Property tax law has a logic all its own. You’ll find that in nearly every US jurisdiction assessed value is a percentage of market value, often a very small one. Saying it makes no sense is tilting at windmills, it’s just one of hundreds of legal fictions that sound silly out of the context they developed in. For example, most deeds to property identify the purchase price as “one dollar and other good and valuable consideration“, whatever the actual price was.

The important thing here is the injustice that was done to these people and the city’s refusal to make it right.

> You’ll find that in nearly every US jurisdiction assessed value is a percentage of market value, often a very small one.

That's definitely not the case in my municipality (North-East USA).

Tax assessments are as close to market value as you can get, considering that they are only being appraised every 5 years (I think, it may be 3 years). So there's obviously some lag if the market booms or busts. But overall it's pretty damn close to market prices and averages out over the long term.

I am also in the northeast and my assessed value is under 1% of actual market value. https://www.tax.ny.gov/research/property/equal/rar/index.htm

There are also many firms to dispute your assessment and lower your property tax bill. They do aggressive mass mailing and are able to claim very specific reductions. They then take a percentage (usually half) of first year savings.

My property here is accessed at roughly market value. Partially because my state has the following law in the constitution

> Indiana property tax caps limit the amount of property taxes to 1% of property values for homesteads (owner-occupied), 2% for other residential property and farmland, and 3% for all other property

Previous places I have lived without this law, things worked differently.

As a somewhat related aside I find the use of mills and other archaic units in this space to be kept around for no other reason than to confuse people.

I'm guessing that it's a technicality. i.e. instead of saying "the property tax rate for a house with value X is Y*X", they say "the property tax rate for a house with value X is 2Y, but house value assessment for market-value X is X/2". Possibly because the 2Y legislation was difficult to change.

> At the end the tax you pay is still the same.

So, no. That is, IIUC, the tax rates are what they are based on the 50% assessment.

>> At the end the tax you pay is still the same.

>So, no. That is, IIUC, the tax rates are what they are based on the 50% assessment.

I don't get it. You admit that the tax rates would be higher (presumably 2x higher) to compensate for the 50% assessment, but claim that the tax won't be the same at the end?

The increase of the taxable value of residential properties is capped at 5% (or inflation if it is lower). When a property is sold, it resets to the assessed value.

The 2x factor increases the taxes paid by people who own properties with a taxable value less than the assessed value.

Yes, that part is ridiculous.

But once you normalize for all of that, then, assessing at 85% is really like assessing for 170% which would be bad.

Also - in a situation of rapidly deteriorating home values, the state may be short sighted, in wanting to pay it's bills, trying to extract some value.

It's really sad because you generally don't see entire neighbourhoods go to nothing in most of the modern world.

I did a tour of Detroit back in 2011, shortly before one of their large house auctions all for unpaid property taxes. Some of these basically destroyed houses were being charge 400-600 a month in property tax. The city continuing to tax Detroit neighborhoods like this is one huge contributing factor to the decline of Detroit.

That's probably the tip of the iceberg of corruption and stupidity.

You're missing the point. Nothing I said negates the fact that people were over-assessed. I'm simply pointing out that the clause in the Michigan constitution makes no sense. Can you let that sink in for a minute?

What is there to say the people wouldn’t have been charged the same amount if assessed at 50% and the city then set a higher tax rate to get the revenue needed?

The 50% assessment cap is meaningless for taxes paid when the rate is just double what it would be at 100% assessment.

I can, but what of it?

I exist at point A, not point B.

I can’t influence point B from A.

Our culture at large refuses to blink from “the hustle.”

What does lingering in ennui and frustration achieve while?

If people want change it’s going to be on the level of quitting jobs en masse and working for each other at both points A and B, because letting outsiders guide agency through market hype is the problem.

You want to make sure a community has enough and is free from people feeling they’re free to treat others however? Go do it.

You want more of the same? Let the JIT machine keep creating bag holders.

This sit and reflect thing is no different than thoughts and prayers.