Local News

Wake Reassessment Will Kick Up Property Values

Posted September 27, 2007

Map Marker  Find News Near Me

— For the first time in eight years, Wake County has reassessed property values. It is no surprise that values are up, but some folks could experience sticker shock when they see the numbers next year.

The county's Revenue Department spent the past two years reevaluating property values countywide, which it does every eight years. On average, Wake County has seen property values jump 43 percent.

"The western part of the county is very desirable. It's close to the employment center of the Research Triangle Park,” Emmett Curl, Wake County revenue director, said.

It was the east where land values saw the biggest increases, however.

“With the opening of Interstate 540 and [U.S.] 64, the eastern side of the county is inflating much faster in land,” said Curl.

The northern part of the county has seen a steady increase, too, and there has been a significant jump in the value of retail property.

That is "certainly good for the area, good for the economy,” new homeowner Allison Rabin said.

Rabin just moved inside the Beltline. She is pleased to hear property values are going up, even if it means higher taxes.

"It's good. I think property values in the Raleigh area are going to continue to go up, at least that's my hope,” said Rabin.

The county will be sending out the reevaluation notices in the next couple of months. Homeowners can challenge the adjustments if they want.

County commissioners are also considering whether to reevaluate property values every four years, instead of eight.

141 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Steve Crisp Sep 28, 2007

    To elcid:

    That's an awful lot of number crunching you're asking for there, but I'll give you a baseline example that you can extrapolate from.

    In 2006, the Gross Domestic Product of the United States was just over 13 trillion dollars. The total revenue of the government was right at 2.5 trillion dollars or about 19.2 percent of the GDP. Granted, those numbers have to be adjusted given that I would eliminate all taxes on food, drugs, and articles of clothing under $50 per item, but it's a start. So let's say that the non-exempted revenue is but half of the current revenue. That means that one would need a sales tax rate of 40 percent to break even on existing revenues. But you are forgetting the property tax component. I can not even get a handle on the total property valuation in the US, but from what I can crunch, it has to be somewhere north of 400 trillion dollars. A tax rate of 65 cents on the hundred alone would generate that same 2.5 trillion dollars.

  • DontLikeTheSocialistObama Sep 27, 2007

    Another excuse to raise taxes. We need need shut down government and eliminate all taxes.

  • elcid89 Sep 27, 2007

    25% to 35%

  • elcid89 Sep 27, 2007

    "That would not be true. Given that there woud be a complete elmination of all taxes paid on a corporate level. the retail price of the car would drop significantly, most likely offsetting the transparent sales tax paid. Or at least coming close."

    Thereby shifting the entire burden of taxation to the consumer and requiring that any nominal sales tax rate be set so as to recover the revenue lost to the elimination of corporate taxes.

    Think about that for a moment Steve. We already pay rates approaching 25% to 25%, and in some cases more, on our gross incomes, and still the federal government runs in the red. That's WITH corporate income taxes and such mixed in. Eliminate them and begin to estimate what a sales tax would have to be set at in order to even keep revenue flat, much less grow it.

    Where's the benefit?

  • elcid89 Sep 27, 2007

    "What people who can't get their heads around the Fair Tax plan fail to realize is that every component needed to manufacture a product, all the way down to raw materials, will pay a 23% (not 25% btw) tax on their purchases."

    This is incorrect. You need to read HR 25 again. I had to. It imposes a one time tax at retail POS only. What you are describing is a VAT.

  • Steve Crisp Sep 27, 2007

    To neversurrender:

    "So you'd be in favour of paying $25K for a $20K car? If I had a dealership, I'd invite you in with open arms... ;)"

    That would not be true. Given that there woud be a complete elmination of all taxes paid on a corporate level. the retail price of the car would drop significantly, most likely offsetting the transparent sales tax paid. Or at least coming close.

    And even if there were cheating, it is much easier to police the sales tax reporting of 25 million businesses who also have to provide P&L to a number of different sources like banks than it is to police 200 million income tax filers.

  • TheWB Sep 27, 2007

    To neversurrender:
    I've heard a lot of arguments against the fair tax and like yours they all fall short, yours maybe shorter than others. I'm not going all the way back, but of all of your glaring misconceptions one definitely needs correcting; You won't pay $1.25 for a $1.00 item, you are already paying $1.00 for a $.75 item due to the imbedded taxes charged to manufactures but paid by us. What people who can't get their heads around the Fair Tax plan fail to realize is that every component needed to manufacture a product, all the way down to raw materials, will pay a 23% (not 25% btw) tax on their purchases. 23% is a bargain compared to the ludicrous rates now charged to each supplier along the way of bringing products to market and thus lower the costs to final the producer, who, through the pressures of competition, will lower the prices charged to us, the consumers.

  • elcid89 Sep 27, 2007

    (and note that self-employed persons, under HR 25, pay tax at the rates associated with their OASDI and HI profiles, which would result in a rate for them of 30.21%, plus any state and local sales taxes.)

    The effective sales tax rate for a self employed consumer in Wake County, for example, would be 37.21% at current rates. You can expect that to go up.

    Unless you are in the effective 35% bracket, in that scenario the odds are that you will end up paying more in taxes, just in smaller increments.

  • GoBoSox Sep 27, 2007

    Never surrender:

    I agree with you about how much goes uncollected under the current system, but how many taxpaers are there in the U.S.? Compare this to the number of retailers and the number of entities to be "policed" drops dramatically. I just think that regulaton of business entities will be much easier to accomplish that the regulating of every U.S. citizen.

    Also, don't forget that every tourist that comes to this country will also be subject to the national sales tax for all goods and services purchased/consumed here.

  • elcid89 Sep 27, 2007

    "elcid: I'm talking about eliminating personal income taxes in favor of a national sales tax. I didn't mean to imply that corporate taxes would change...my bad!"

    Ok, we were on a different page then. The current proposal, HR 25, completely shelves taxation on income and replaces it with an end user tax, but then also implements monthly rebate payments to consumers. It, in effect, puts the entire country on welfare.

    It also implements a sliding scale taxation based on underlying taxes that continue to be collected (OASDI and HI.) For 2009, it is set at 23%, which is in addition to any state & local sales tax. After 2009, it's 14.91% + OASDI + HI. At the current rates, that would be 22.56%, but it's too easy to implement a tiny shift in those rates and achieve a massive increase in revenue. This does nothing to curtail spending and makes it harder to track what you are paying in taxes.

    It's just a mess.

More...