Jeeper79 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

You could get the idiocy like we have in my small town of 9k people where both our school rates and municipal rates are rising at the same time. The latter of which is partially due to the absolute Taj Mahal City Hall that we've built that is about 10x overkill for what we need, is way over budget, and behind schedule.

It's absolutely ridiculous what they built and then had the gall to raise our taxes again to cover the bill. It's a 3 building campus that looks like something you would see in a city of 1M or more. I would wager that it's nicer than most existing City Hall's in the USA.

---

Sounds like a terrible idea, but surely it was voted on, wasn't it?

If I could vote my city hall down into a double wide, I'd do it.

---

Yes, but I didn't live here when it was voted on. I just get to pay for it a second time.

People saying eliminating property tax is a bad idea is mind boggling.

This is a yearly forever wealth tax on something you bought and paid for, that the government will sieze at first opportunity if you fail to do so.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Wake up!

jeremy said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

ExPeterKeating said:

---

I will support any politician who gets behind this. The property taxes on my house are CRAZY!

---

How much is crazy? Lots of people say this but I've yet to see it reach even a fraction of high income taxes.

---

The difference would be that when you retire, you would not owe income tax. But as the current system stands, you better plan on paying out the nose for property taxes until you die.

---

Ok. Let's do some math, shall we? Say you have $7-10 million is liquid investments in the market earning 7% when you retire. You also owe a home valued at $1.25 million when you retire and you would be paying pay right at between $12k to $15K annually in property taxes.

Texas passes a state income tax or consumption tax that replaces property taxes. In the above scenario which will that retiree pay more for? Property taxes or the replacement? How does the above gentlemen stop paying income taxes? What idiot doesn't have income in retirement? How the F are they even retired then? Just holed up in their house waiting to die?

And that doesn't even take into account the extra he would pay over the next 15 years BEFORE he retires.

people say it has to come from somewhere....

I still think any hurdle with an additional sales tax, can be overcome. You get the revenue, can still use the recapture system that's in place, and we can actually own our home outright.

Just because we 'need' the tax revenue, doesnt mean taxing my property is the only way. I think that a disingenuous argument. There are pros and cons with every form of tax confiscation.

AgGrad99 said:

---

people say it has to come from somewhere....

I still think any hurdle with an additional sales tax, can be overcome. You get the revenue, can still use the recapture system that's in place, and we can actually own our home outright.

Just because we 'need' the tax revenue, doesnt mean taxing my property is the only way. I think that a disingenuous argument. There are pros and cons with every form of tax confiscation.

---

Want to place a bet that the cons will included getting that missing revenue from the high earners and spenders already paying the lion's share of taxes?

Is that different than now? high earners are who pay the majority of the property taxes

Unless we address spending, the tax side of the equation is moot.

AgGrad99 said:

---

Is that different than now? high earners are who pay the majority of the property taxes

---

But I promise property taxes will be a much lower effective rate than whatever replaces it fr high earners is the point. Property taxes are currently 1.2% of my income. Do you honestly believe that whatever replaces it will be less than 1.2% of my income? So instead of paying almost 40% of my income in various taxes, I can just pay more?

Where is the fervor over progressive income taxes? We have a weekly property tax ***** thread.

You can't promise that. We have no idea of knowing any details without a plan. I'm convinced a consumption/sales tax would/could lower the burden for most. But again, no way to know yet.

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

YouBet said:

---

t - cam said:

---

How will we fund schools? That's my only concern.

---

No one has solved that yet which is why status quo will remain and we will continue to whine about it.

---

There is such unbelievable inefficiency and waste in public school spending.

The funding could be cut in half and produce better outcomes but that will never happen because big bloated bureaucracies gotta perpetuate themselves.

Seamaster said:

---

YouBet said:

---

t - cam said:

---

How will we fund schools? That's my only concern.

---

No one has solved that yet which is why status quo will remain and we will continue to whine about it.

---

There is such unbelievable inefficiency and waste in public school spending.

The funding could be cut in half and produce better outcomes but that will never happen because big bloated bureaucracies gotta perpetuate themselves.

---

Oh, I agree. That charts we've seen on spending in school administration are criminal.

YouBet said:

---

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

---

That would cost me between $30k and $60 annually versus the just under $10k that I pay in property taxes. Quite the tax increase and my kids have never stepped foot in a public school.

Tom Fox said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

---

That would cost me between $30k and $60 annually versus the just under $10k that I pay in property taxes. Quite the tax increase and my kids have never stepped foot in a public school.

---

You make $700k+ per year and live in a house valued (currently) at $500k or so?

You gonna retire at 45?

Kidding aside, I think the assumption that we have to have an income tax if we lose the property tax is a red herring.

We could be just fine, as a state, without an income tax or an adjustable property tax.

Seamaster said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

---

That would cost me between $30k and $60 annually versus the just under $10k that I pay in property taxes. Quite the tax increase and my kids have never stepped foot in a public school.

---

You make $700k+ per year and live in a house valued (currently) at $500k or so?

You gonna retire at 45?

Kidding aside, I think the assumption that we have to have an income tax if we lose the property tax is a red herring.

We could be just fine, as a state, without an income tax or an adjustable property tax.

---

House is valued right at $700k and I make more than $700k. And I didn't open my business until 44 and am 51 now. So I will be mid 60s when I retire.

Your statement that we do not need to replace it is focused in the right direction though.

But the last thing we need to is eliminate a class of taxpayers and the burden is just shifted to another group of tax payers.

For example, I'm sure if Trump came out and said he was going to eliminate taxes for those making less than $150k a year there would be a ground swell of support like the idiotic no taxes on tips, overtime, or SS payments.

That is the opposite of what we should be doing. It just removes more people from having skin in the game and from the consequences of their votes on spending priorities.

Whatever we do, every single citizens should be paying the exact same effective rate of taxation to find our spending choices. From 18 to 100. From the first dollar to the last.

Only then will people be able to truly prioritize what we should be paying for through taxes. There is zero chance that we are spending 2/3 of our budget in entitlements if that was the situation with taxation.

There is no scenario where we should be lowering taxes on some people that still get to vote on spending if we are not lowering them for everyone.

I would be fine with a state flat tax as long as it accompanied a federal one. Same goes for consumption.

The other side of it is we pay to 3 different groups and getting enough people to stay involved in all 3 is really hard. A lot of people don't even know they pay to multiple entities, they just know they pay a lot and see little in return.
If we only paid one entity for property taxes, I think they'd have more scrutiny.

The Kraken said:

---

So what new tax would replace the reduced property tax refenue?

---

None. Jurisdictions would have to balance budget and cut costs.

Why do liberals think the taxes we pay MUST be paid somehow?

techno-ag said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

I love the model Florida is pursuing. You'll be hard pressed to exempt all property...so having Homestead being exempt, and others taxed is a very good tangible step.

I'd love to see something similar in Texas. Maybe a menial sales tax bump to compensate. At least with a sales tax, all use are paying for it equitably.

There is nothing I hate more, than a retired person continually paying for the privilege to live in their home, which has been paid off for years.

---

Absolutely. Businesses and investment properties would continue to be taxed, absorbing the difference.

---

Absorbing the difference? They are already heavily taxed. Property taxes are up 50% over the last 5 years on some of them. If you reduce homestead taxes to $0, you remove 45% of the property tax base. That means investment properties and non-homestead exempt properties would have to absorb a ~80% increase immediately and perpetually pay that higher amount.

The first thing this would do is absolutely tank commercial property values. A huge % of those owners would immediately be underwater on their loan and likely to never sell for enough to pay off the loan. That wipes out billions in equity overnight. It wipes out a huge % of the debt as well, so banks, private debt providers, and Fannie/Freddie all take on massive losses. Texas would immediately enter into a deep recession.

No, you don't fix this by making someone else maintain the bloated pie. You fix it by forcing jurisdictions to reduce spending to account for the lower tax revenue. Worried about schools? Maybe its time for schools to operate more efficiently. I would vote for completely privatizing education. Give it a 5 year window until it goes into effect and watch the free market, now flush with more cash from the massive reduction in taxes against it, figure it out real quick.

And if a jurisdiction wants to increase other forms of taxes to try and make up the difference, cool, let them. Taxpayers will choose if they want to participate in that jurisdiction. Ultimately, the free market would force spending lower.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

I love the model Florida is pursuing. You'll be hard pressed to exempt all property...so having Homestead being exempt, and others taxed is a very good tangible step.

I'd love to see something similar in Texas. Maybe a menial sales tax bump to compensate. At least with a sales tax, all use are paying for it equitably.

There is nothing I hate more, than a retired person continually paying for the privilege to live in their home, which has been paid off for years.

---

Absolutely. Businesses and investment properties would continue to be taxed, absorbing the difference.

---

Absorbing the difference? They are already heavily taxed. Property taxes are up 50% over the last 5 years on some of them. If you reduce homestead taxes to $0, you remove 45% of the property tax base. That means investment properties and non-homestead exempt properties would have to absorb a ~80% increase immediately and perpetually pay that higher amount.

The first thing this would do is absolutely tank commercial property values. A huge % of those owners would immediately be underwater on their loan and likely to never sell for enough to pay off the loan. That wipes out billions in equity overnight. It wipes out a huge % of the debt as well, so banks, private debt providers, and Fannie/Freddie all take on massive losses. Texas would immediately enter into a deep recession.

No, you don't fix this by making someone else maintain the bloated pie. You fix it by forcing jurisdictions to reduce spending to account for the lower tax revenue. Worried about schools? Maybe its time for schools to operate more efficiently. I would vote for completely privatizing education. Give it a 5 year window until it goes into effect and watch the free market, now flush with more cash from the massive reduction in taxes against it, figure it out real quick.

And if a jurisdiction wants to increase other forms of taxes to try and make up the difference, cool, let them. Taxpayers will choose if they want to participate in that jurisdiction. Ultimately, the free market would force spending lower.

---

THIS!!!!!!! I own a business.

If you don't want to pay for public schools anymore, great! End them. But stop this BS that you are just going to force "others" to foot the bill while you still get to vote on the expenditures. If you're not paying the same rate, your azz shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

I love the model Florida is pursuing. You'll be hard pressed to exempt all property...so having Homestead being exempt, and others taxed is a very good tangible step.

I'd love to see something similar in Texas. Maybe a menial sales tax bump to compensate. At least with a sales tax, all use are paying for it equitably.

There is nothing I hate more, than a retired person continually paying for the privilege to live in their home, which has been paid off for years.

---

Absolutely. Businesses and investment properties would continue to be taxed, absorbing the difference.

---

Absorbing the difference? They are already heavily taxed. Property taxes are up 50% over the last 5 years on some of them. If you reduce homestead taxes to $0, you remove 45% of the property tax base. That means investment properties and non-homestead exempt properties would have to absorb a ~80% increase immediately and perpetually pay that higher amount.

The first thing this would do is absolutely tank commercial property values. A huge % of those owners would immediately be underwater on their loan and likely to never sell for enough to pay off the loan. That wipes out billions in equity overnight. It wipes out a huge % of the debt as well, so banks, private debt providers, and Fannie/Freddie all take on massive losses. Texas would immediately enter into a deep recession.

No, you don't fix this by making someone else maintain the bloated pie. You fix it by forcing jurisdictions to reduce spending to account for the lower tax revenue. Worried about schools? Maybe its time for schools to operate more efficiently. I would vote for completely privatizing education. Give it a 5 year window until it goes into effect and watch the free market, now flush with more cash from the massive reduction in taxes against it, figure it out real quick.

And if a jurisdiction wants to increase other forms of taxes to try and make up the difference, cool, let them. Taxpayers will choose if they want to participate in that jurisdiction. Ultimately, the free market would force spending lower.

---

I'd be down with this. At least let a red state or two go forward with it and see the result. When it works better for less $$, the others will follow.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

I think he means exempting the full value of homesteads from property tax.

But to his previous point, no. Texas politicians don't have the balls for that.

---

Im all for this, but where does the money come from if not property taxes?

---

Property taxes would still exist. Only homesteads would be exempt.

Again, replace the property tax with a sales tax. Exempt or lower the rate for certain items that impact poor people disproportionately. Let the state collect it and reallocate to the counties/cities based on population and per capita cost of living... there's a way to overcome the small town vs. big city gap in sales tax revenue due to consumer mobility.

Think of all the money we would save by eliminating appraisal districts in every county, all the staff, and all the effort spent on protesting appraisals. Yeah it sucks if you work in the sector, but people would reallocate to other sectors. Lots of other industries have reallocated labor over time... newspapers, phone operators, taxi drivers... the list goes on.

But stay the hell away from a state income tax. Once that camel gets his nose under the tent, you never get him out. It only grows from there.

GeeBee said:

---

People saying eliminating property tax is a bad idea is mind boggling.

This is a yearly forever wealth tax on something you bought and paid for, that the government will sieze at first opportunity if you fail to do so.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Wake up!

---

I have many other things I have paid for that I have not paid tax to own. Have you considered putting your money there instead of real estate? If you're complaining about your home being taxed then let's discuss increasing the homestead exemption. I bet if you read the thread above, that has actually been mentioned

GeeBee said:

---

People saying eliminating property tax is a bad idea is mind boggling.

This is a yearly forever wealth tax on something you bought and paid for, that the government will sieze at first opportunity if you fail to do so.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Wake up!

---

I have many other things I have paid for that I have not paid tax to own. Have you considered putting your money there instead of real estate? If you're complaining about your home being taxed then let's discuss increasing the homestead exemption. I bet if you read the thread above, that has actually been mentioned

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Again, replace the property tax with a sales tax. Exempt or lower the rate for certain items that impact poor people disproportionately. Let the state collect it and reallocate to the counties/cities based on population and per capita cost of living... there's a way to overcome the small town vs. big city gap in sales tax revenue due to consumer mobility.

Think of all the money we would save by eliminating appraisal districts in every county, all the staff, and all the effort spent on protesting appraisals. Yeah it sucks if you work in the sector, but people would reallocate to other sectors. Lots of other industries have reallocated labor over time... newspapers, phone operators, taxi drivers... the list goes on.

But stay the hell away from a state income tax. Once that camel gets his nose under the tent, you never get him out. It only grows from there.

---

Yep, we could replace those folks with comptrollers to track every business's transactions and include an enforcement division when people don't report or underreport, just like the IRS.

Tom Fox said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

---

That would cost me between $30k and $60 annually versus the just under $10k that I pay in property taxes. Quite the tax increase and my kids have never stepped foot in a public school.

---

You keep making this about you which is fine. Most people support policy for selfish reasons which is why we live in a welfare state with a spending problem.

Is a property tax moral? No....so get rid of it

A flat income tax of 2% and a state sales tax of about 1.5% would replace the property tax revenue or close to it. That may be more than you're paying now, but. Once you retire that will net back out.

Or how about this idea. We tax business values and personal wealth instead of property? What do you think about that? Your wealth is in your business and likely personal savings, I have my wealth in property as do the majority of Americans. You don't want your wealth taxed, but you are perfectly fine with the government taxing mine. That is the whole point of flat income and fair consumption tax. It is the only moral form of tax policy.

FIDO*98* said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For context, 41 states have a state income tax. The average top marginal rate is 5.5%. The median is 5.4%. States that have a flat rate are in the range of 3-5% depending on the state.

Thus, you could expect Texas to have a rough average state income tax of somewhere between 3-6% if we ever did it.

---

That would cost me between $30k and $60 annually versus the just under $10k that I pay in property taxes. Quite the tax increase and my kids have never stepped foot in a public school.

---

You keep making this about you which is fine. Most people support policy for selfish reasons which is why we live in a welfare state with a spending problem.

Is a property tax moral? No....so get rid of it

A flat income tax of 2% and a state sales tax of about 1.5% would replace the property tax revenue or close to it. That may be more than you're paying now, but. Once you retire that will net back out.

Or how about this idea. We tax business values and personal wealth instead of property? What do you think about that? Your wealth is in your business and likely personal savings, I have my wealth in property as do the majority of Americans. You don't want your wealth taxed, but you are perfectly fine with the government taxing mine. That is the whole point of flat income and fair consumption tax. It is the only moral form of tax policy.

---

As someone who is supporting 20 other Americans through just his fed income taxes alone, I only care about the total effective rate not how the taxes are assessed. I want my total effective tax rate < 25% like the majority of Americans. I don't hear you clamoring to remove state franchise taxes. So because my business now makes more than 2.47 million I should be taxed differently than other small businesses. This socialism redistribution BS must end.

I will feel that way until everyone is taxed at the same rate across fed, state, county, and municipal taxation. Then and only then I will concern myself with the type and method of taxation. Because taxing me and the other top 1% and expecting us to pay 40% of net fed taxes is insane. This has doubled from 20% since 1980. And very time you exclude a tax that actually hits the lower tax payers it further insulates them from the consequences of their votes on spending.

The actual solution is to gut state spending and severely reduce taxation. Not cut taxes on low earners and shift the burden to high earners whose kids probably do not even utilize public schools.

Taxation should try and avoid stifling income earning and spending. But if one has to be stifled it should be spending not earning. You can live in a smaller house before you expect someone to have to earn less to reduce their effective tax rate.

So you against socialism, but you support socialism in the form of property tax because it currently benefits you. All taxes should be flat and fair. Period. And yes, that should apply to businesses too

FIDO*98* said:

---

So you against socialism, but you support socialism in the form of property tax because it currently benefits you. All taxes should be flat and fair. Period. And yes, that should apply to businesses too

---

Property taxes are flat within a jurisdiction. They are not progressive and socialistic.

Income taxes are socialistic because they are not flat. They increase the tax rate as you make more money.

Neither are fair.

Income taxes are unfair because it's ridiculous to force such a large burden of total taxes on high earners. When roughly 50% of income earners aren't paying net income tax... the system isn't fair.

Property taxes are unfair because they tax an asset that's already been paid for, even if you no longer have an income to pay the tax.

The fairest solution is a consumption tax (sales tax) that exempts or lowers the rate for some items that disproportionately impact poor people. It's more complex to administer than an income or property tax, but it can be managed in this modern age of computers and sophisticated analytics.

FIDO*98* said:

---

So you against socialism, but you support socialism in the form of property tax because it currently benefits you. All taxes should be flat and fair. Period. And yes, that should apply to businesses too

---

Texas franchise taxes are not fair because they do not tax all businesses in Texas and property taxes are in fact a flat rate, they just tax something you do not want them to tax.

The solution again is to cut spending. Period. Everyone should be responsible for providing for their own family needs and that should include schooling. Why should I pay your 2% state income tax that would tax me at $20K and double my taxes when my kids do not even attend public school and never will. Tax me for the other stuff but it makes zero sense for me to be paying public school taxes.

And at least with property taxes that will freeze at 65, but I will pay your 2% state income taxes on my investment income for the rest of my life.

Plus you are a fool if you think once state income taxes are implemented that the rate will not increase. I can control where I live and the price of my home.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

FIDO*98* said:

---

So you against socialism, but you support socialism in the form of property tax because it currently benefits you. All taxes should be flat and fair. Period. And yes, that should apply to businesses too

---

Property taxes are flat within a jurisdiction. They are not progressive and socialistic.

Income taxes are socialistic because they are not flat. They increase the tax rate as you make more money.

Neither are fair.

Income taxes are unfair because it's ridiculous to force such a large burden of total taxes on high earners. When roughly 50% of income earners aren't paying net income tax... the system isn't fair.

Property taxes are unfair because they tax an asset that's already been paid for, even if you no longer have an income to pay the tax.

The fairest solution is a consumption tax (sales tax) that exempts or lowers the rate for some items that disproportionately impact poor people. It's more complex to administer than an income or property tax, but it can be managed in this modern age of computers and sophisticated analytics.

---

I am fine with a consumption tax but not ok with exempting anything. Every dollar must be taxed at the same rate. I do not care if it is regressive.

But there is no way on God's green earth that a consumption tax will not resist in increased taxation for high earners.

We already have ridiculously low taxes with our current regime.

Burdizzo said:

---

GeeBee said:

---

People saying eliminating property tax is a bad idea is mind boggling.

This is a yearly forever wealth tax on something you bought and paid for, that the government will sieze at first opportunity if you fail to do so.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Wake up!

---

I have many other things I have paid for that I have not paid tax to own. Have you considered putting your money there instead of real estate? If you're complaining about your home being taxed then let's discuss increasing the homestead exemption. I bet if you read the thread above, that has actually been mentioned

---

It's on the ballot right now. Proposition 13,

Martin Cash said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

GeeBee said:

---

People saying eliminating property tax is a bad idea is mind boggling.

This is a yearly forever wealth tax on something you bought and paid for, that the government will sieze at first opportunity if you fail to do so.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Wake up!

---

I have many other things I have paid for that I have not paid tax to own. Have you considered putting your money there instead of real estate? If you're complaining about your home being taxed then let's discuss increasing the homestead exemption. I bet if you read the thread above, that has actually been mentioned

---

It's on the ballot right now. Proposition 13,

---

And would be idiotic because it remove the number of voters with skin in the game. If you want to not get taxed, you do not get to vote.

Tom Fox said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

FIDO*98* said:

---

So you against socialism, but you support socialism in the form of property tax because it currently benefits you. All taxes should be flat and fair. Period. And yes, that should apply to businesses too

---

Property taxes are flat within a jurisdiction. They are not progressive and socialistic.

Income taxes are socialistic because they are not flat. They increase the tax rate as you make more money.

Neither are fair.

Income taxes are unfair because it's ridiculous to force such a large burden of total taxes on high earners. When roughly 50% of income earners aren't paying net income tax... the system isn't fair.

Property taxes are unfair because they tax an asset that's already been paid for, even if you no longer have an income to pay the tax.

The fairest solution is a consumption tax (sales tax) that exempts or lowers the rate for some items that disproportionately impact poor people. It's more complex to administer than an income or property tax, but it can be managed in this modern age of computers and sophisticated analytics.

---

I am fine with a consumption tax but not ok with exempting anything. Every dollar must be taxed at the same rate. I do not care if it is regressive.

But there is no way on God's green earth that a consumption tax will not resist in increased taxation for high earners.

We already have ridiculously low taxes with our current regime.

---

I agree on not taxing your income at rates that increase as you make more. That's just pure envy, socialism, communism... whatever you want to call it.

But I disagree on not giving some consideration for poor people. I don't buy into the notion that they can just die if they can't handle it. Some amount of compassion and leeway is appropriate. But not near to the extent that gets abused today. Needs to be tightened up a lot. And after that, if they still refuse to work to eat and pay their bills... society doesn't need to pick up their tab. They can deal with the consequences, whatever they are.

Tom Fox said:

---

jeremy said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

ExPeterKeating said:

---

I will support any politician who gets behind this. The property taxes on my house are CRAZY!

---

How much is crazy? Lots of people say this but I've yet to see it reach even a fraction of high income taxes.

---

The difference would be that when you retire, you would not owe income tax. But as the current system stands, you better plan on paying out the nose for property taxes until you die.

---

Ok. Let's do some math, shall we? Say you have $7-10 million is liquid investments in the market earning 7% when you retire. You also owe a home valued at $1.25 million when you retire and you would be paying pay right at between $12k to $15K annually in property taxes.

Texas passes a state income tax or consumption tax that replaces property taxes. In the above scenario which will that retiree pay more for? Property taxes or the replacement? How does the above gentlemen stop paying income taxes? What idiot doesn't have income in retirement? How the F are they even retired then? Just holed up in their house waiting to die?

And that doesn't even take into account the extra he would pay over the next 15 years BEFORE he retires.

---

I'm confused. So in this world we're we get rid of property taxes and now Texas has a state income tax, retirement payments are taxed as well?

Also, I'm not talking about your scenario at all.

I'm talking about state pensioned retiree who makes $3200 a month and has to pay $15k a year on taxes because the appraisers said their 1960s home is worth 1.25 million.