Taxation of Ccommon Property > HOA Forum

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: Taxation of Ccommon Property

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author

Messages

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/07/2008 12:51 AM
In another threat, Mary posted the following " The only break HOAs have gotten is a break on property taxes for the common areas and this is a very substantial tax break for communities with lots of high-cost amenities. This law allows HOAs to consolidate common area parcels into a single parcel taxed on a value of only $500. You can imagine the tax break if the HOA has a $5 million clubhouse, tennis courts, swimming pools, etc. A tax bill in the tens of thousands might be reduced to less than $10. Proponents of this measure argued that higher taxes on common areas was a form of double taxation." After the statewide property tax revolt last year (which included the ouster of the Mayor of Indianapolis), Indiana took what may be a novel step, eliminating taxation of common property of homeowner associations. Value of such real estate was subsumed in the valuation of individual units. It was viewed by some as eliminating a form of double taxation, as Mary observed. Is this practice common in other states?

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/07/2008 12:51 AM
Sorry, Mary, I meant "thread"

MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:1865

08/07/2008 6:02 AM
our common areas are not taxed.

MaryA1
(Arizona)

Posts:2498

08/07/2008 7:37 AM
George, You stated: "Value of such real estate was subsumed in the valuation of individual units." That's fine for condo assn's, but in a planned community the assn owns the common areas -- no portion of the common areas are owned by the members. So, the city/county/state would be eating the property taxes once collected from planned community HOAs.

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/07/2008 8:03 AM
Posted By MaryA1 on 08/07/2008 7:37 AM George, You stated: "Value of such real estate was subsumed in the valuation of individual units." That's fine for condo assn's, but in a planned community the assn owns the common areas -- no portion of the common areas are owned by the members. So, the city/county/state would be eating the property taxes once collected from planned community HOAs. Good observation, but that is not the right analysis. Indiana went to a fair market value assessment system. It is very challenging to come up with a fair market value for common elements, since they cannot be sold and cannot be used for anything else. Market value is essentially zero. For example, what is the fair market value of an 10 foot by 150 foot strip of land that is for access to the lake? It cannot be sold (or even used for anything else), so it has no fair market value. Similarly, what is the value of a 2 acre detention pond that cannot be sold or used for anything else? In the past, open space common areas and detention ponds had been assessed at the lowest fallow agricultural rate--in the middle of the city. It was cumbersome and odd. Instead of separately valuing the common area and amenities,the assessor apportioned the taxes previously paid by the homeowners association to the individual homes. Each homeowner's property taxes went up slightly, and the association property taxes dropped to zero. It was basically a wash. Tax revenues did not change. Keep in mind that common property is owned and managed for the benefit of homeowners in a planned unit development. Common area property taxes are assessed based on who benefits, not who owns it. It is a very fair approach approach, I think. Does all that make sense to you?

MaryA1
(Arizona)

Posts:2498

08/07/2008 8:36 AM
George, Instead of separately valuing the common area and amenities,the assessor apportioned the taxes previously paid by the homeowners association to the individual homes. Each homeowner's property taxes went up slightly, and the association property taxes dropped to zero. It was basically a wash. Tax revenues did not change. Keep in mind that common property is owned and managed for the benefit of homeowners in a planned unit development. Common area property taxes are assessed based on who benefits, not who owns it. It is a very fair approach approach, I think. Does all that make sense to you? No, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If I knew my taxes increased because the co. assessor applied the value of a portion of the common area to my parcel, I'd be disputing the increase -- BIG TIME. I cannot legally be taxed for something which I do not own! I don't care that the assn property might be "owned and managed for the benefit of the homeowners", I am not resp. for paying property taxes on it. IMO, this was an illegal act on the part of the co. assessor. Does state law say: "Common area property taxes are assessed based on who benefits, not who owns it"?

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/07/2008 8:56 AM
I thought I might be confusing, rather than clarifying the issue. Let me try it again and see if I can get it right this time. Owners are only taxed only on the fair market value of the property they own, not on property they do not own. The assessor is essentially saying that the fair market value of individual homes in the community is higher because the rights to enjoy the common areas go with the individual home. Thus the taxes are higher. In the old system, you still paid the same amount of property taxes, but part of it was collected through your association fee. And, yes indeed, property can be taxed on something that is not owned. Before the fair market value system was implemented, there was a "view" adjustment that increased the property taxes on a 20th floor condo, relative to an otherwise identical condo on the third floor. A "view" that you did not own was taxed at a higher rate. That was part of the unfairness of the old system. The new system is based on fair market value, so if the view is not valued by the market, it will not be taxed. Similarly, if common property is not seen as an amenity worth paying extra for, fair market value drops and the property taxes will decrease.

SusanW1
(Michigan)

Posts:2316

08/07/2008 10:55 AM
Our private HOA with 250 homes has a community center, several outlots, including one big enough to build a home on and a beach. No property taxes paid on any of this, due to the corporation being a not for profit.

MaryA1
(Arizona)

Posts:2498

08/07/2008 1:07 PM
George, OK, I gotcha! :-)

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Taxation of Ccommon Property