The rebellion is being built all over the United States against property taxes. From Florida to North Dakota, states are trying to repeal them or are trying to repeal them. The rage that drives this movement comes from two sources.
One is the belief that you are being taxed because you live in your home. “Is the property yours or are you just borrowing from the government?” asked Ron DeSantis of the Florida government. “It is impossible to fulfill the promise of personal freedom, summarizing it in its various essences, if you can “finally own yourself in a part of your real estate,” argues Pennsylvania Assemblyman Russ Diamond.
The second driving force is that it is often linked to the expected market value of the asset – your home – rather than the cost of providing tax finances to the owner’s ability or services. They work like a wealth tax, but that’s not good. “Seniors on Social Security in 2025 prescribed a 2.5% cost-of-living adjustment,” said a Minnesota resident.
These first points are based on misconceptions (although they are from minors, taking into account the second point).
Property tax is the payment for locally provided and consumed goods and services.
Property taxes are not a fee for living in your home, but payments for goods and services provided and consumed locally, such as at schools, police, parks, fire stations, etc. If advocates for the abolition of property taxes are willing to surround products and services, there’s no problem. But most of them are. The questions are: How are these products and services paid?
Ideally, we would bill our local parks the same way we would do water parks and fire stations. However, “public interest” is not as ubiquitous as it is often claimed, but does exist, but is not always possible by simply paying for the service. Squad cars cruise the streets discourage criminals from robbers 48 and 50 (in technical terms, “non-competitive”). In these cases, if you want locally provided and consumed services, you will need to pay sumhow.
Local service charges must be based on their prescribed costs
The above misconceptions allow you to understand property taxes, as payment methods commonly used for locally provided and consumed goods and services are generally the same. If you address real estate tax issues before misunderstanding, you can build a subject that could gain more support, or at least tolerance, more equitable.
They will become renamed as the first step in reforming payment systems for locally provided goods and services. When Margaret Thatcher discontinued the “rate” system, this was property tax – she called the alternative a community bill. This was controversial in the application, but it was an action that reflected what the payment was in fact.
The second step is to break the link between these changes in payment burden and changes in the expected value of the payer’s property. As the costs of providing products and services change, the burden should change. The Tabor Bill of Rights (Tabor) limits the growth of government spending to things like inflation growth and population.
Finally, once the costs for these locally provided goods and services have been determined, there are several ways to allocate them between taxable units. One of the closest to the current system is to allocate according to the share of the total assets value of each unit in the region. Another Thatcher idea was to approximate private sector fees as closely as possible by allocating costs by the number of units.
Sub-tax is better than others
Most people who want to abolish property taxes want to maintain locally provided and consumed goods and services that pay taxes. From funds distributed from state governments to taxing foreign immigrant wiring, there are tough suggestions on how to fund them. These push schemes are often presented as “conspiratorial” buckaus who are often pushing to abolish taxes, but Ares pushes to abolish spending, but in reality they are seeking a free lunch for a smart guy.
Few people are prominent among the abolitionist ranks due to the massive sales tax hikes that could fill the gap. Those who consume goods and services whenever possible should be the ones who pay them.
