• Puzzled in Paradise Puzzled in Paradise At the Sept. 8 meeting of the County Council, a very interesting tax relief bill was introduced by Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura — Draft Bill No. 2144 — which purports to reward the owner
• Puzzled in Paradise
Puzzled in Paradise
At the Sept. 8 meeting of the County Council, a very interesting tax relief bill was introduced by Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura — Draft Bill No. 2144 — which purports to reward the owner of a single residence home (that does not qualify for any exemptions) with a 30-percent discount on the property tax if the owner agrees not to sell it for 10 years.
Nothing is said on the use of the property, which opens up some interesting features.
If you look up the assessment records of most, if not all vacation rentals, you’ll find that no exemptions are taken, so these properties are assessed at around $1 million and more, with a resulting property tax generally of around $4,000 and more.
There appears to be no dispute that “vacation rental” is a commercial activity, yet our council members steadfastly refuse to recognize this bit of reality. Otherwise, the property tax would be doubled. One can only surmise that our council members believe that the use of residential property for vacation rental accrues to some public benefit and therefore deserves the lower property tax.
Under Bill 2144 the owner of vacation rental property can be further rewarded with a 30-percent discount on the property tax — with the result that what logically would be a property tax of $8,000 would first be reduced to $4,000 by not recognizing its commercial use; and, under Bill 2144, reduced to $2,800 if the property owner promises not to sell it for ten years. After all, why would anyone want to sell when such a good deal is offered by the government?
Now, let’s hear from the County Council what great public benefits accrue from vocational rentals to warrant a 65-percent reduction (from $8,000 to $2,800) in the property tax?
