Print

Print


It was proposed in the senate and failed in conference that those with a
million dollars net worth beyond the primary residence would be ineligible
for income sensitivity- a seemingly easy thing to agree on but again it
failed to become law.

 

James Gregoire

Board of Listers, Chair

Town of Fairfield

 

From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendy W
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 10:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Education Rebates

 

Some people who don't have jobs have an income and some people who own
property have additional assets which negate the need for an income, which
is exactly what the current formula overlooks.  There is a need for an asset
test.

 

Wendy Wilton

Rutland City Treasurer

  _____  

From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Town Clerk
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 10:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Education Rebates

 

Mary Jane,

 

            Thank you for your answer.  However, the parties in question
boast that they don't file income tax returns because their income isn't
taxable, so, it seems that they should have no income tax refund to apply to
property taxes.  This has been going since the beginning of "income
sensitivity" and it will always seem unfair to me that an education
rebate/pre-bate can be greater than the individual's entire property tax
bill.  It means that other property owners are paying the education tax,
municipal tax and then giving them some extra spending cash. 

            I haven't met anyone in my area of the state who thinks this
current system is a good one.  A simple 1.5% income tax surcharge dedicated
solely to education would be fairer.  Not every who has a job owns property,
but, anyone who has a job owns an income.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

  _____  

From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Grace, Mary Jane
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 7:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Education Rebates

 

There can be a few reasons. Perhaps the individual included some income tax
refund money.  Maybe the relative assessed value of the property changed
considerably from the previous year.  Was the town reappraised this year.
It's possible the parcel was over-assessed previously relative to other
properties in town.  Maybe the effective tax rate changed considerably from
the previous year.  The income sensitivity payment is a "look-back."  It
uses the previous year's income, assessment and taxes.  You have to look at
all those pieces.  

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

Mary Jane Grace, Program Technician

Property Valuation and Review Division

Vermont Dept. of Taxes

802-828-5863

 

 

From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Town Clerk
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Education Rebates

 

Hi All!

            I know this question has been asked before, but for the life of
me I can't recall any of the answers that have been given.

Here's the situation:  a property owner has a non taxable income, files an
HS122 and gets an income sensitivity refund greater than his actual property
tax, so, we send him a check for the difference.

            How is it possible for someone to get a "refund" greater than
what they owe?  Does it seem right that some tax payers are not only
supplementing the entire property tax of others, but also giving them extra?