San Francisco Assessor Wants to Raise Property Taxes on Corporations

Phil-Ting-portrait.jpg San Francisco Assessor Phil Ting is starting a campaign to amend Proposition 13, the 31-year-old ballot measure that limits the increase of property taxes statewide to 2% a year. He argues that corporations no longer should reap the benefits of a measure that passed in order to keep seniors and the disenfranchised from losing their homes. He says the ads that aired before Prop 13 passed "never talked about Disneyland, or Universal Studios, or Sunset Records getting the same kind of protections that Grandma or Grandpa Smith would get."

It's a bold argument for solving the state's budget crisis, and not a bad one. But if it means writing another convoluted ballot measure no one's going to understand in a mid-term election no one will vote in, then we doubt it will pass.

Here's Phil's interview with KQED:

UPDATE: Commenter urbanic provides us with the Facebook fan page for Ting's campaign.

Email This Entry


Comments (15) [rss]

user-pic

That sound you hear is the collective "DUH" of everyone in California.

If the people have their way (instead of big money) this will win by a landslide.

user-pic

How's this for simple language?

"'The People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation' of 1978 is hearby repealed."

Lot's of luck getting that one voted in. Oh well.

Getting rid of Prop 13 for business would be wrenching, but good for CA.

Similarly, getting rid of Prop 13 for peoples' homes would be wrenching, but good for CA.

Phil's proposal would raise taxes in an highly efficient way. If your business needs Prop 13 to survive, maybe you shouldn't be in business.

it would be good.... in theory. remember, these are california state representatives that have dollar signs in their eyes...

I wonder what the effect of raising property taxes on businesses might have during the biggest downturn since the great depression? Anyone?......anyone?

I don't know, but I'm sure we could elect a black mayor so you could "protest" the hike.

Increasing taxes during the recession will ensure government programs stay intact, which generally means the people at the bottom of the food chain don't starve.

Great, the company I work for has already sent all of our manufacturing to Ireland because the taxes there are so much cheap. This has cause thousands of Californians to loose their jobs. What do you think raise taxes more will do? It certainly won't help in the job creation department.

No, but learning basic English language skills might...

So, what's your solution? Should we have a race to the bottom where we try to emulate the business climate of the cheapest places on earth? No need for workplace safety if it'll help us compete for jobs with China, right? And those silly minimum wage rules are just holding poor corporate America down. Let's get rid of them and let Mexico set our wage expectations.

Or maybe, just maybe, we need to realize that if we want to live in a society that has all the good things that much malinged thing called the gum'amint provides (like roads, schools, cops, and firefighters), we need to find a way to pay for them.

Oh, and by the way, eliminating prop 13 for businesses lets new businesses compete on a level playing field with older businesses. After all, if I buy a hotel for $20 million, and the identical hotel next door has been owned by the same guy for 30 years, I'm going to pay more than double the property taxes as him. That's not exactly fair or conducive to the entrepreneurial spirit.

Who said anything about a race to the bottom? Right now, I'm for status quo, as in, let's not do something to make unemployment any worse than it already is. I'd be more for fixing the structural reasons we are in this fix in the first place, i.e., the stupid prior initiatives which all sound good in the abstract but when combined put is billions in the red.

Once we actually recover, this (along with other property tax reforms) actually doesn't sound like a bad idea to throw around.

Um, really? You're for the status quo? You're for a bankrupt state that can't pay it's teachers, police or firefighters? Your for a state that has to close all of its parks (and fire all the employees) because it can't afford to keep them open? You're for a state that can't afford to pay for basic health insurance for poor children? I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. Anyone who's for the status quo is either living under a rock or is crazy.

And may not know it, but "the stupid prior initiatives which all sound good in the abstract but when combined put is billions in the red" that you refer to is Prop 13. Repealing it for business is a big step in fixing the structural reason we're in this fix in the first place.

Thanks for taking me out of context. I was remarking that I preferred the status quo in contrast to a "race to the bottom."

Academy of Fart people go OH NOES!

Ting ming fing.. whatever his name is a idiot ....

Post a comment (Comment Policy)

Tips

About SFist

SFist is a website about San Francisco.

Editor: Brock Keeling
Publisher: Gothamist

Contribute

Latest Tip:

Did anyone else see this? This is shameful! http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11
[more]

Latest Photo:

Recent Comments

Subscribe

Use an RSS reader to stay up to date with the latest news and posts from SFist.

All Our RSS