Do any other states/ cities have anything similar to Prop 13?
7 Replies
Tyler D.
posted about 2 months ago
Hey BP,
I'm looking to invest for the long term, and am considering buying a fixer in California to lock in my property taxes with prop 13. It seems like an excellent long-term play.
I'm curious on if any other states/ cities offer a similar benefit? I've been told that Oregon might, but have not found any proof to back that up.
Jenning Yu
Investor from Texas
replied about 2 months ago
Larry Fried
Investor/RE Broker from Eugene, OR
replied about 2 months ago
Yes, Oregon has a similar law with a couple of significant differences. 1st our annual increase is limited to 3%, as compared to 2% for California. So a disadvantage there. However, here in Oregon there is no tax adjustment made when the home is sold, unlike under Prop 13. Big advantage for those buying now, because they pay the same tax rate as previous owner.
Tyler D.
replied about 2 months ago
Originally posted by @Larry Fried :Yes, Oregon has a similar law with a couple of significant differences. 1st our annual increase is limited to 3%, as compared to 2% for California. So a disadvantage there. However, here in Oregon there is no tax adjustment made when the home is sold, unlike under Prop 13. Big advantage for those buying now, because they pay the same tax rate as previous owner.
Interesting. Do you think that permanently locking interest rate increases in OR will cause them to lag behind? In CA you could see nieghbors paying drastically different taxes, because of the 2% rate lock.
Lesley Resnick
Real Estate Agent from Jacksonville, FL
replied about 2 months ago
I am not from California and I generally understyand what is going on in the PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA, but you are going to buy a house to get/keep low property tax?
You need to take me though the numbers as to why? Should the investment stand on its own merit and property tax just be one part?
Lynnette E.
Rental Property Investor from Tennessee
replied about 2 months ago
Originally posted by @Lesley Resnick :I am not from California and I generally understyand what is going on in the PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA, but you are going to buy a house to get/keep low property tax?
You need to take me though the numbers as to why? Should the investment stand on its own merit and property tax just be one part?
The property tax can make or break the ability for a rental in CA to cash flow.
This is a house I sold a few years ago. Zillow did not have the tax amount, but the assessment value is right on. You can see when I did a room addition 2008/9 and how the assessor gave an increase in value based on how much was complete by 12/31 of each year. Then you can see the drop in value when I went to court over their assessment of the increase in value. I won and they had to drop the value. Then a couple of years ago I sold it and the value went to market value. Prop 13 held down the taxes significantly.
Public tax history
| YEAR | PROPERTY TAXES | TAX ASSESSMENT |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | $5,214 (+13.1%) | $341,700 (+2%) |
| 2018 | $4,610 (+57.7%) | $335,000 (+35.7%) |
| 2017 | $2,923 | $246,870 (+2%) |
| 2016 | $2,923 (+3.3%) | $242,029 (+1.5%) |
| 2015 | $2,831 (+1.2%) | $238,393 (+2%) |
| 2014 | $2,799 | $233,723 (+0.5%) |
| 2013 | -- | $232,667 (+2%) |
| 2012 | -- | $228,105 (+2%) |
| 2011 | -- | $223,632 (+0.8%) |
| 2010 | -- | $221,961 (-27.5%) |
| 2009 | -- | $306,288 (+106%) |
| 2008 | -- | $148,714 (+17.8%) |
| 2007 | -- | $126,190 (+2%) |
| 2006 | -- | $123,716 (+2%) |
| 2005 | -- | $121,290 (+2%) |
| 2004 | -- | $118,912 (+1.9%) |
| 2003 | -- | $116,733 (+2%) |
| 2002 | -- | $114,444 (+2%) |
| 2001 | -- | $112,200 (+2%) |
| 2000 | -- | $110,000 |
| See less tax history |
Find assessor info on the county website
This house, for another example, its a real house I sold a couple of years ago. Look at how the taxes changed after it sold and was reassessed:
| YEAR | PROPERTY TAXES | TAX ASSESSMENT |
|---|---|---|
| 2020 | $6,433 | $535,500 (+2%) |
| 2019 | $6,433 (+430.4%) | $525,000 (+596.7%) |
| 2018 | $1,213 | $75,359 (+2%) |
| 2017 | $1,213 (+2%) | $73,882 (+2%) |
| 2016 | $1,189 (+3.5%) | $72,435 (+1.5%) |
| 2015 | $1,148 (+1%) | $71,348 (+2%) |
| 2014 | $1,136 | $69,951 (+2.5%) |
| 2012 | -- | $68,271 (+2%) |
| 2011 | -- | $66,934 (+0.8%) |
| 2010 | -- | $66,435 (-0.2%) |
| 2009 | -- | $66,593 (+2%) |
| 2008 | -- | $65,288 (+2%) |
| 2007 | -- | $64,009 (+2%) |
| 2006 | -- | $62,755 |
| 2005 | -- | $62,755 (+4%) |
| 2004 | -- | $60,320 (+1.9%) |
| 2003 | -- | $59,215 (+2%) |
| 2002 | -- | $58,055 (+4%) |
| 2000 | -- | $55,803 |
Lynnette E.
Rental Property Investor from Tennessee
replied about 2 months ago
So the 2 examples I gave will rent at a 0.5% rather than the 1 or 2 % rules. But with the taxes held down in a few years they may reach the 1% rule. If taxes kept increasing with the property value the house will never cash flow.
Larry Fried
Investor/RE Broker from Eugene, OR
replied about 2 months ago
Originally posted by @Tyler D. :Originally posted by @Larry Fried:Yes, Oregon has a similar law with a couple of significant differences. 1st our annual increase is limited to 3%, as compared to 2% for California. So a disadvantage there. However, here in Oregon there is no tax adjustment made when the home is sold, unlike under Prop 13. Big advantage for those buying now, because they pay the same tax rate as previous owner.
Interesting. Do you think that permanently locking interest rate increases in OR will cause them to lag behind? In CA you could see nieghbors paying drastically different taxes, because of the 2% rate lock.
I am not sure I understand your question. First by "interest rate" do you mean tax increase? Second, lag behind what? That are tax rates are lower on average than California? If so, yes!