What is this country coming to? New Hampshire is taxing people out of their homes by putting a price on the view from their windows. Granted, people will pay more for a home with a nice view, but estimating such values is subjective. The state of New Hampshire claims property values, and thus tax revenue, should reflect the assets of a location, including its view. Landowners claim their property values have increased so dramatically over the past ten years that they can no longer afford to live in their own homes. Some report a ten-year increase of up to six times their original property values. The maximum state assessment has gone from $20,000 to $200,000.
Greenville County paid 53.88% on every $1000 of valuation in taxes to the state, and that was back in 2003. Granted, New Hampshire has no income or sales tax. However, they tax interest and dividend income at 5% and inheritance estates at 18%. It strikes me as odd that a state would set things up this way. Income is fluid money, money that comes and goes according to the efforts of the individual. Income best reflects a person’s value to the community. Property does not earn income and money in savings has already gone through the income and taxation process. People living on fixed incomes coming from savings or investments and inheritance, do they really have the kind of resources to pay possibly 75% each year on taxes? In New Hampshire? I never thought of New Hampshire as an extremely wealthy state; wasn’t it chosen for electoral primaries because of its normalcy?
I suppose the premise is that property values are stable and provide a more predictable income for the state government. This just highlights the perspective that New Hampshire government cares more about its property than its people. Not living in New Hampshire, one cannot be certain of the final impact, but the mere idea sends us reeling. New Hampshire was one of the original thirteen states.
In the United Kingdom, income and national taxes can run as high as 50%. In Germany taxes run 45%, where as Italy charges 43% plus 40% on capital gains. Didn’t we found America on the premise that taxation without representation is unconscionable? How many really feel represented within their government today? Do the people of New Hampshire feel they are getting their money’s worth? We hire the people who make these rules by electing their employers. We the people are the board of directors for this nation. Are we going to allow this sort of underhanded dealing, or are we going to find, support, and elect officials who listen to their constituents?
What is this country coming to? New Hampshire is taxing people out of their homes by putting a price on the view from their windows. Granted, people will pay more for a home with a nice view, but estimating such values is subjective. The state of New Hampshire claims property values, and thus tax revenue, should reflect the assets of a location, including its view. Landowners claim their property values have increased so dramatically over the past ten years that they can no longer afford to live in their own homes. Some report a ten-year increase of up to six times their original property values. The maximum state assessment has gone from $20,000 to $200,000.
Greenville County paid 53.88% on every $1000 of valuation in taxes to the state, and that was back in 2003. Granted, New Hampshire has no income or sales tax. However, they tax interest and dividend income at 5% and inheritance estates at 18%. It strikes me as odd that a state would set things up this way. Income is fluid money, money that comes and goes according to the efforts of the individual. Income best reflects a person’s value to the community. Property does not earn income and money in savings has already gone through the income and taxation process. People living on fixed incomes coming from savings or investments and inheritance, do they really have the kind of resources to pay possibly 75% each year on taxes? In New Hampshire? I never thought of New Hampshire as an extremely wealthy state; wasn’t it chosen for electoral primaries because of its normalcy?
I suppose the premise is that property values are stable and provide a more predictable income for the state government. This just highlights the perspective that New Hampshire government cares more about its property than its people. Not living in New Hampshire, one cannot be certain of the final impact, but the mere idea sends us reeling. New Hampshire was one of the original thirteen states.
In the United Kingdom, income and national taxes can run as high as 50%. In Germany taxes run 45%, where as Italy charges 43% plus 40% on capital gains. Didn’t we found America on the premise that taxation without representation is unconscionable? How many really feel represented within their government today? Do the people of New Hampshire feel they are getting their money’s worth? We hire the people who make these rules by electing their employers. We the people are the board of directors for this nation. Are we going to allow this sort of underhanded dealing, or are we going to find, support, and elect officials who listen to their constituents?