This Blog has been created to accept comments and replies related to AdkAction.org's Tax Reform initiative, currently focused on the valuation of State lands. Before posting please review the materials on the Tax Reform tab at Adk.Action.org.
Questions and Answers from the August 22nd Conference
The following questions were received in written form at the end of the Conference. The answers are given by me, Dave Wolff, and are based on my knowledge of the topic of state land valuation in the Adirondack Forest Preserve.
Based on the some of the questions received, it became obvious that assessments and taxes are broad subjects and mean different things to different people.
The Conference focused on the valuation (assessment) of taxable state land in the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Go to http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/wolfferct-92016-sources-uses-assessed-value-property-funds-education-ppt-powerpoint/ to see a picture that tries to put this focus in the context of the bigger topic of local assessments and taxes.
Some questions were valid but dealt with areas of assessment and taxation that were not the focus of the Conference, and are outside my expertise. For example, a number of questions were about additional revenue sources to pay for local services. In general, it is my understanding that additional revenue sources would require legislative action at the state level. This is a valid topic, but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
1 Question: Why are local services based on property taxes on public and private lands?
a Answer: While this is outside the conference scope, my understanding is that local governments have two sources of local tax revenue, property taxes and a portion of the state sales tax. Local governments must pay for locally generated costs such as schools, police, and fire departments as well as unfunded mandates from above. My understanding is that additional revenue sources would require legislative approval at the state level.
Given that property taxes are one source of local revenue, the state passed legislation in 1886 allowing the Forest Preserve land in the Adirondack Park to be taxed, as if privately owned.
2 Question: Why not explore other ways to pay for local services, such as carbon taxes, consumption taxes, luxury taxes, real estate transfer taxes...?
a Answer: Great question: As I said in Answer #1, I think that taxing other sources for local use would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
3 Question: Why expect land owners -- public or private-- to pay taxes on values that they are providing for society at large, such as clean air and water, biodiversity, carbon sequestration? Does not this punish good land stewardship?
a Answer: The issue is one of balancing the cost (local Adirondack towns and villages) with the benefit (all the citizens of New York State.) Quoting from the ORPS document: Compensating Local Governments for Loss of Tax Base Due to State Ownership of Land, (September 1996): “The practice of taxing state land in New York began in 1886, when legislation permitting taxation of the forest preserve (i.e., state-owned land in the Adirondack and Catskill regions) was enacted. Two factors are generally accepted as having motivated the original extension of taxability to the forest preserve. The first was the very large acreage which the state owns in many of the towns in the Adirondack and Catskill areas. The second factor was the realization that, while state ownership conveyed benefits to residents of other areas of the state, costs were largely borne locally. In the late 1800s, the benefit which received the most attention was the provision of watershed areas to supply the heavily-populated downstate metropolitan region with a high-quality and reliable water supply. Later on, the statewide benefits in terms of recreational and scenic amenities began to receive more emphasis, and this outlook continues to the present day.” To the statewide benefits already identified in the 1996 ORPS document can be added biodiversity and carbon sequestration.
4 Question: What are the relative costs (in terms of schools, roads, utilities …) to the towns of public lands vs. private lands? How much per acre does the private land cost the town? How much does public land cost the town?
a Answer: The local revenue sources of sales tax and property taxes are not based on the use of local services or on the cost of a property in terms of its impact on the schools, roads, utilities, etc. For example, a retired couple with no children still pays local school taxes. Rather the local costs are paid for by taxing all local property owners based on the value of their property. One can argue that the local services should be paid for based on use or that they should be paid for based on ability to pay (income). However, that will take legislative action at the state level to change. In the meantime, local services are paid for by local property taxes on all taxable land and by a portion of the state sales tax, irrespective of the amount of services used.
5 Question: What other revenue sources could be considered for funding local and regional services: Park admission fees for out-of-staters, tolls on major roads at park entrances, carbon taxes, consumption taxes, taxes on luxury items, real estate transfer taxes, federal payments to state for provision of ecosystem services on forest preserve lands, ….?
a Answer: Great question: As I said in Answer #1, my understanding is that taxing other sources for local use would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
6 Question: How might timber tax abatement programs be expanded to encourage wildlife habitat preservation?
a Answer: I assume this is referring to land that qualifies under Real Property Tax Law, Section 480-a. Under Section 480-a, tracts of privately owned forest land of at least 50 contiguous acres are eligible for a tax exemption. To qualify, the tract must be committed to continued forest crop production for an initial period of 10 years and must have an “approved management plan” to ensure the continued production of a merchantable forest crop.
This is another great question. However, modifying the tax laws would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
3 comments:
Questions and Answers from the August 22nd Conference
The following questions were received in written form at the end of the Conference. The answers are given by me, Dave Wolff, and are based on my knowledge of the topic of state land valuation in the Adirondack Forest Preserve.
Based on the some of the questions received, it became obvious that assessments and taxes are broad subjects and mean different things to different people.
The Conference focused on the valuation (assessment) of taxable state land in the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Go to http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/wolfferct-92016-sources-uses-assessed-value-property-funds-education-ppt-powerpoint/ to see a picture that tries to put this focus in the context of the bigger topic of local assessments and taxes.
Some questions were valid but dealt with areas of assessment and taxation that were not the focus of the Conference, and are outside my expertise. For example, a number of questions were about additional revenue sources to pay for local services. In general, it is my understanding that additional revenue sources would require legislative action at the state level. This is a valid topic, but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
1 Question: Why are local services based on property taxes on public and private lands?
a Answer: While this is outside the conference scope, my understanding is that local governments have two sources of local tax revenue, property taxes and a portion of the state sales tax. Local governments must pay for locally generated costs such as schools, police, and fire departments as well as unfunded mandates from above. My understanding is that additional revenue sources would require legislative approval at the state level.
Given that property taxes are one source of local revenue, the state passed legislation in 1886 allowing the Forest Preserve land in the Adirondack Park to be taxed, as if privately owned.
2 Question: Why not explore other ways to pay for local services, such as carbon taxes, consumption taxes, luxury taxes, real estate transfer taxes...?
a Answer: Great question: As I said in Answer #1, I think that taxing other sources for local use would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
3 Question: Why expect land owners -- public or private-- to pay taxes on values that they are providing for society at large, such as clean air and water, biodiversity, carbon sequestration? Does not this punish good land stewardship?
a Answer: The issue is one of balancing the cost (local Adirondack towns and villages) with the benefit (all the citizens of New York State.) Quoting from the ORPS document: Compensating Local Governments for Loss of Tax Base Due to State Ownership of Land, (September 1996): “The practice of taxing state land in New York began in 1886, when legislation permitting taxation of the forest preserve (i.e., state-owned land in the Adirondack and Catskill regions) was enacted. Two factors are generally accepted as having motivated the original extension of taxability to the forest preserve. The first was the very large acreage which the state owns in many of the towns in the Adirondack and Catskill areas. The second factor was the realization that, while state ownership conveyed benefits to residents of other areas of the state, costs were largely borne locally. In the late 1800s, the benefit which received the most attention was the provision of watershed areas to supply the heavily-populated downstate metropolitan region with a high-quality and reliable water supply. Later on, the statewide benefits in terms of recreational and scenic amenities began to receive more emphasis, and this outlook continues to the present day.” To the statewide benefits already identified in the 1996 ORPS document can be added biodiversity and carbon sequestration.
4 Question: What are the relative costs (in terms of schools, roads, utilities …) to the towns of public lands vs. private lands? How much per acre does the private land cost the town? How much does public land cost the town?
a Answer: The local revenue sources of sales tax and property taxes are not based on the use of local services or on the cost of a property in terms of its impact on the schools, roads, utilities, etc. For example, a retired couple with no children still pays local school taxes. Rather the local costs are paid for by taxing all local property owners based on the value of their property. One can argue that the local services should be paid for based on use or that they should be paid for based on ability to pay (income). However, that will take legislative action at the state level to change. In the meantime, local services are paid for by local property taxes on all taxable land and by a portion of the state sales tax, irrespective of the amount of services used.
5 Question: What other revenue sources could be considered for funding local and regional services: Park admission fees for out-of-staters, tolls on major roads at park entrances, carbon taxes, consumption taxes, taxes on luxury items, real estate transfer taxes, federal payments to state for provision of ecosystem services on forest preserve lands, ….?
a Answer: Great question: As I said in Answer #1, my understanding is that taxing other sources for local use would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
6 Question: How might timber tax abatement programs be expanded to encourage wildlife habitat preservation?
a Answer: I assume this is referring to land that qualifies under Real Property Tax Law, Section 480-a. Under Section 480-a, tracts of privately owned forest land of at least 50 contiguous acres are eligible for a tax exemption. To qualify, the tract must be committed to continued forest crop production for an initial period of 10 years and must have an “approved management plan” to ensure the continued production of a merchantable forest crop.
This is another great question. However, modifying the tax laws would require legislative action at the state level. This is certainly a very valid topic; but one that is well beyond the focus of the Conference.
Post a Comment