All Entries Tagged With: "california property tax"
California Property Tax Associates (CAPTA)
“THIS ASSESSMENT REDUCTION FILING SERVICE IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH ANY
GOVERNMENT AGENCY. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE ASSESSED VALUE OF YOUR
PROPERTY, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO AN INFORMAL ASSESSMENT REVIEW, AT NO
COST, BY CONTACTING THE ASSESSOR’S OFFICE DIRECTLY. IF YOU AND THE
ASSESSOR CANNOT AGREE TO THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR IF YOU DO NOT
WISH TO CONTACT THE ASSESSOR YOU CAN OBTAIN AND FILE AN APPLICATION
FOR CHANGED ASSESSMENT WITH THE COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OR
ASSESSMENT APPEALS BOARD ON YOUR OWN BEHALF. AN APPEALS BOARD HAS THE
AUTHORITY TO RAISE PROPERTY VALUES (BUT IN NO CASE HIGHER THAN THE
PROPOSITION 13 PROTECTED VALUE) AS WELL AS TO LOWER PROPERTY VALUES.”
The above disclaimer is required by AB 992. CAPTA is pleased to include it in our website as a remedy to the growing number of fraudulent companies seeking to take advantage of the continuing problems associated with falling real property values.
While CAPTA agrees with the above premise that the Assessor should reduce a property’s value if it is over-assessed, the magnitude of the work required to accomplish this task is not possible. As the need increases, the budget and staffing at the Assessors Office decreases. They simply cannot do more work with less people. That’s where CAPTA comes in.
California Property Tax Associates (CAPTA) is an expert in the field of Property Tax reduction relief . For many years we have saved thousands of Clients millions of dollars in counties throughout the State of California by representation before the Assessment Appeals Boards in the assessment reduction process. Our Associates who will actively work on our Clients portfolios include attorneys, licensed and certified appraisers, and past and present County Assessment Appeals Board Members.
California Property Tax Assessment Appeal Experience and Services
- 20 Years Experience Reducing Assessments County by County
- A History of Success Across Property Types (see rotating chart on right for recent reductions)
- Contingency Based Fee; No Savings, No Fee!
- CAPTA Does All The Work
- All Appraisal Work Required
- Informal Assessment Review Filing
- Negotiation With Assessors Office
- Formal Appeal Filing- If Your Appeal Is Already Filed By You Or Another Agent- We Can Still Represent You
- Negotiation With Assessors Office Prior to Assessment Apeals Hearing
- Full Representation at the County Assessment Appeals Board Hearing
- Future Year Assessment Appeal Filing Where Warranted
- Annual Property Tax Assessment Review to Ensure Lowest Possible Value
CAPTA is dedicated to educating property owners about their rights under the California Revenue and Taxation Code. Some of our associates have worked to provide assessment relief and reduce property taxes since 1989.
Our mission is simple:
- Enforce our Clients Rights under Proposition 13 and ensure they never pay more property tax than what they are required to pay after applying every conceivable reduction strategy allowed by law.
In most cases our fee agreement is simple as well: You, the property owner receive property tax savings, credits, or refunds–otherwise you don’t pay. There are never any up front costs and fees are only due once you have received official notification of your savings. NO SAVINGS-NO FEE!
Over the years our associates have handled cases for a variety of clients and interests which include restaurants such as Del Taco, Sizzler, Honey Baked Hams and Burger King, vacant commercial and residential land projects, shopping centers and retail properties such as Chino Town Center and Blue Jay Village Corp., hundreds of industrial buildings such as the GFS Airport Center located at the Los Angeles International Airport, hundreds of office and apartment buildings, and countless single-family residences Statewide.
CAPTA Can Help
Our team of agents and consultants have helped property owners get through tough times like these back in the 1990’s with property tax savings and even refunds. The California Property Tax Appeal system is difficult but fair overall, but accurate taxation is the responsibility of the property owner who has the greatest interest in establishing a fair market value.
CAPTA can give you Property Tax Reduction help and assistance. Now more than ever you need to protect your assets by making wise decisions in a depreciating market. CAPTA has the Agents, Consultants and systems in place and the experience you need to maximize your property tax savings and refunds. Regardless of whether you own residential property, apartments, retail, commercial, industrial or even vacant land, all real estate is subject to valuation for taxation by the County Assessors Office and should be reviewed for a reduction in value whenever possible.
CAPTA has provided answers to most of your questions throughout the pages of this site. Please feel free to browse our frequently asked questions (FAQ) section for additional information.
Ready to Get Started? There is no charge to begin and no fee is due until a reduction, refund, or savings is granted! If you would like to start the process and let CAPTA begin their investigation to determine the feasibility of receiving a reduction in your assessed value please call us immediately at 888-678-9TAX . But time is critical; deadlines vary by County.
Sacramento County Assessor Office Report Card
Prices Trend Down
The chart to the left shows the dramatic fall in homes listed for sale. The fact that many who wish to sell cannot and so are hidden from the transactional analysis is seldom discussed. The fact of the matter is, the housing market is down and continues to fall, and the commercial market is in the process of following. If you own commercial property and don’t believe this to be true simply go to the top of this page and click one of the property types such as apartments and look at the chart produced by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The numbers don’t lie.
As commercial property values fall it becomes increasingly important to protect the bottom line. We have many Sacramento County clients for whom we have saved hundredths of thousands of dollars. Each year we will continue to save them money if values continue to fall. We are the most aggressive Sacramento County property tax company and we fight to secure our clients the lowest possible value under the property tax law.
Sacramento County Property Tax Assessor
Many of our clients and Sacramento County property owners believe the County Assessor will automatically reduce values if warranted. In some cases this happens. But not often and not in a sufficient quantity. The Sacramento County Assessor has a big job to do and overall does it well. Nevertheless there are countless opportunities to see a reduction in assessed value that our clients wish to have in order to protect the bottom line of their company. For our residential property owners it’s much the same. Money saved and not paid to the county is money earned. The Associates at California Property Tax can help you in this endeavor. But first, let’s take a look at the Sacramento County Assessor’s office.
The California State Board of Equalization is mandated by law to audit the office of the county assessor throughout the state of California to assure compliance with the property tax laws. And Sacramento County, the most recent audit produced some interesting results. They are presented here in excerpts from the actual report which can be read in its entirety by clicking here. We wish to point out that in no way are we attempting to slander the assessor’s office. We merely wish to point out that they have the ability to make mistakes, mistakes that can cost you money. We are experts at finding and correcting those mistakes whether they are errors in judgment or factual errors. Let’s look at the report.
In the area of change in ownership, the assessor’s website provides inaccurate information
about transfers of base year value by persons over age 55, and the assessor adds the value of
improvement bonds to sales prices of real property without developing the evidence required
to support the addition.
• The assessor has not enrolled all new decks and patios as new construction at their full cash
value; and he does not obtain copies of building permits from Sacramento County’s
Environmental Health Division.
• The assessor’s California Land Conservation Act (CLCA) program has several shortcomings:
(1) the assessor has not enrolled significant areas of taxable vineyards and nonliving
improvements; (2) he does not use market-derived expense rates when valuing CLCA
property; (3) he improperly classifies irrigation wells as unrestricted improvements on CLCA
property; (4) has not consistently established base year values for trees or vines; (5) he does
not treat restricted CLCA property as a separate appraisal unit; and (6) he inappropriately
issues supplemental assessments on restricted land when there is a change in ownership.
• The assessor has not correctly identified and enrolled parcels of taxable government-owned
land and has not completed the valuation of taxable government-owned properties for the
current roll.
The assessor should revise his possessory interest (PI) procedures in several areas: (1) he
inappropriately reapraises month-to-month tenancies at the airports, marinas, and other
public property as annual changes in ownership; (2) he has not followed rule 21 when
assessing possessory interests created by written agreements with a stated term of possession;
(3) he does not review all private uses at the fairgrounds that may qualify as PIs; and (4) he
incorrectly assesses the possessory interests of a private concessionaire who provide banking
services at a state university.
• The assessor does not send the Right-of-Way Property Statement (Form BOE-571-RW) to
pipeline owners, and he does not maintain pipeline right-of-way assessment records in
accordance with section 401.8.
• The assessor does not correctly determine the appraisal unit for mineral properties as
required by rule 469.
The assessor accepts business property statements that are not BOE-prescribed forms or that
lack a proper signature, and he does not consistently apply the penalty for late filed
statements.
• The assessor does not consistently identify and correctly classify taxable personal property in
apartment complexes, personal property owned by one-way paging companies, or pollution
control equipment financed by state bonds, and does not use Assessors’ Handbook Section
581, Equipment Index and Percent Good Factors, as intended.
• The assessor does not review significant differences found in business property statements
filed by leasing companies.
• In the area of vessel assessments, the assessor does not add a sales tax component to the
suggested values in published vessel value guides, and accepts unsigned vessel property
statements.
• The assessor’s manufactured home assessment program has several areas of weakness: (1) he
does not classify manufactured homes as personal property as required by section 5801; (2)
in one year, he enrolled escape assessments for a group of manufactured homes based on an
inappropriate edition of a published value guide; (3) he incorrectly issues supplemental
assessments for manufactured homes voluntarily converted to local property taxation; and
(4) he inappropriately adds sales tax to used manufactured home values derived from the
NADA appraisal guide when they are resold or voluntarily converted to local property
taxation.
• Some taxable animals have escaped assessment.
=============================End of Report==============================
To restate what we said earlier, we in no way want to have given the office of the assessor in Sacramento County. Overall they do a good job. But there are many, many properties that require constant attention. The Associates at California Property Tax have the time and attention to give to your property. We can ensure that the taxes you pay are the taxes you owe and not a penny more area. We work on a contingency basis, so we don’t get paid unless we perform. You can readily see our feet and our contract by clicking Our Fee. the deadline is coming in just a few short weeks. Contact us today.
Los Angeles County Assessor Report Card
The Los Angeles County assessor’s offices, of which there are many dispersed throughout the county have the responsibility to annually assess each property, both real and personal for the purpose of property tax assessment. How do they do? Let’s see. But first we will make it clear that there are elements of the assessors job that he does very well. Our intent is to simply point out there are many deficiencies in LA County relative to assessment practices.
We present the following from the Los Angeles County Assessment Practices Survey accomplished by the State Board of Equalization dated May, 2008 (the most recent audit): Audit of Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office by the California State Board of Equalization May, 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (These are the comments from the actual audit by the State Board of Equalization)
…As stated in the Introduction, this report emphasizes problem areas we found in the operations of the assessor’s office…Areas within other programs, however, need improvement…
…However, we found that uncertified staff are processing business property statements; there are no estimates or assessments made for supplies when taxpayers fail to report supplies on their business property statements; and historical aircraft exemptions are being incorrectly granted…
…Moreover, the processing of changes in ownership of certain types of manufactured housing needs improvement, and there are minor problems with the assessment of vessels and animals…
…However, we found that the assessor does not maintain uniformity in document processing… In addition, we found that another district office does not have access to vital records, which are valuable tools for confirming information on deaths, marriages, and births. Instead, the ownership staff contacts the downtown office for such information. This inevitably interferes with production and may lead to incorrect document processing…The assessor should ensure that his staff knows and understands the proper procedure for processing change in ownership documents. The assessor also should provide the proper resources to all district offices so that the staff will be able to operate efficiently and effectively…
We found that the assessor does not determine the fair market value of construction in progress on each lien date as required by section 71. Instead, the assessor’s computer system automatically applies the annual inflation factor to the prior roll value of construction in progress. Upon completion of the construction project, the assessor issues roll corrections for the years in which the construction was still in progress. Section 71 provides that new construction in progress shall be enrolled on each lien date at its full value until the date of completion. Upon completion, the entire portion of the property that was newly constructed shall be reappraised at its full value. Thereafter, the entire assessment shall be subject to the annual inflation factor. It is improper to apply the inflation factor to construction in progress. Taxable government-owned properties misdirected to district offices often are not identified as such…
…Further, appraisers in district offices may not be aware of the special assessment procedures regarding the valuation of taxable government-owned properties. Thus, the misdirection of taxable government-owned properties to district offices often results in assessment errors. For example, many taxable government-owned properties are issued supplemental assessments because they were not identified correctly. By properly directing taxable government-owned properties to the appraiser specialist, improper assessments could be avoided...
We found that the assessor does not issue supplemental assessments for all changes in ownership of taxable possessory interests...
==============End of Report=================================
Again, our intent is not to slander the work of the Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office. Overall, we believe they do a good job for the limited employees they have. But in our 20 years of experience we have discovered many errors and fought many hard fights on behalf of our clients, winning most of them.
If you would like to read the 64 page report from which the excerpts were taken above please click here.
Click Here for Los Angeles County Assessors Office Information
If you own property in Los Angeles County and are considering an assessment appeal, you owe it to yourself to have an experienced knowledgeable company represent you. Don’t get caught up in the rhetoric; the County assessor oftentimes does not represent your best interests. Please call us at (909) 867-5000 directly.
County Property Assessment-Proposition 13
The following is a simplified discussion of Proposition 13 and California property taxes in general. It is not a complete Prop 13 explanation but simply an introduction into the California property tax assessment procedures. For a complete understanding of the California property tax Law on a county by county basis, please read the Property Taxes Law Guide and The State Board of Equalization audits (this one is for Contra Costa as an example).
Pre Proposition 13
Before the passage of Proposition 13 California property taxes were raised by an annual assessment of all property located in the state of California. Simply stated California property tax was based on the fair value of your property each year as shown in the assessment on your tax bill. Each year, as California property values increased, so did the value assessment for the property tax payment.
The system worked fine until California property values began to appreciate at an accelerated rate, which then resulted in increasingly higher assessments and increasingly higher California property taxes. People who didn’t change residences or other properties found themselves with escalating California property tax bills with personal income that didn’t follow suit. The California property tax system was broken and the fix was Proposition 13.
Proposition 13
To summarize, before proposition 13 California property taxes were based upon the fair market value of your property each year. Should values increase at a greater than normal rate, so did your California property taxes.
With Prop 13 California property tax law changed extraordinarily as stated in the paragraph from Proposition 13 below:
Section 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.
This meant that each year the state could collect no more than 1% of the assessed value of California real property. It went on to say that the county assessor could raise the value of the given property no more than 2% annually. As an example, if the value increased 5% this new California property tax law limited the assessment to a 2% increase.
As stated in an earlier page, when a new property is completed (completion of new construction) or when a property is sold (change in ownership) Proposition 13 provides that a base year value be determined. To assist in this determination a rule was created, Rule 2 which stated that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it would be assumed that fair market value was the price paid in a sale of property made in an arms length transaction between a knowledgeable buyer and a knowledgeable seller neither of which was taking advantage of the other. For the purpose of making a value assessment for California property taxes, if the buyer bought a property for $500,000 from the seller with no extenuating circumstances, then $500,000 would be considered the base your value.
Proposition 13 then stated that each year the maximum assessment increase was the base year +1%. The taxpayers voted, the government cried foul but the vote carried and Proposition 13 was passed.
All went well in the property tax world as properties appreciated and taxes lagged behind until something different happened. Property values began to fall and yet the assessed value continue to be raised by 2% in accordance with Proposition 13. This presented an unforeseen problem with assessments for California property taxes which resulted in a new Proposition.
Go to PROPOSITION 8
If this is enough information and you wish to have your property taxes reduced, please call us immediately at (888) 678-9TAX or fill out the simple form below and we will contact you at your convenience.
Comments or questions are welcome.
County Property Assessment-Proposition 8
Pre Proposition 8
Before Proposition 8 (California property taxes measure) was adapted in late 1978 the voters passed Proposition 13 which held that only a 2% increase in the assessed value could be enrolled by the County assessor for any given year despite the actual amount of increase in the real property value. California property tax payers were very happy with this property tax measure as it limited their property taxes they have to pay each year in the face of an ever appreciating real estate market. But what would happen if the values actually fell?
County property tax payers understood real quick that they had painted themselves into a corner. They had a piece of legislation that said the value of Real property could be raised to more than 2% a year; now they needed something to address property tax values in a declining market.
In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that allows a temporary reduction in assessed value when a real property suffers a “decline-in-value.” A decline-in-value occurs when the current market value of real property is less than the current assessed value as of January 1 of a given year.
As an example for California property tax purposes, say your property has a value of $200,000 on January 1. The assessor needs to prepare the property tax value for the upcoming fiscal year, which runs July 1 through June 30 of each year. January 1, prior to the beginning of the fiscal year is the date of valuation for each fiscal year. So on January 1 your property was worth $210,000. But under Proposition 13 the California property tax assessor can only place an assessment $202,000, even though the market value is $210,000.
Taking the same example for California property tax purposes, say your $200,000 property has a value of $190,000 on January 1. Under Proposition 13 your property would still be valued at $202,000. But under the new Proposition 8 the assessor is allowed to enroll the lower of the factored base year value ($202,000) or the current fair market value ($190,000). The assessment should rightfully be $190,000. But is it?
Problems with the System
We’ve shown how the California property tax payer tried to deal with an unfair property tax system. Both Proposition 13 and Proposition 8 attempted to regulate the value of the assessment so that real property owners pay the right California property taxes in both an appreciating and a depreciating market. But notice the wording in the paragraph about Proposition 8:
In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that allows a temporary reduction in assessed value when a property suffers a “decline-in-value.”
Notice that the amendment “allows” a temporary reduction. Some County assessor’s have held they are not required to reduce values. Others have been very forthcoming in recognizing the value declines and have been very proactive. But they can never do the job of recognizing individual property valuation changes. So they are held to doing mass appraisal for the most part on housing tracts and across very similar properties. Invariably, some are too high and some are too low. And still there is another problem.
Once the property taxes and the value have been reduced under Proposition 8, the County assessor is charged with raising the California property tax value when the value increases. Once again this is very subjective. The assessor enrolls a value of $195,000 for the coming year. Should it have stayed at $190,000? Should it have dropped further? Should it have been $193,000. All of these answers are dependent upon one person’s opinion of value. Are you content to let the assessor’s office make that determination?
Let’s look at some bigger numbers. In one of our examples of a recent reduction achieved on a property in central California, a $36 million property was reduced to $15 million. That’s an annual property tax savings of $226,000 for our client. Maybe next year the California property tax assessor wants to raise the assessment up to $25 million. Will that be correct? Maybe it should be $22 million. The difference is some $30,000 in California property taxes paid. That’s a lot of money for one man’s opinion.
So there you have it. Under Proposition 13 the value can only be raised 2% per year. Assuming the annual property tax values appreciate greater than 2% there is no dispute. But if the values depreciate there is only one thing to do: fight!
Go to PREPARING THE APPEAL
If this is enough information and you wish to have your property taxes reduced, please call us immediately at (888) 678-9TAX or fill out the simple form below and we will contact you at your convenience.
Comments or questions are welcome.
