Monday, February 11, 2008

Tax time, yay!

Actually, I am one of the lucky few who look forward to tax time. We use income tax as a forced savings plan. My husband doesn't claim any deductions on his W2, so they take out quite a bit, and then we get it all--or most of it--back in one lump sum that can actually do us some good. (This year the plan is to pay off our truck, yay!) So, because I have plenty of deductions maybe I am biased...

But, I've been thinking about taxes, and there is something that I think should change. I started thinking about this when I first heard that Mike Huckabee wants to dismantle the IRS. He calls his plan "FairTax". I'm not sure yet if I like this idea, but it's interesting. What is he going to do with all the people who lose their jobs? IRS agents are people too--the fact that they are generally rated just below telemarketers on the list of most despised persons just means that they need extra understanding and protection, right?

Anyway, what I really want to talk about is Property Tax. I suppose this is a state thing, rather than a federal thing, so it's not likely to come up in the Presidential debates, but I think we have a problem here. I thought that we--as people of the United States of America--had the right to own property. The 5th and 14th amendments to the Constitution address this. I like the wording in the 14th particularly, "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

I'd also like to take a brief look at the Virginia Declaration of Rights. This was written by George Mason--Thomas Jefferson was strongly influenced by this when writing the first part of the Declaration of Independence, and James Madison also drew heavily upon this document when writing our current Bill of Rights. Section 1 declares, "That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." (The rest is really great, by the way, check it out.)

So, I think the founding fathers thought that this was kind-of important. I would like to quote Don Harkins from the Idaho Observer, because I think he said it well. "Do American's have the right to own property? This seems like a silly question until you find out that we do not "own" anything. Ownership implies that property belongs to you and that nobody but you has the right to sell or otherwise transfer that ownership to another party. We used to be able to own property in America; the right to do so was perhaps the most important of protections built into our Constitution. However, somewhere along the line ownership of our property was conveyed to government. We are allowed to live on their property until we stop paying taxes, at which time government has given itself the right to sell it and move you out by force, if necessary. The ability to dispose of property is the ultimate test of who really owns it."

Think about it. You work your whole life, and finally pay off your 30-year mortgage, and your house is finally really yours, right? Nope. If you don't keep up with the taxes, it's gone. So, if we really want to talk about tax relief, let's get rid of property tax. It helps all home-owners. People like me, who would be paying 100+ less a month (because of escrow)--you think that might help the economy?--as well as older, more established citizens who would no longer have to worry about losing their house as their retirement income struggles to keep up with inflation. I realize that the government needs money for schools, police, libraries, roads, etc. But, surely there is a better way. If property tax is completely necessary, maybe we can change it a little... no property taxes on your personal, single-family residence, higher taxes on recreational properties and rental properties? That doesn't seem fair either, but at least it's picking on the people who are more likely able to afford it... people shouldn't be punished for working hard and making more money, but at the same time, people with more have a greater responsibility, maybe? This is a whole different can of worms, let's not go into it now.

In short, I think that ownership of property is an inalienable right worth fighting for. And, there must be a better way for government to get the funds they need---or manage the funds they have!

"Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place." ~Frederic Bastiat The Law

-----
P.S. I think my dad should run for President. He's smart, moral, attractive, not too old, not extremist, well-spoken, conservative, but good at compromise--I should say finding common ground, because my father would never compromise his integrity. I guess maybe he is too good a person to actually win, but he'd do a great job.

2 comments:

KayLynn said...

I agree and dissagree. Well put on the property taxes. maybe we should be a reporting state, and when you purchase property you are required by law to report how much you paid. Then we could be taxed on 100% on your purchase ammount at a set percentage rate. You paid 35k for your house in 1976, well you will pay 1.5% of the 35k every year until you buy some other property. You stay where you are, pay off your debt and the government rewards you with non-adjusted property taxes. You decided to upgrade, increase debt load, etc. they get to take their share. Something predictable not based on inflation, that way as you are preparing for your future, you can actually know what to expect to pay each year.

As for the forced savings account, I totally dissagree! I know that saving is hard. But if you don't meet your tax burden from the year befor you have to pay fees and INTEREST on the money you should have been paying. However the money that you pay the government, they do not pay YOU interest on overage. At three percent APY the government is making about an additional $106 in interest that they do not pay you. If you pay taxes as if you are in a 25% tax bracket, but with all your additional deductions you really ahould be in a 17%, if you make 45000 gross, the difference is $450 (about) a month. If you took the 450 dollars a month difference, you not only would still have the money at the end, but also the 106 dollars additional. You can have your work do automatic deposite into an account, that you just say you arn't going to touch for 1 year or more. A better option would be to put it into a roth IRA. At $450 a month for 30 years at an average of 8% APY (mutual funds) in 30 years you would have an account of $680,086 that you would not have to pay taxes on. The interest that you would approximatly be earning a month at that point would be about $4000 a MONTH, your money would be working for you!

Saving is my soap box, take it or leave it. Paying down debt is always a good option, but if you simply put the $450 a month towards debt you would actually pay it down faster, because interest is being paid on outstanding balances per day.

Sorry this got a little long!

KayLynn said...

Oops, just did the math again and it is about a $300 difference per month. Changes numbers a little, but still the same concept.