Phase 1 Of Tax Plan Is Now The Law
On Thursday June 21, 2007 Gov. Charlie Crist signed into law the first phase of property tax reform which means a savings of about 6 or 7 percent to all property owners, including second homes and commercial property.
This is just the first phase, so Florida property owners shouldn't be disappointed on a relatively small first year's savings, estimated to be around $174 - $199. Florida voters will decide in late January, 2008 whether to adopt the second half of the plan.
If passed, the bipartisan law could slash up to $15.6 billion in local property taxes during the first five years. But those reductions would be spread across all classes of property. The Republican-sponsored constitutional amendment, however, could increase the total five-year cut to $31.6 billion, with owners of primary homes benefiting the most.
Critics of the plan (largely made up of Democrats, local officials, and labor unions) say the amendment is flawed for two reasons. First, they feel the amendment would cut too deeply into the budgets of cities, counties and school boards. Second, most of the savings would go to homesteads, which they say already receive substantial tax breaks. Opponents say the plan does not adequately help other residential properties and businesses hardest hit by real estate values that have skyrocketed in the last for or five years..
This is just the first phase, so Florida property owners shouldn't be disappointed on a relatively small first year's savings, estimated to be around $174 - $199. Florida voters will decide in late January, 2008 whether to adopt the second half of the plan.
If passed, the bipartisan law could slash up to $15.6 billion in local property taxes during the first five years. But those reductions would be spread across all classes of property. The Republican-sponsored constitutional amendment, however, could increase the total five-year cut to $31.6 billion, with owners of primary homes benefiting the most.
Critics of the plan (largely made up of Democrats, local officials, and labor unions) say the amendment is flawed for two reasons. First, they feel the amendment would cut too deeply into the budgets of cities, counties and school boards. Second, most of the savings would go to homesteads, which they say already receive substantial tax breaks. Opponents say the plan does not adequately help other residential properties and businesses hardest hit by real estate values that have skyrocketed in the last for or five years..
No comments:
Post a Comment