For a story I’m working on concerning tax reform, I’m looking for a handful of moderate-income people who own their own home, with the house valued at less than $180,000, and who would agree to an analysis of how the tax reform proposal would affect their property taxes.
The ideal candidates would be professionals or working-class people, with a household income of more than $40,000. Think school teachers, mechanics, secretaries, young people with a starter house, that sort of thing. Or, retired people, also with a pension income of more than $40,000.
If you’re interested, please contact me at timb@thecoast.ca.
This article appears in Nov 19-25, 2009.
House value or assessment value, the latter I assume.
How about looking at all the underassessed properties ? I know of dozens.
Oh, did you get a copy of the ‘Management letter’ that comes from the auditor along with the audited financial statements ?
Yes, appraised value or assessed value?
I’ll report on both appraised and assessed value.
The assessment cap is bad public policy, imo, but it’s a somewhat separate issue from “tax reform.” I recognize that the two are tied up together in what people pay, and moving to the fee-for-service model will in effect do away with the assessment cap (and for that matter, any consideration of either appraised or assessed value), but we could get sidetracked with only a discussion of assessment caps. I’ll put all the information out there, and try to discuss it a bit, but my focus is on “tax reform.”
Is it even possible to find a place on the peninsula for under $200,000? Am I missing out on a wealth of reasonably priced homes?