TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
88sins wrote:ADONI wrote:Soon enough we will be paying first world taxes, for third world returns...
wouldn't be that bad if it end up that way. we already paying 1st world taxes for zero returns right now anyway.
Suffer non PNM ppl suffer88sins wrote:the minimum arv for buildings as stated by clown inbutt was 18K, supposedly 1500/month, & the tax on that was said to be approximately 480 P.A.
Proton, I seriously doubt what you saying about houses in rural areas, seeing what property rentals are going for, even using the outdated data they using. We also have to remember, they valuing arv of the land as well as the house. and many properties in those rural areas, even though the house might not be substantial in size, the lands tied to those houses are often worth more than the houses.
there's a lot of people especially in south, with plenty under utilized lands that aren't planted with anything so they aren't even supposed to be classed as agricultural properties. those people go feel it.
88sins wrote:the minimum arv for buildings as stated by clown inbutt was 18K, supposedly 1500/month, & the tax on that was said to be approximately 480 P.A.
Proton, I seriously doubt what you saying about houses in rural areas, seeing what property rentals are going for, even using the outdated data they using. We also have to remember, they valuing arv of the land as well as the house. and many properties in those rural areas, even though the house might not be substantial in size, the lands tied to those houses are often worth more than the houses.
there's a lot of people especially in south, with plenty under utilized lands that aren't planted with anything so they aren't even supposed to be classed as agricultural properties. those people go feel it.
ProtonPowder wrote:88sins wrote:the minimum arv for buildings as stated by clown inbutt was 18K, supposedly 1500/month, & the tax on that was said to be approximately 480 P.A.
Proton, I seriously doubt what you saying about houses in rural areas, seeing what property rentals are going for, even using the outdated data they using. We also have to remember, they valuing arv of the land as well as the house. and many properties in those rural areas, even though the house might not be substantial in size, the lands tied to those houses are often worth more than the houses.
there's a lot of people especially in south, with plenty under utilized lands that aren't planted with anything so they aren't even supposed to be classed as agricultural properties. those people go feel it.
88sins wrote:ProtonPowder wrote:88sins wrote:the minimum arv for buildings as stated by clown inbutt was 18K, supposedly 1500/month, & the tax on that was said to be approximately 480 P.A.
Proton, I seriously doubt what you saying about houses in rural areas, seeing what property rentals are going for, even using the outdated data they using. We also have to remember, they valuing arv of the land as well as the house. and many properties in those rural areas, even though the house might not be substantial in size, the lands tied to those houses are often worth more than the houses.
there's a lot of people especially in south, with plenty under utilized lands that aren't planted with anything so they aren't even supposed to be classed as agricultural properties. those people go feel it.
For those with large acreages of agriculturals with a house on it, it is classed as homestead. One lot from the acreage goes as residential and the house ARV will be calculated, while for the rest of the agricultural land, the tax is calculated as 1% of 90% of 2% of the capital value of the agricultural land and any agricultural buildings thereon. If the agricultural land is worth $1m the tax will be calculated as $180.00
http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/al ... /58.03.pdf
page 22 for ARV calculation
http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/al ... /76.04.pdf
page 27 for tax calculation[/quote
And what happens with those ppl living on a small section of the lands they own and have large expanses of lands that are NOT used for agriculture?
ProtonPowder wrote:88sins wrote:ProtonPowder wrote:88sins wrote:the minimum arv for buildings as stated by clown inbutt was 18K, supposedly 1500/month, & the tax on that was said to be approximately 480 P.A.
Proton, I seriously doubt what you saying about houses in rural areas, seeing what property rentals are going for, even using the outdated data they using. We also have to remember, they valuing arv of the land as well as the house. and many properties in those rural areas, even though the house might not be substantial in size, the lands tied to those houses are often worth more than the houses.
there's a lot of people especially in south, with plenty under utilized lands that aren't planted with anything so they aren't even supposed to be classed as agricultural properties. those people go feel it.
For those with large acreages of agriculturals with a house on it, it is classed as homestead. One lot from the acreage goes as residential and the house ARV will be calculated, while for the rest of the agricultural land, the tax is calculated as 1% of 90% of 2% of the capital value of the agricultural land and any agricultural buildings thereon. If the agricultural land is worth $1m the tax will be calculated as $180.00
http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/al ... /58.03.pdf
page 22 for ARV calculation
http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/al ... /76.04.pdf
page 27 for tax calculation[/quote
And what happens with those ppl living on a small section of the lands they own and have large expanses of lands that are NOT used for agriculture?
You made a realistic scenario and I explained exactly why the tax is not inequitable. Now you coming with a really stupid one.
Yes. The poor, scared directors of Palmiste Estates and Maruni Enterprises, in whose asset portfolios dozens of plots of vacant land sit. I, for one, tremble at the thought of it.
Poor Coosal, in whose asset portfolios sit vast swathes of light industrial property.
Poor proprieters and money launderers, in whose asset portfolios sit dozens of plots of commercial land bought and cleared for triple market value for no other reason than to burn some liquid money.
Come better than that nah.
88sins wrote:Just as I suspected, you in fact a tripe threat. You are dense, dunce & dotish.
As a matter of fact, I presented the exact same scenario in both my posts. Because you might think you replied to my post, but you in fact did not. so I put it differently for your simple mind to understand. You answered a question I never asked about ppl living in homes on vast expanses of agricultural lands. I mentioned ppl living on vast expanses of lands that are not planted and are NOT agricultural lands.
But never mind, you need not respond to this post since I already have the answer I was looking for.
son, try to wrap your mind around this. 88sins wrote:me? angry? at you?
you might be important to someone somewhere, but you're not important enough to me to make me angry.
This is some serious88sins wrote:proton, your emotions, they just run you don't they lol.
But I don't get why u so sensitive tho, about me stating a very true and extremely easy to understand fact that you are of no importance to me. I strongly recommend that address that sensitivity issue before it manifests in physical changes like lactation and menstruation
btw, I don't backtrack, backpedal, reverse, retract or however you'd like to say it. If I make an error, I own it and if need be apologize accordingly. However, in this instance I'm not inclined to do either, because I'm still of the firm impression you're dense, dunce and dotish. And you may not comprehend this, but me thinking and openly stating what I think about you doesn't equate to me being angry, it just means I think you're an idiot.
anyway, have a happy Friday.
88sins wrote:proton, your emotions, they just run you don't they lol.
But I don't get why u so sensitive tho, about me stating a very true and extremely easy to understand fact that you are of no importance to me. I strongly recommend that address that sensitivity issue before it manifests in physical changes like lactation and menstruation
btw, I don't backtrack, backpedal, reverse, retract or however you'd like to say it. If I make an error, I own it and if need be apologize accordingly. However, in this instance I'm not inclined to do either, because I'm still of the firm impression you're dense, dunce and dotish. And you may not comprehend this, but me thinking and openly stating what I think about you doesn't equate to me being angry, it just means I think you're an idiot.
anyway, have a happy Friday.
ProtonPowder wrote:I would be against it because of the indirect effects.
[u]No property tax= no incentive for a central property database or database of real property or register of deeds. ]Both these things being worked on at present to tie into the same purpose. Next time you buying land and wondering why the title search taking so long, give this a thought.[/u
When you realise that TnT's global rank in land registry's robustness is 151st in the world, out of 187, you might realise that this was an attempt in the right direction.
http://www.instituteofsurveyors.com/ow/blogs/2
88sins wrote:ProtonPowder wrote:I would be against it because of the indirect effects.
[u]No property tax= no incentive for a central property database or database of real property or register of deeds. ]Both these things being worked on at present to tie into the same purpose. Next time you buying land and wondering why the title search taking so long, give this a thought.[/u
When you realise that TnT's global rank in land registry's robustness is 151st in the world, out of 187, you might realise that this was an attempt in the right direction.
http://www.instituteofsurveyors.com/ow/blogs/2
you saying that the tens and hundreds of thousand of dollars in stamp duty ppl does be paying to transfer properties, ISN'T an incentive to keep a central property database? This, as opposed to the proposed minimum $480/year they might board ppl for in property tax? Where you get that idea? So when a man buying a property & he gets hit with a stamp duty fee of $250K, what exactly he paying that for? just for paying it sake? Property tax here is just a way for crooked politicians to bleed more out of ppl pockets in the long run, for doing basically nothing. Simple as that. Because come hell or high water, if they were to implement it and collect it in full for the next decade, we'd still be going through the exact same kaka we going through today. It will be diverted elsewhere,and not gonna benefit the property or it's community in any way.
When they first proposed this, the talk was that collected taxes would go to the go to fund the regional corporations for the areas where they were paid & other local gov't bodies in those areas, so that those organizations need not lean so hard on the central govt for funding to operate. You remember that? That was one of the main selling points to justify this property tax, claiming it would then free up monies that could be better used elsewhere, & it was the primary reasons for all the yappage about 'local govt reform' some years back. Notice not a soul h even whispering anything about 'local gov't reform' lately?
The low ranking of our local land registry has less to do with property taxes & more to do with ppl failing to transfer properties in a timely manner, errors wrt dimensions as well as on documentation such as deeds & cadastral sheets hat occurred over time, among several other factors.
As regards title searches, long is a subjective term eh. Some take months, others take weeks, & others take days. & theres multiple reasons for this that have absolutely nothing to do with property tax. One of which is so many deeds that were hand written and are now so old that they in a condition where the writings on them are barely discernible, some pages torn, & yet even others missing. Another reason being lazy search clerks, (btw, there's times when a lil motivation goes a long way). Another reason being so many racket deeds being registered, so one property would appear to have multiple individual owners at the same time, creating chaos, so each has to be back tracked & the original source documents found & followed from there. & there still more, but I've already made my point.
But all that aside, if it were up to me. I personally would dispose of property tax altogether. yes, they go come up with some other hare brained idea to fleece the populace. but at the very least, when a person spends hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to buy or build a property, they won't be a tenant of the state and at the mercy of a merciless wrinkle faced albino minion
88sins wrote:well, an increase in some other type of tax to "recover" what "revenue" they not getting from it would still be acceptable to a large degree.
ppl with limited income wouldn't be at risk of losing their homes, and nobody would be a tenant of the state even after spending hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars to buy or build their own homes and not depending on the state for housing.
88sins wrote:stamp duty is not based solely on the value of the land, but the definition you used is technically correct.
in any regard, allyuh remember when this property tax catastrophe was initially being discussed? do you recall during that time how every 6 seconds some politician kept yapping about "local government reform", and about how this new tax regime would be used to fund the regional corporations so they would be less dependant on central government funding? Notice, it's been years since any of them even whispered anything similar to what they were so passionate about when they were pushing this new tax regime.
this is not an accident, nor is it a coincidence.
88sins wrote:no matter what clown inbutt or chief toolum head say, let us all as grown adults be honest
nobody wants to risk losing what they worked hard to acquire for an opportunity to pay for getting nothing positive in return. & nobody anywhere ever actually wants to pay more taxes. & this is particularly true when they live on modest incomes and are fully well aware that for their additional tax dollars they will continue to see it being piddled away and not used to benefit them in any way, or that their tax dollars will be used to reduce taxation of corporations & the uber rich.
they hoping ppl forget, & they think not talking about it will allow them & their bs to slide under the radar. That eh go wuk tho.
You forgot eleit, the silent oneDe Dragon wrote:88sins wrote:no matter what clown inbutt or chief toolum head say, let us all as grown adults be honest
nobody wants to risk losing what they worked hard to acquire for an opportunity to pay for getting nothing positive in return. & nobody anywhere ever actually wants to pay more taxes. & this is particularly true when they live on modest incomes and are fully well aware that for their additional tax dollars they will continue to see it being piddled away and not used to benefit them in any way, or that their tax dollars will be used to reduce taxation of corporations & the uber rich.
they hoping ppl forget, & they think not talking about it will allow them & their bs to slide under the radar. That eh go wuk tho.
Careful, the self appointed 2NR Racist Police Squad, led by CoP shogun, and ACP Redman will not be pleased.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 314 guests
