County commissioners meet about NHC property tax increase
commishmeeting300.jpg

The New Hanover County Commissioners have to decide whether to postpone the property revaluation set for January 1, 2011. New Hanover County Tax Administrator Roger Kelley said, "Values for the most part will be going down based on the current sales that are out there and we're reaching a point where foreclosures may or may not affect value." North Carolina law requires revaluation every eight years, but last year commissioners voted to do it every four years, to avoid a property value and tax increase shock. Property values traditionally go up during a revaluation, but that would not be the case in the current market. "People have a false sense of what their values really are,” said New Hanover County Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr. “As a realtor, I sold a home to someone back in January and the tax value was 331, the home appraised and sold for 295, so there's almost a $36,000 difference between tax value and the actual current market value." Kelley estimates the tax rate would have to increase by about five cents per one hundred dollars of assessed value in order to stay revenue neutral. Commissioner Barfield supports moving forward with the 2011 date. "You're not going to see that big of a difference in what you're going to pay in taxes from year to year, maybe $100 to $200 difference for the average home," he said. Unless commissioners vote for a delay after hearing Monday night's presentation, the revaluation is still set for January of 2011.

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

I'll be out of NHC as soon as the market goes up. If things continue, I will be out of NC altogher. This state, or at least those that run it, are becoming a joke!!!
The knife cuts the butter both ways or it should. Here is why. In a revaluation, overall taxes for the county (or the city) do not have to rise or fall if the rate is set at a revenue neutral level. However, in a rising market, some properties will rise faster and thus pay a relatively larger share of the tax burden after a revaulation. For example, beach property values rose faster than property values in Castle Hayne. In the last revaluation, some of the burden shifted to these areas where values were rising faster. Similarly, in a falling market such as we have been experiencing lately, higher priced property values probably (although not certainly) fell at a faster dollar rate than more modest properties. They may not have fallen by as much on a percentage basis. Here is an example with round hypothetical numbers. Let's say that the total value of the property in the county is $100 million and the tax rate is $0.50 per $100. Then the county would receive $500 thousand ($100 million * 0.005 or $1 million * 0.5) in revenue. If the property value in the county fell at a collective 20% rate, then the value of the property in the county is now $80 million. For the county to still realize $500 thousand in revenue, the rate would have to be set at $0.625 per $100 (the new lower base of $80 million * 0.00625 (the new higher rate) =$500 thousand). The key point here is that while the tax rate increased, there is NO increase in actual taxes paid. If a $100,000 house pays the old rate of .005 then the property owner paid $500 ($100,000 * .005 = $500). If the revaluation finds that the property decreased by the county average of 20% and is now worth $80,000 and the county sets the new rate at the revenue neutral rate of .00625 then the property owner still pays the same $500 ($80,000 * .00625 = $500). Therefore, if the county commissioners play it straight and set the rate at a revenue neutral rate, then taxes should not change with a revaluation. In our example, $500 in taxes = $500 in taxes before and after revaluation. But, and this is a big BUT, on an individual basis, taxes paid will remain the same only if the value of the individual property rises and falls at exactly the same percentage as the average for the county. If the value of a particular property in percentage not dollar terms falls faster than the average for the county, then a revaluation actually lowers actual taxes paid for that individual property. Similarly, if the % value of particular property falls less (or actually rises faster) than the county average, then actual taxes paid increase. Back to our hypothetical example. Again, average county property values have fallen 20%. If our $100,000 house falls only 10% rather than 20%, then taxes paid rise to $562.50 ($90,000 (new value) * 0.00625 (new rate) = $562.50) or $62.50 more than pre-revaluation. If our $100,000 property falls 30% while the average county property falls 20%, then actual taxes paid decrease to $437.50 ($70,000 (new value) * .00625 (new rate) = $437.50 or $62.50 less than pre-revaluation. The bottom line is that if the goal is to fairly apply the tax burden based upon property value, then frequent, accurate revaluations provide for the fairest distribution of the tax burden. No one gets a free ride for many years nor is someone overpaying for many years.
No arguement here. You wasted a lot of your time though. Our elected officials could care less because they know we are so divided and stupid, we will kep electing them!
I LOVE THIS PART... "You're not going to see that big of a difference in what you're going to pay in taxes from year to year, maybe $100 to $200 difference for the average home," he said. So because it is ONLY 100-200 dollars we shouldn't be worried with paying an extra tax..lets see here.. 35% increase in Home Owners Insurance Increase in my Health Insurance Increase in my Auto Insurance Increase in goods I buy (which HAVE NOT gone down since gas prices dropped) That 100-200 dollars I get to KEEP in my pocket sounds PRETTY GOOD stacked up against all the bending over I have been doing with the increases I have to deal with...and JUST WAIT until LAME BRAIN causes increases in our energy costs...you haven't even BEGUN to hear the screaming and hollering yet!
....and this is all happening while wages are tanking....$100 or $200 may not seem like alot to some, but if you're on a fixed income, it's huge. For some it may be the difference in eating or paying the light bill.
Amen..and to add more expense..gas is going back up and the city want to annex so they will have the money to pay the additions to the water hole downtown also referred to as the convention center..Saw another 612,000 additional expenses in this mornings paper. Also the sanitation expenses are going up, water/sewer and electricity as well. Where is it going to stop. I guess maybe when we are all living on the streets.
The politicians in N.C. will be taxing us even more in the near future by taxing services. Yep, those haircuts, Doctors office visits... and everything else are about to get more expensive. It's coming folks. The state budget (spending) keeps growing and big government continues to get even bigger while my budget shrinks. You wanted change, well you're about to get it. I hope you're happy with it.