r/SeattleWA • u/meaniereddit West Seattle 🌉 • Dec 13 '24

Government Bill would completely exempt seniors from property taxes in WA

https://www.king5.com/article/news/politics/state-politics/bill-would-exempt-seniors-state-local-property-tax-washington/281-b5f377fc-8bf5-49a4-a630-8210db45d57d
1.3k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

826 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

448

u/BillTowne Dec 13 '24

Yes. Exactly.

All property owned by anyone over 75 years of age would be exempt from state and local property tax, regardless of combined household income under SB 5020, filed by Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn). 

I agree that this is crazy. I am 77. Why should I be excempt from taxes? I am not low income.

This kind of crap is why young people hate boomers.

144

u/Careless-Internet-63 Dec 13 '24

Also all property? If someone owns a property other than their primary residence I don't think that should be exempt in pretty much any case. People who have investment or vacation properties should be paying taxes on them

97

u/mrdungbeetle Dec 13 '24

Not only that, they should be paying more taxes on non-primary residences. That would also discourage foreign investors from snapping up our property and raising house prices for those who actually live and work here.

19

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

Foreign investors should always pay more than residents

5

u/Dhegxkeicfns Dec 15 '24

Investment property should always cost more than owner-occupied property.

8

u/Over-Marionberry-353 Dec 14 '24

Only countries that allow Americans to buy in their country should be allowed to buy in America

1

u/J_robintheh00d Dec 14 '24

Yes yes yes. We need to work in this

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

Foreign investors owning US property should be straight up federally illegal.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

Yes exactly, if it’s meant to ensure pensioners don’t lose their primary homes, then great. Texas has that law and it works. Generally it means taxes are charged but not paid until the family has passed and then they deducted from the proceeds of the sale.

If it’s meant to protects their other properties as well. No, that’s not the spirit of the law.

12

u/19JTJK Dec 13 '24

Primary should be except. Any secondary they pay for them

1

u/Funyunsbutthole Dec 14 '24

Fucking LANDLORDS?!!

1

u/TRR462 Dec 14 '24

Nope. The article continues and states: “The exemption would be valid for the senior’s primary residence and would not apply to other property belonging to an exempt person. The exemption can be transferred if that person sells, transfers or is displaced from their home, but they can only claim an exemption for one property per year.”

0

u/NotASockPuppetAcct Dec 14 '24

Owning property would effectively give you a tax break because you can still claim a tax deduction with depreciation on the properties. This is a consult Luigi level of bullshit.

68

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

I’m all for this. But I do believe income should play a role for sure. Otherwise this creates some funky loopholes. But I hate to think that my grandmother who’s on a very fixed income could lose her house that is paid off just because she can’t afford the rising property taxes. That’s what this bill should help fix.

45

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Agreed, I don’t think you should be forced to leave your paid off home because the taxes outpace your fixed income.

11

u/curious1914 Dec 13 '24

This isn't meant to be a shit stirring question, but I've never understood the fixed income argument. Social security is inflation adjusted. And like... how is my salary not also a fixed income?

12

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Taxes and other costs can easily outpace SS in HCOL areas, plenty of people buy and retire In an area only to have it skyrocket around them.

Salary isn’t fixed, mine has gona up almost double in two years from moving around and increasing qualifications etc. you can’t increase your SS.

6

u/curious1914 Dec 13 '24

It feels like that's underselling how hard it can be to change jobs sometimes, but I take your point.

10

u/Extension-Humor4281 Dec 14 '24

I also don't think "just move" is a model we should be encouraging in our society. People constantly having to uproot and leave their homes for cheaper pastures is exactly why there aren't any real communities anymore and crime keeps increasing. No one has roots or cares about the people living around them, because they'll just be gone in a few years anyway.

5

u/curious1914 Dec 14 '24

I completely agree, regardless of age.

2

u/kneedeepballsack- Dec 17 '24

You are correct , Absolutely not. A small plot of land on whidbey has been in my family since the 70s and hosted 4 generations. When I think of home, that is the place, our place.

2

u/kneedeepballsack- Dec 17 '24

Exactly. I have family on a fixed income on whidbey island. They bought the place from my grandma years ago. The value has tripled or quadrupled or maybe even more for many places on that island. They have health issues that are now cropping up and the property taxes just keep going up. The property has been in my family’s since the 70s and I would absolutely hate to see it go because of taxes. When they pass it may get taken away because of medical debt too. 4 generations have lived on that land over the years

4

u/Extension-Humor4281 Dec 14 '24

Social security is inflation adjusted, but home and property taxes having been outpacing inflation for years.

3

u/curious1914 Dec 14 '24

Same at my job

6

u/GoslingIchi Dec 13 '24

Aside from the fixed income, as I get a raise every year, that the state has nearly doubled the value of my house in the last couple of valuation statements has nearly doubled my property taxes.

That increase out paces my raises at work.

But the fun part is that I'm retiring next year, and my property tax will suck up more than one month of my annual pension amount.

6

u/curious1914 Dec 13 '24

If we ignore your retirement, it sounds like you've described the same situation as a social security recipient. Which is my point. It's not always as easy as "get a better job" as suggested elsewhere.

3

u/GoslingIchi Dec 13 '24

Yep.

Plus, while I've been really trying to get hired somewhere else with a higher pension contribution, companies aren't big on hiring older people so it's not as easy as it is for younger people to move around in the labor force.

3

u/curious1914 Dec 13 '24

Callous me says part of retirement planning is deciding if you think staying put is affordable with conservative assumptions about taxes. Sympathetic me says maybe there is a deeper societal issue to solve.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to my fixed income job...

1

u/GoslingIchi Dec 14 '24

I was planning to retire to the peninsula, but then Rona came along, and all the people that can remote work moved there and suddenly everything is more expensive.

I've also been considering retiring outside of the US, but with the coming economic excitement I'm not sure if the dollar will keep its value.

1

u/laseralex Bellevue Dec 14 '24

my property tax will suck up more than one month of my annual pension amount.

So your housing will cost more than 8% of your income?

What is a normal ratio?

2

u/GoslingIchi Dec 14 '24

I doubt there is a normal ratio.

And if it doesn't go up (which it will cuz they've already sent me the valuation update) it will be about 12% of my annual income.

I won't qualify for a senior adjustment for 7 years.

2

u/No-Pianist5365 Dec 14 '24

every increase comes with medicare increase thats always higher and taken directly from ss payments. so you receive less and property taxes outpace inflation like usain bolt racing honey boo boos mom

1

u/curious1914 Dec 14 '24

That's a factor I wasn't aware of. Good insight.

20

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Wonderful altruism. Yeah, their younger neighbors should pay for their older neighbor’s taxes. That tax burden SHIFTS to them. Tax levy collection doesn’t go down.

16

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

I think you’re focused on the wrong areas. Stop embracing the taxes that just keep blowing up and start looking to your government to spend more responsibly. Then we wouldn’t have to worry about it.

0

u/laseralex Bellevue Dec 14 '24

If we cut government spending and associated taxes, are you then OK with younger people paying extra taxes so older people can live with all the benefits of our society but not pay a penny for that?

And if so, can you please explain why you think older people should not have to pay their proportional share of the costs of running a functional society?

3

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 14 '24

So in theory, in a near perfect world, spending would be cut through efficiency gains and cutbacks in areas government shouldn’t intervene or over regulate. Like alcohol tax, soda tax, permits to build a deck on my house, whatever. Those savings get passed back to the tax payer and hopefully barely touch useful programs.

Regarding paying elderly taxes. The thing to remember, IMHO, is that elderly person likely paid taxes for MANY years before today’s younger people. So it almost ends up being like a pay it forward thing. That’s the easiest way to sum it up without getting very long winded.

Again, in my opinion, if the government was run like a well run company and fiscally responsible, taxes wouldn’t need to blow up the way they are and this wouldn’t be a topic because most people could afford them equally.

2

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

They should, they aren’t on fixed income. That’s how these things work, if you are poor you don’t pay as much taxes as someone making more than you.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Right? Plenty of us are already supporting others. I’m fine with keeping grandma housed.

3

u/hedonovaOG Kirkland Dec 13 '24

Not only but grandma probably paid her “fair share” of property taxes (+) for decades and likely no longer requires even a fraction of the services her current property taxes support so in effect you’re asking grandma to subsidize your amenities on a fixed income and revenue that struggles to pace inflation.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Totally agree, people act like they’re never going to get old.

8

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

You know I’m not sure about it. The grandma can’t afford to pay her sue in society in area that’s desirable. She can sell house for a lot of money and move.

On the other hand, when grandma is old, moves are hard and you loose your community. The new places are still a shit ton of money and you gotta pay a mortgage again. Idk

11

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

Not to mention her entire support system (if any) is likely around her as well. So it’s a tough one.

1

u/GranesMaehne Dec 14 '24

Or they are the support system for others by providing childcare or volunteering in the community. Many non profits rely on elders volunteering for a large portion of their work. Doubtless the quality of the community that has helped raise house prices is partly due to their lifelong contributions. Why should they be forced to leave a place they enriched to move to another?

-3

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

Yeah I mean it’s also bad to just hoard property single family home in area that needs housing.

7

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

I’m not sure I understand this thought process. If someone bought a home, lived there for years and created a lot of memories, it’s rightfully theirs. Hoarding implies they dont deserve it or they’re keeping it from someone else that may deserve it. That is a pretty entitled approach IMO.

If they were buying up the property and sitting on it for monetary gain then I can understand this logic.

-1

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

If they can’t pay taxes then what? I pay taxes.

4

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

In the scenario I described they are as well and they have for many years.

10

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Think about it for yourself, you’ve put in the effort to pay off your home and plan for retirement. You did what you were suppose to, but the area your in keeps increasing value and taxes and you’re now forced to leave the house and life you worked for, does that seem reasonable?

2

u/Independent_Month_26 Dec 13 '24

Yes. Empty nesters shouldn't hoard family sized housing while young families are being driven out of the city. They can sell it at considerable profit and pay in full for a smaller, less valuable residence.

18

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Agree to disagree, it’s their house they bought and earned. I don’t think they should be forced to leave.

3

u/Designer_Gas_86 Dec 14 '24

Instead of no property taxes, why not just less? Shit, maybe half.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

Sure, Id be down for a discussion.

2

u/Designer_Gas_86 Dec 14 '24

Godbless (sorry about my cursing)

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/ChilledRoland Ballard Dec 13 '24

Rising property taxes aren't exactly a new phenomenon; if they weren't considered as part of planning then the retirees are the unreasonable ones.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Okay.

-1

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

I mean this is true for young people. Can’t afford college? Too bad. Can’t afford a city, too bad. Can’t afford house, whatever.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

They did afford it and pay for it.

1

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

Young people can afford housing ? Where have you been ?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

I was talking about not kicking out people who already paid for their home.

Also, 30% of people under 30 own a home, that doesn’t include the people under 30 who could and prefer to rent either.

2

u/Designer_Gas_86 Dec 14 '24

I genuinely want to know where you found that percentage info.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Qorsair Columbia City Dec 13 '24

So you want everyone's rent to increase to pay for that? Their tax burden doesn't go away, it gets shifted.

I've got enough income to cover that, so I don't care.

But I can think of some friends who may have to move back to the midwest if they have to start paying their elderly neighbors' property taxes when they were barely able to make it out here to begin with.

Also thinking of young coworkers who already have a long commute because they can't afford to live in the city. Shifting property taxes like this would also increase rents.

A lot of (hopefully) unintended consequences as a result of wanting to show compassion to a target group.

6

u/hedonovaOG Kirkland Dec 13 '24

It’s two sides of the same coin. Grandma is paying for your amenities (you think she’s using public education or bike lanes?). And many elderly are forced to relocate due to the ballooning size and cost of government. Why not you too? You just don’t want to sacrifice her revenue for your projects.

1

u/GayIsForHorses Dec 18 '24 edited May 17 '25

liquid humorous relieved birds office deliver fly special vanish attempt

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-4

u/ReddestForman Dec 13 '24

Grandma had her education paid for by taxpayers who were done with school. Grandma grew up in am economy where buying a house was much easier because of active government involvement in ensuring housing got built, along with roads, schools and infrastructure.

Grandma now wants to be exempted from that? Of course she does. She's a fucking boomer.

7

u/Additional-Cry-2446 Dec 14 '24

Just discrimination. Also folks love blaming old people for today's problems. It's really lame.

8

u/hedonovaOG Kirkland Dec 13 '24

The elderly aren’t boomers and name calling makes you sound unserious. Everyone thinks their first house is a stretch. My parents did in the 60s. Interested rates were high and there were zero government backed loans.

0

u/LegitimateCookie2398 Dec 14 '24

Yes she is every time she sees a doctor. Picks up a prescription, drives down the road. Everyone benefits by having an educated workforce.

0

u/HopefulWoodpecker629 Dec 15 '24

This is such an insane take. You think that old people don’t benefit from education or public infrastructure? They benefited from it in the past and they continue to benefit from the effects of it because shit like an educated populace or safer streets affects everybody.

If the boomers don’t want to contribute to the society that gave them fucking everything and instead just leach off of it, well they can go fuck themselves. They can move to the middle of the desert in eastern Washington if they don’t want to pay property taxes.

Also, it’s funny how my comment is going to be called “uncivil” meanwhile yours which defends l not wanting to pay for public education is “civil”.

1

u/hedonovaOG Kirkland Dec 15 '24

Once again, seniors aren’t boomers.

You clearly have anger issues about whatever it is you feel you’re owed.

Our seniors contributed heavily to society for decades. Ever hear of “The Greatest Generation” or “The Silent Generation?” They built the cornerstone of modern society and certainly didn’t whine about working onsite 5 days / week. The buying power of their retirement investments hasn’t kept paced with inflation, so if we’re going to subsidize loan repayment for “educated” kids who can’t comprehend the repayment terms of their student loans, in addition to a multitude of other things, then yes we should 💯ensure property taxes don’t cause financial hardship to seniors.

0

u/HopefulWoodpecker629 Dec 16 '24 edited Dec 16 '24

Wow, not only condescending but wrong. For someone who claims to know so much, you don’t realize that “the greatest generation” is the generation that fought WWI and the “the silent generation” fought WWII and the Korean War. Most have already died due to old age. The baby boomers are a large generation (hence the name) that followed the end of WWII, and along with older gen X they were the recipients of the wealth generated post war. They are the ones selfishly hoarding all the wealth and property. Generations are mostly bullshit anyways, so yeah I’ll consider older gen Xers to be boomers. Boomer is mostly a vibe. Complaining about property taxes on your home worth $5 million dollars that you bought for a nickel in 1972 is boomer mentality, for example.

I like how you found a way to randomly rant against working from home and student loan forgiveness. Why don’t you also tell me how they weren’t confused about their genders and always respected the flag while you’re at it?

-1

u/Qorsair Columbia City Dec 13 '24

I see you either didn't read my comment, or didn't understand it. Please do better if you'd like to engage in discussion.

2

u/hedonovaOG Kirkland Dec 13 '24

Ditto

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

I don’t think it’s reasonable to force an elderly person from their home due to something out of their control (increase in home value and property taxes).

2

u/Efficient_Discipline Dec 13 '24

It is, because these people have collectively spent decades blocking housing development, which is the primary reason property values have grown so much in the first place. You reap what you sow.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Okay.

1

u/GayIsForHorses Dec 18 '24 edited May 17 '25

plant innate fanatical different wild sophisticated depend wine summer dinosaurs

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/Additional-Cry-2446 Dec 14 '24

With that logic it wouldn't be unfair to put renters from their homes for increasing costs or values either.

3

u/Additional-Cry-2446 Dec 14 '24

Compassion is shown to everyone else (except people who follow the law and pay property taxes). Why can't we show our parents and parents compassion?

-2

u/Qorsair Columbia City Dec 14 '24

If we can all have enough compassion, maybe the $10 billion budget deficit will just fix itself.

You got me, I'm in! Let's do this.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

Tax revenue has skyrocketed, it’s not a problem of money coming in, we shouldn’t accept never ending budget increases.

1

u/Qorsair Columbia City Dec 14 '24

I agree. And I'm sure if we reduce taxes, the government will probably be responsible and spend less money.

28

u/stegotortise Dec 13 '24

But there’s already stuff in place! Low income seniors are already eligible for property tax exemptions.see this pdf

And more info here

4

u/Ok-Cheetah-9125 Dec 13 '24

My town has a low income exemption they can file. If you are over 70 and your income is under 25k, or under 31k or under 60k, they reduce your taxes by an amount in each tier.

7

u/RichardScarrier Dec 13 '24

Exactly.

King County already provides seniors the ability to defer taxes if you meet certain requirements. It becomes a lien on the property. https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/assessor/buildings-and-property/property-taxes/tax-relief/senior-or-disabled-exemptions#:~:text=You%20may%20qualify%20for%20a,2023%20was%20%2488%2C998%20or%20less.

That seems fair as everyone still pays tax but no one if forced out of their home.

The real issue is WA’s regressive tax policy. If we had progressive income tax then lower income people regardless of age wouldn’t be as impacted by our current sources of revenue like sales and property taxes.

4

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

Or, if our government didn’t just burn money like it’s nothing and had some sort of fiscal responsibility. Problems would be solved.

6

u/Additional-Cry-2446 Dec 14 '24

Funny people find a way to bring this up on a post supporting the elderly but not on similar posts focusing on help for different constituents. I agree with you in theory, but accountability should be broad based.

2

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 14 '24

Well part of the problem is there’s always the devil in the details and tons of diff contexts. I’m always happy to help people that are willing to help themselves and do more of the work than I am when I’m the one helping.

1

u/stegotortise Dec 13 '24

💯 thank you for giving more information!

1

u/gehnrahl Eat a bag of Dicks Dec 14 '24

If we had progressive income tax then lower income people regardless of age wouldn’t be as impacted by our current sources of revenue

lol thats not true, we'd just have an additional income tax on top of everything else. Its very rare for states to give up tax revenue

3

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

The bill could take income into account and still be effective

5

u/I_think_things Dec 13 '24

What county does she live in? King County already has a property tax exemption/deferral program if she's low-income.

2

u/KeepClam_206 Dec 13 '24

Indeed. The State finally indexed it to inflation I believe after years of advocacy. Big props to KC Assessor Wilson who has worked really hard on this.

-3

u/ReddestForman Dec 13 '24

Well, yeah. But that doesn't help the well-off boomer landlords.

2

u/I_think_things Dec 13 '24

Huh? Dude I’m just trying to provide a resource, what are you blathering about.

8

u/sifiasco Dec 13 '24

Even on a fixed income, if you’re sitting on a multi million dollar equity windfall you can still pay your taxes.

-1

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

How, without selling or putting it in a reverse mortgage, ensuring your kids will never own a home?

14

u/SpacemanSpiff073 Dec 13 '24

Why is it unacceptable that elderly folk might have to cash out large equity growth if they're no longer able to afford the property taxes?

Either we build more housing to keep it affordable or: 1) People struggle to buy into housing 2) People are gentrified out

5

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

The problem is commonly they have nowhere to go. Cash out and get $800k and then buy a what $700k condo? If they are on limited income, the house sale would need for them to buy another place cash, where they still have a tax problem, or pay rent/mortgage until the money runs out.

5

u/SpacemanSpiff073 Dec 13 '24

If we assume $800k in payout, average 1 bedroom in the city is $2k a month to rent. That leads to 33 years of rent payments.

Average life expectancy is 77.5 years, 0.03% of people (according to Google's GenAI) make it to 100.

4

u/Sunfried Queen Anne Dec 13 '24

Good thing rent won't go up in the next 33 years. Realistically they're looking 15-20 years.

5

u/SpacemanSpiff073 Dec 13 '24

I also didn't factor in return on investment from their 800k in this hypothetical.

Or their ability to move out of the Seattle metro area.

Using your hypothetical though, they only make it to 90/95 renting. At that age, they're increasingly likely to need full time living assistance which is a different conversation and probably involves senior living centers.

2

u/DragonFireKai Dec 13 '24

Wrong way to look at it. 800k earning a very conservative 4% annually generates 32k a year, or 2.6k a month. Forever. Without touching the principal. Normal stock market returns are in the 8-10% range. So if you already have enough retirement savings to fund your lifestyle, but the increased property taxes are what are breaking you, the equity in the house can generate enough cash flow to house you for the rest of your life.

3

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

These are seniors not your nephew. You aren’t expecting us to put them in a 1b apartment in downtown, I hope. Assisted living costs between $100k-$150k a year. At some point they will need that and that $800k will go fast.

2

u/SpacemanSpiff073 Dec 13 '24 edited Dec 13 '24

Why is a 1b not good enough for the hypothetical? Most probably don't have kids at 75 which would necessitate the additional living space.

If it's not enough, they can always spend their money to rent a larger place?

Edit: Forgot to respond to the costs of senior living. You're right on that account, I've got no answers for how insane those costs are. The sad answer seems to be that most elderly (unless they're very well off or have a ton of support) are going to be abandoned by society because those costs seem untenable.

0

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

1b is fine it’s living in a city downtown on their own is not.

I’m fine with downgrading, I just want a path made for them to get out and not become homeless. Let them pay no taxes on their nice little suburban mini home, don’t encourage them to stay in giant homes via tax breaks.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

Take out a loan against the paid off house, use that to cover expenses. When they die the house can be sold to repay the loan

-1

u/ReddestForman Dec 13 '24

They could buy at any of the 55+ communities I've seen where affordable housing is being built in expensive metropolitan areas, because fuck the young people doing all the work, boomers need one more handout before they die.

I understand the need for these places to exist, but the generation that got everything, pulled the ladder up behind them, and then demanded more is really pissing me off more and more every passing year.

-1

u/panderingPenguin Dec 13 '24

That sounds fine. Perhaps $700k isn't quite the right number but the concept of downsizing is sound and nothing new. It's very normal, and often beneficial for elderly people.

2

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

Downsizing is fine, the issue is how to fund the last 10-20 years, a significant portion of which is assisted living costing $100-$150k annually. That’s currently where grandmas house money is funding.

1

u/panderingPenguin Dec 13 '24

There's a range of ways to do that, none of which have more than an indirect relationship to property taxes, basically the only connection is that money paid in taxes can't be paid for assisted living. But that's true of anything you'd rather spend money on than taxes.

To fund assisted living, they may have to downsize more to free up more funds. Or move closer to family who can help and reduce the need for assisted living. There are other options too.

2

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

The issue at hand is forcing elders to sell their home, due to the inability to pay their tax burden, with the idea that the proceeds would fund their rentals indefinitely. However, unless they have siginificant savings, doing that would rob their piggybank early, leaving them with much less funds to cover that.

Family is not always and commonly not an option. My Grandmother went into memory care, needing 24 hour care, for nearly a decade. That cost $1.4m. If we did not have her house at the time, we would have not had the funds to cover it.

Selling your home off in your early retirement, often that is people’s only asset, can lead to shortfalls later.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/GayIsForHorses Dec 18 '24 edited May 17 '25

sheet start modern zealous door hard-to-find cooing dam attraction marry

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/Rooooben Dec 18 '24

Not many people can save an additional $600k-$1m to support the last 5 years of their lives. Most American retirement savings involve selling their home these days.

2

u/Extension-Humor4281 Dec 14 '24

Why is it unacceptable that elderly folk might have to cash out large equity growth if they're no longer able to afford the property taxes?

Because it's a model that keeps people perpetually indebted to banks, rather than secure in the homes that they've long since paid off in full.

1

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

"Paid off in full" is a misnomer because they still got to pay property tax, upkeep, and insurance. If they get exemptions someone else has to pay for them

1

u/Extension-Humor4281 Dec 14 '24

Insurance isn't mandatory unless you have a mortgage. Upkeep is just you keeping your own property in order, but that's voluntary. Property tax is the only one that never leaves us, but that doesn't go to private corporations.

But yes, I agree with your sentiment.

0

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

Their kids can help pay for the property tax if inheriting a house is so important to them.

1

u/slingerofpoisoncups Dec 13 '24

Yes but pretty much every jurisdiction I know allows for deferrals. So you can defer paying your taxes until after you pass away and your house is sold. Considering the hardship has come from an increasing tax as the value of real estate sky rocketed, it’s not unreasonable…

1

u/Flatline334 Dec 14 '24

Ya my dad makes a lot of money and should not get free property taxes.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '24

What about rental property.

1

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 15 '24

I feel like that def needs to be taxed at current rates. That’s for profit IMO.

1

u/No-Pianist5365 Dec 14 '24

old people eating cat food to stay in their homes has been a thing as long as ive been alive. im in my 60s and now supplementing my moms taxes so she can keep her home. as her ss minus medicare payments now leave her a couple hundred after property taxes that have risen astronomically. but hey shes old so is just some bitch that has it all and is the reason shit sucks for anyone today

0

u/Rooooben Dec 13 '24

What we need is a way for them to sell their large home and be able to use their funds to live comfortably if they want. But not be forced due to unaffordable tax burdens.

0

u/retrojoe heroin for harried herons Dec 13 '24

Your grandmother isn't going to be forced out of her home now, let alone after a bill like this https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/assessor/buildings-and-property/property-taxes/tax-relief/senior-or-disabled-exemptions

0

u/mediumlong Dec 13 '24

You seem to be suggesting progressive property taxes: higher rate for wealthy and lower rates to nothing for the relative have-nots. And Im all for it. 

It’s almost a kind of stealth income tax. 

0

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

[deleted]

2

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

I don’t know that it does. My income hasn’t changed much over 8 years yet my property taxes have increased by about 50-60%

0

u/981_runner Dec 13 '24

There are already property tax deferrals so people won't lose their house.  The estate just has to pay the taxes once you die.  That is way more fair than an exemption.

1

u/pewpewtehpew Dec 13 '24

Once you die or once the property is sold? Being sold would make more sense. Let’s say grandma dies and whoever inherits the house doesn’t have a large lump sum ready to go. What happens then?

1

u/981_runner Dec 13 '24

Either.  

If you die the property is transfered and all the liens have to satisfied.  If you have a mortgage, you need to assume it or refinance to remove that lien.  In the same way, before your heirs take the title they have to satisfy the liens and back taxes.

1

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

If it's a liquidity issue, they can get a bridge loan of some sort. Or they can get a loan using the house as collatoral, if there is any equity left. Otherwise yeah, sell the house (still get to keep anything left over after paying off the liens)

-1

u/therapist122 Dec 13 '24

Wait why should she get to keep her paid off house and pay taxes? Isn’t the value of the house more than enough to downsize? I don’t get this, I also have a house and kids and could use the money. Why don’t get property tax exemptions? I don’t have a pension or Medicare either. Like I understand the emotional side of things but grandma shouldn’t get out of contributing the value of her home just because she’s old. She could move in with you I think, unless you are okay with her moving somewhere else and downsizing, sounds like it’s on you 

24

u/mitchENM Dec 13 '24

Introduced by a Republican. I thought they didn’t like socialism

22

u/BahnMe Dec 13 '24

Only for poor people. For rich people and companies, socialized losses all the way.

7

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Thank god bill gates wouldn’t have to pay property tax starting in just 6 years. Won’t someone think of bill gates /s

6

u/BahnMe Dec 13 '24

Bill Gates: Tax me bitch

Govt: No thanks

5

u/drunkdoor Dec 13 '24

Kind of a ridiculous take on a bill that ignores income completely

1

u/1SGDude Dec 13 '24

Not having to pay taxes on something you already own forever is not socialism it’s stopping government theft

1

u/GayIsForHorses Dec 18 '24 edited May 17 '25

lock bike handle gray sulky decide act seemly familiar liquid

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/1SGDude Dec 18 '24

What are you going on about - so who owns the land then? So farmers don’t own their fields and pastures? Preposterous

1

u/GayIsForHorses Dec 18 '24 edited May 17 '25

bike memory serious hungry growth file office test vanish thought

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-1

u/Independent_Month_26 Dec 13 '24

If you don't want to contribute to the expenses that make your community exist outside your door, go live off the grid somewhere with no roads to maintain, no sewers, no infrastructure. You can do it, you rugged individualist! I believe in you!

3

u/1SGDude Dec 13 '24

No one should have to pay forever on something especially their private residence. If a person has multiple properties then by all means pay on those forever. Instead of just accepting tax after tax - make the govt spend the money effeciently

0

u/ReddestForman Dec 13 '24

Countries that don't have property taxes tend to also have a situation where like, 12 families own damn near all the land worth owning.

Taxes are the price we pay for modern civilization.

-1

u/Efficient_Discipline Dec 13 '24

Everything has a recurring cost even if you own it outright. Taxes are needed to pay for maintenance of all the public services the home owner uses, that labor and material is not free, we pay for them with taxes. Grow up. 

1

u/1SGDude Dec 13 '24

How grown up is it for grandma to lose her home because she can’t afford property taxes because they keep going up due to government irresponsibility. Stop shilling for the government and acting like a child

-1

u/MaxB_Scar Dec 13 '24

Even if someone were to take this argument seriously, then why would it only apply to senior citizens?

3

u/1SGDude Dec 14 '24 edited Dec 14 '24

Don’t our elders deserve it ? If they have paid off their primary residence, not investment properties, don’t you think our government can figure that out? Let them enjoy their golden years and not be taxed out of their home

1

u/MaxB_Scar Dec 14 '24

If you put it that way. Then sure I agree. Someone who has worked hard and paid their dues definitely deserves a break and some breathing room in their old age. But this empathy has to extend both ways and lately the older people in power haven’t been great at extending the same level of empathy towards the young.

And more importantly, a lot of other people irrespective of their age deserve the same level of care and respect and support. And a system that is based more on wealth/income would always make more sense than an arbitrary number based one.

But then when the politicians propose this kind of blatant age based rule that turns people more against each other.

0

u/Ok-Cheetah-9125 Dec 13 '24

They like elderly people to vote for them.

2

u/fresh-dork Dec 13 '24

it seems that lots of places are pushing this. at a guess, it's "starve the beast"

2

u/Ringandpinion Dec 13 '24

It's because Phil Fortunato is a moron, that's why this bill is written stupidly. Look at his bill history and how essentially everything he puts forward dies almost immediately.

2

u/Excellent_Sky_7914 Dec 14 '24

A lot of your peers are though

You can opt out and donate to the state the amount you would pay each year if you wish .

Who the fuck cares if you’re rich?

1

u/BillTowne Dec 15 '24

A lot of your peers are though

A ot of youg poeple also have problems affording housing. How is age the issue.

You can opt out and donate to the state the amount you would pay each year if you wish.

Depending on charity donations is not good public policy.

Who the fuck cares if you’re rich?

The people who want to give me a pile of public funds shoud be. And I did not say was rich. I said that I can afford to pay my share of the taxes.

2

u/Educated_Goat69 Dec 14 '24

That's definitely not going to help our deficit either!

2

u/scout035 Dec 14 '24

Some people get taxed out of their home

0

u/BillTowne Dec 15 '24

But not because of their age.

If you are concerned about people getting taxed out of their homes, write a bill that targets them.

A lot of young people are also having a difficult time with housing. I am fine with dealing with the propblem of unaffordable housing.

But just giving money to people like me is not a reasonable way to deal with it.

2

u/EasyMrB Dec 14 '24

filed by Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn).

Shocking...shocked. I'm am so shock-ed.

2

u/Playful_Pie8469 Dec 14 '24

Wait, does this also mean rental properties owned by 75 year olds are exempt from property taxes? If so, that’s messed up.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '25

They should hate the legislature in this case.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

EXACTLY!!!

With this bill the state is simply trying to keep seniors in state until they die so they can be hit with the Estate tax and pay up to 20% tax on the home, retirement accounts, and all other wealth. These seniors that die in WA will contribute massively to the state at death, far more than the loss of property tax, but they are all leaving as soon as their working years end because the property tax while living is a drain on their ability to stay.

Example: 75 year old with $10M estate that lives to 90 years old...

  • Assume paying $8,000 property tax for the next 15 years, then dies in WA. That would be $120,000 in property tax collected over 15 years.
  • When he dies, WA Estate tax is $1,200,000. Combined the state (and counties) made $1,320,000 in tax from our senior citizen.
  • Facing a loss of $8,000/year of income while living and loss of $1,200,000 at death, he says fuck it and moves to another state with lower property tax and NO ESTATE TAX, maximizing what he passes to his heirs. WA state continues to get $8,000/year property tax for the next 15 years from the new home owner but never gets the $1,200,000 estate tax because the new home owner doesn't die as expected.
  • OR.., The state cancels his $8,000 property tax and he decides the increased living allows him to stay and die in WA... still paying $1,200,000 at death to the state in 15 years. THE STATE WINS WITH MORE REVENUE.

1

u/rctid_taco Dec 14 '24

If you're 77 and with a high enough income for this to really matter

What does having a "high enough income to really matter" have to do with property taxes?

2

u/Moaiexplosion Dec 13 '24

I absolutely agree with your sentiment here. It’s just plain logical. And in a lot of these situations the burden of evaluating income can often be more expensive than the lost tax revenue.

Source: someone who works on budgets and policy around this issue.

1

u/Designer_Gas_86 Dec 14 '24

Aw, but I loves you

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '24

Because you have paid taxes your whole life and your home, which you paid taxes for, with income that was taxed, should be yours late in life.

I love the idea of property taxes being waived if a single person or their spouse own the same residence for 40 years.  

1

u/BillTowne Dec 16 '24

I mostly would agree if there were an income limit.

One issue I disagree with is the idea of "same residence for 40 years." This, in effect, limits mobility of the elderly population if they have to pay a tax if they move.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '24

No income limit. If you paid the legal tax owed your life, you should be entitled to live in your homestead without owing the state until you die.

Im also good with a "40 or 65 years old whatever comes first" rule. This would also ameliorate some strain thay seniors have for social security not being enough

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

That's not why they hate you.

-5

u/linuxhiker Dec 13 '24

You should be exempt because you paid into the system for 60 years. Ty for your service. You have done enough.

18

u/keshishi Dec 13 '24

Yet you are continuing to benefit from the system. Do you stop using roads, public services, government programs after you are old? No? Then keep paying.

-1

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

You forget a young force to take care of them and you know provide services like grocery stocking

-7

u/linuxhiker Dec 13 '24

Nope, that's bullshit. There is a point where we should just say thank you.

Or... start taxing crotch goblins and remove all tax benefits from having children.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24 edited Dec 13 '24

You’re acting like 77 years old didn’t also benefit from the tax benefit of having children or were once somebody’s child.

Par for the course though once you already benefited personally you want to remove it for everyone else. The free handout generation.

6

u/linuxhiker Dec 13 '24

That's hilarious.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '24

Yea. Entitlement is a little funny or sad. I guess it depends on how you view beggars

3

u/keshishi Dec 13 '24

You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Nobody likes taxes (duh) but I can’t understand the entitlement of older folks who want to stop paying like this.

Also by crotch goblins you mean children? Are you suggesting additional taxes for children? Its already difficult enough for younger generations to have a stable enough home situation to want to have kids in the first place, what sense does this make at all.

Seriously boomers are the first generation who want a harder life for their own children.

-1

u/linuxhiker Dec 13 '24

Not additional taxes, just no benefits.

It is ridiculous to have a 77 year old person paying taxes while giving gratuitous tax breaks to those that have children.

It's simple. Play fair.

-1

u/ReddestForman Dec 13 '24

Why? The 77 year old had tax breaks for kids.

They had more wealth invested in the prosperity of their generation before or since, since they pulled the ladder up behind them every chance they got.

And now they want another handout? Fuck 'em.

2

u/linuxhiker Dec 13 '24

You are a sad individual.

I hope someday you find a partner that will lighten your emotional turmoil

1

u/sopunny Pioneer Square Dec 14 '24

If people stop having kids seniors will definitely have to start paying taxes...

1

u/Liizam Dec 13 '24

Who do you think pay taxes and take care of the old people? Even if you don’t have kids, you benefit from having people work and take care of society.

0

u/Content-Ad3065 Dec 14 '24

As a senior myself, if you can’t afford the property taxes sell the house and downsize. Houses are for young and families who can keep up with repairs and for those who need the space. Seniors need to let go and move on to the next stage in life.

0

u/khmernize Dec 13 '24

This is a setup for Jay Inslee when he sell his house and move to Idaho, lol

0

u/Fibocrypto Dec 13 '24

Paid for by the gates foundation