Benjamin Lanka, writing for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, has an article about lax enforcement for giving the homestead property tax credit. The exemption is supposed to apply only to primary residences, but there isn’t much in the way of enforcement to make sure that people aren’t taking the credit for their lake house while they also take the exemption for property elsewhere in the state.
The reason to cheat the system is obvious: It saves homeowners a lot of money. A $200,000 home near Fox Lake in Steuben County would be billed $1,642.58 with a homestead exemption, but $2,371.68 without the benefit. In Wayne Township in Fort Wayne, an owner of a $100,000 house would pay $1,097.74 with the exemption, but would have to pay $2,537.72 without it.
The article contrasts Indiana’s haphazard enforcement against double dippers with Florida’s system which apparently has strong enforcement mechanisms and clear penalties.
But county officials said they have had difficulty working with the state on the problem. Bill Borne, Adams County auditor, said that county enforcement efforts have even been curtailed by the state.
Some auditors asked for Indiana voter identification or driver’s license to grant the exemption, but Borne said some legislators complained about the tactics, saying the exemptions should be easier to get.
“It’s a different philosophy. ‘If you file, you have to just give it to them when they come in,’ †he said. “That’s not fair.â€
Apparently we make it harder to vote in Indiana than we do to claim a second homestead exemption for your lake house.
Doug wrote:
“Apparently we make it harder to vote in Indiana than we do to claim a second homestead exemption for your lake house.”
Surprise!
Apples and oranges as usual, but another great inane way to voice your displeasure about asking people to prove who they are (for free).
Here’s another great comparison: Apparently we make it harder to vote in Indiana (that whole pesky free i.d. thing) than we do to pump gas. Who’d a thunk it……
I wouldn’t carry on so much if the in person voter ID regulation didn’t look so much like a pretext to inhibit voting. For example, if the proponents of the additional bureaucracy had taken care to clearly identify the the problem instead of assuming its existence. Or shown the slightest interest in whether absentee voting might also be subject to irregularities. Or been open to other forms of identification besides state and federal photo IDs.
Who are denied voting, non -counted ballots, and official, irregular voter record keeping should have the same priority as voters who are not qualified.
Bush is president only becauses votes weren’t or couldn’t be counted,and many were denied the right to vote in Florida. There is low state priority for voting,and poor counting,many voters turned away from polls, coupled with new, confusing voting machines in Florida gave the country to Bush and I would say that’s where the legislation should start to correct irreglarities. Counties have the great burden of voting expense for elections,and it’s ‘only’ an occasional event. How different is Florida from Indiana,winter weather not up for discussion? Both states have mostly republican dominated counties with a few democratic controlled counties that are targeted by Republicans to make sure no illegal voters vote there. Indiana could have been Florida in 2000 maybe.
New to your blog, love your honest insight.
That doesn’t seem fair to be able to double dipp in the homestead law for taxes. I don’t live in Indiana but in every state everyone should have to pay fairly. Not everyone can afford 2 houses and get the exemption on both. So, a person should be limited to one exemption per address. (Their primary living address)
What is the reason for a “homestead” exemption being given on some residences but not others? I can see not giving it if a property is a rental, but if it’s just a home where someone resides for part of the year, leaving it empty otherwise, and thus presumably placing far less of a burden on local services than a full-time resident, then why should that person pay as much as 100% more in property taxes? Maybe it’s because that person doesn’t vote locally, so the legislature doesn’t really care about whether they are taxed equitably.
I think the policy reflects a preference for home ownership. Most times, a person who can afford a second house doesn’t need additional help from the legislature. And, after all, the property owner gets the first exemption just like everyone else.