By what right? - Property Tax

as that was how taxation was to be apportioned amongst the States. (not according to population as is currently specified, though Congress fails to use apportioned taxes and instead opts for excises, though they are illegally enforced as direct taxes)

I think the idea is likely a hold over from feudalism, but more currently can be supported by the idea that those that stand the most to lose are land owners. Since the sole purpose of government is to secure the rights of the people, and land owners have the most to lose, it would make sense then, to require those who benefit from government most, to pay the largest burden of its costs.

This was the pretext for the present income tax. (note, what you pay is NOT an income tax, it is a tax on your employment - two very different things)

The people saw that business owners were making profits overseas and held sway with the government to use military force to protect those business interests. It was argued that the cost of that military protection should be born on the backs of those making the profits and thus would be measured by those profits, and thus the income tax was born.

("income" is a gain or profit arising from business activities, with respect to the Congress, it is a profit derived from a privileged activity, in this case, permission for a foreign company to do business in the U.S., granting of a government contract, or protection of business interests overseas)

Property taxes are not "rent" paid to the government, though current implementations make them effectively the same. There are reforms that can be implemented to change this. Though there will always be some argument that landed people will generally benefit more from peaceful civilian government and thus should bear its cost.

This is also the general argument in favor of sales and use taxes. Though there is also a holdover element of protectionism involved there as well.

It is very important to note though, that all property taxes and sales taxes, except those passed by state governments are generally self-imposed by virtue of referenda.

Perhaps the best area of improvement here is:

1) Congress may lay imposts, duties and excises only within federal territories and international ports of entry where a federal presence exists for the purpose of security.

2) Direct taxes are forbidden to Congress except the Congress may lay a tax on the States directly in proportion to either their land value or their population as Congress sees fit for that particular appropriation. Any such tax shall be for a one-time specified amount, and non-recurring.

3) State governments should follow a similar model with respect to themselves and county/parish governments.

4) All other forms of taxation - employment, sales, use, property etc. should be on the county/parish and local level and be implemented for specified time periods no longer than the longest term of office of any elected representative at that level, and then only by referendum by some large absolute majority of citizens. (2/3, 3/4, or 7/8) Coincidentally, a simple majority of those voting in a referenda may abolish any tax so imposed before its expiration.

This would give people more control over their taxation, and they would be inclined to continue paying for government if they are happy with what they are getting for their money. Making it easier to repeal taxes than to approve them will force the governments to spend wisely and not overreach.

My property tax pays for:

fire protection
street lighting in front of my house
sewer
police protection of my property and person
public schools
city parks
garbage pickup (my city has the monopoly)

Some of these things are itemized, but the theory is that they're all property-related. (Good schools and parks raise property values.)

Some libertarians insist all of these expenses should be voluntary, and I must say, I don't see any reason why government should be able to take property for non-payment of taxes.

It's fairly obvious that if a property owner opted out of fire protection, their insurance rates would climb, and that they could not get a loan without insurance, so the chances of anyone opting out would be very slim.

Over time, of course, local governments have taken on more "services" and consequently collect more taxes. Plenty of them are "services" I could do without, like the palacial new city hall.

Thank goodness California has Prop. 13 and HJTA.org That keeps us from losing our homes to tax hikes.

Prop. 13 has also made things better by blunting the real estate bubble which would have put many people on the street if it hadn't existed, and it helped keep government from ballooning up as much as it would have done, since it is a stablizing influence on tax revenues, so when the bubble collapsed it hasn't been as bad as it could have been.

IMissLiberty

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/99168

I reserve the right to govern myself.

Someone way better then I am at researching something, could figure out a decent answer to your question. I have always had a problem with that whole concept and have had no luck fighting it. YET!
Not only do I have a county tax, but a city tax also. Sure sucks and I want out.
Most states have a program that allows you file for tax credits based on your income. That has been my only saving grace. If not for that, I would have had a pretty hard time keeping up with them. Just across the river from me, I have a friend that pays more then double what I do and he lives in a shack with no running water. Property taxes have always seemed wrong to me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love my country
I am appalled by my government

Start a G.O.T.C.H.A. ( Government Oversight Taskforce of Citizens for Honesty and Accountability) group in your county...

http://www.facebook.com/search/?init=srp&sfxp=&q=gotcha&o=69...

" By what Right" exactly. Good question. I do believe that in the Treaty of Paris, all land in America was transformed into Allodial Title, which meant we own it. Now our property is just deeded to us.
This is a travisty! I hate the government!!!!

History of Property Taxes in the United States

Taxes based on ownership of property were used in ancient times, but the modern tax has roots in feudal obligations owned to British and European kings or landlords. In the fourteenth and fifteenth century, British tax assessors used ownership or occupancy of property to estimate a taxpayer’s ability to pay. In time the tax came to be regarded as a tax on the property itself (in rem). In the United Kingdom the tax developed into a system of “rates” based on the annual (rental) value of property.

The growth of the property tax in America was closely related to economic and political conditions on the frontier. In pre-commercial agricultural areas the property tax was a feasible source of local government revenue and equal taxation of wealth was consistent with the prevailing equalitarian ideology...

The rest of the article can be read at
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/fisher.property.tax.histo...

There is nothing unconstitutional about a property tax. In fact, the property tax is explicitly authorized in most states' constitutions. More than that, there was once a federal property tax.

http://www.msa.md.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fries's_Rebellion

The need to pay property tax is why in the U.S. most property transfers are called "fee simple". True ownership, where property tax is not owed, is called "allodial title". Wikipedia describes the handful of circumstances in the U.S. where allodial title is possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allodial_title

Maybe we can research our counties and city records to find when and how, property taxes came about in the first place. Did your county and or city have a vote on property taxes? Or did they come up with their own ideas to make a property tax and personal tax?

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win!"
GANDHI

1973 my father bought 2 acres on a tidal area in Maine.the land and the house he built cost him a total of 200K back then.
He just turned 72 years old and his annual property taxes from the great town of cumberland has reached $24,000 a year.
Basically he is paying about $500 a week to "rent" this property from the town.This a property he bought and paid fr and built himself.
Its an absolute shame to treat any individual like that.
He keeps re mortgaging the home just to pay the tax so he can stay in the home he loves.
great isnt it???
when he sells he will have nothing....

of all taxation.....no relation to ability to pay.

just where does this authority come from

it is becoming out of hand....being used like the local/state ATM machine

Maybe what you're asking for doesn't exist.

They have guns, they are not afraid to use them, and you will give them what they say, when they say or else. Oh and BTW, they're righteous in making this claim on your property because they said so. And if you don't like that, re-read the first sentence of this post.