognizing the signs of disruption in our urban habitat
by zeveb on Monday August 26, 2019 @05:04PM
(#20803763)
That’s a really low annual household income, particularly for California. But perhaps it's tweakable.
Re:Recognizing the signs of disruption in our urban habitat
by jacobolus on Monday August 26, 2019 @05:08PM
(#20803803)
This is aimed at elderly people making a living from a pension, social security, etc. Not for people currently earning a full-time salary.
Re:Recognizing the signs of disruption in our urban habitat
by zeveb on Monday August 26, 2019 @06:39PM
(#20804454)
Yeah, but $35,000 from one's pension/401(k)/Social Security is still peanuts for California. That's got to be well below effective poverty level for someone living in San Francisco, LA or San Diego, even without rent.
Re:Recognizing the signs of disruption in our urban habitat
by rcpt on Tuesday August 27, 2019 @12:11AM
(#20806274)
Then we can talk about changing that limit. Several states have programs like this and they work just fine, eg. https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/ptr/
It's a totally different problem from prop 13.
The State of California offers another solution. It's called Property Tax Postponement: https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_prop_tax_postponement.html
"The State Controller’s Property Tax Postponement Program allows homeowners who are seniors, are blind, or have a disability to defer current-year property taxes on their principal residence if they meet certain criteria including 40 percent equity in the home and an annual household income of $35,500 or less."
The taxes are deferred until a change of control, like due to a sale or transfer to next of kin. Many or most high-cost-of-living jurisdictions have similar programs.