patrick.net

Bap33 says

liveconfused says

instead in bay area they have bounced back, accept the truth,

ahem ~bullpoopy~

Bap33 is right, prices have most definitely not bounced back in the Bay Area. Year-over-year comparisons of the same month (the only price change with meaning) show that prices are still way down from a year ago, enough to wipe out even a "safe" 20% downpayment in most areas. I posted a data link about it recently.

Re the land-value-tax:
tatupu70 says

I’m not sure everyone would agree that it’s fair. Wouldn’t it hurt seniors? and lower income folks? Everyone has to live somewhere and making this the only tax would almost certainly raise housing costs (owning or renting).

We should distinguish between seniors and poor folks. They are definitely not the same crowd, even if there is some overlap. My old boss's boss at Schwab is a senior, but he's rich, and he leaves his $2.5M house in Palo Alto empty and lives in San Francisco at his condo with a view of the GG bridge, because, as he put it, he "bought so long ago that I don't pay any property tax. Prop 13 guarantees that YOU pay my property tax for me, so I can leave it empty."

So if you're rich, even though a senior, tough, you should have to pay your fair share of the land-value tax, unlike the system we have now.

If you're poor, you'll probably live in a place that cheap enough that your land-value tax will be small.

justme says

Suppose someone amassed a large contiguous piece of land. How would one go about bidding on just a small piece of it? How would one ensure that there was road access to the property? How would public lands (such as city streets) be defined?

Allow me to clarify and expand: Suppose someone amasses a large contiguous piece of land by putting it together from smaller pieces. Suppose the land has a hole in the middle which is YOUR land. What does that do to the access, and the general usability of your land?

Another case: What if Tony Soprano comes to you and says that he will bid (buy) your land away from under your feet unless you pay him protection money? How much (%) would you be willing to pay to avoid the hassle?

I think any land-rent system (which is what a land-tax system really is) is rife for exploitation and instabilities.

Anyway, the property is sold on 10/20/09 at $651K.

I guess there still are some people out there willing to pay the amounts for that kind of property.

How do you know that was the sale price? Don't believe any realtors!

by clicking the link CrazyMan had provided at post #3.

@justme,
I'll give it a shot.
The parcels are set on a map and recorded per county. It would not matter if it were 53 connected APN (assessors parcel numbers) or one as big as 52 with your 1 in the center on an island (land locked), the existance of any easments or access roads would be recorded on the map just as obvious as the lines for each property boundry. If you look at a checker board type of map, any land-locked parcel has a (normally 10 foot minimum) easement for access in as direct a line as possible to public road. That easement might be 50 miles long, and have other easements tie-into it along the way ... alot like the dirt roads that The Duke's of Hazzard drive on from Uncle Jessie's to the paved road.... but they are privately held access road, normally gated and locked by the owner's, not far from the public road.

A person can buy your entire town, do a bunch of "lot line adjustments" and create one huge APN - (planning department and General Plan would not allow, but we are just making cinversation here) - and you could be wrapped up entirely by this person's land and all you would have a right to is the same public road you acess now. If the public road is bought up and removed, the new owner would have to provide an access route that is as direct as possible, and all-weather, and is now part of your property profile (or, the county would be made to maintain it.)

In all seriousness, your question is a valid one. A corrupt group of RE professionals makes up most planning commisions. The Gneral Plan is changed by the highest bidder. The way growth is made to flow is the most obvious "good 'ol boy" system on this palnet.

Nomograph says

Do you actually think the two lots will be valued the same when they sell? Sounds kind of silly to me.

The value of a lot is mainly its location value and its present and future zoning. This is a smoothly continuous value that does not change materially from lot to adjacent lot. (There are environmental differentials -- views, insolation, etc. that alter this somewhat, though.)

Back when I was living in Tokyo they were building this monstrosity near my apartment:

back then I didn't have the economical basis to understand the injustice -- the new building was going to steal everyone's light but . . . that's life, right?

Now with my Georgism I understand that insolation is community good and if your building is going to take it from its neighbors there should be a set tax burden to compensate them directly. This would naturally encourage building to conform to sky exposure plane zonings.

So if you’re rich, even though a senior, tough, you should have to pay your fair share of the land-value tax, unlike the system we have now.

Patrick, I'm a 100% LVT proponent but I don't see the value in aggressively taxing owner-occupied single-family homes.

The first priority is commercial land and non owner-occupied rental properties.
Secondly we can look at taxing residential property above a threshold size & value (compared to their zoning).
But at any rate I think any tax on owner-occupied can be just assessed via liens, like the PTP was:

http://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_prop_tax_postponement.html

Suppose the land has a hole in the middle which is YOUR land. What does that do to the access, and the general usability of your land?

LVT regime doesn't arrive ex-nihilo on virgin land. All it really is is a split-tax. Don't tax buildings at all. Tax the land at some proportion of what the land would collect in rents if it were built out to its current zoning. It's really not a big deal, administratively.

I think any land-rent system (which is what a land-tax system really is) is rife for exploitation and instabilities.

Instabilities compared to the jam-job just accomplished this decade by the FIRE sector?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/REALLN?cid=49

LVT is an incredibly beautiful tax regime. It aligns with my left-libertarian principles perfectly -- ideally we all should able to profit from our labor, but since nobody made the land profiting from its ownership is a form of social injustice, an injustice that has been ongoing for centuries.

http://geolib.com/essays/sullivan.dan/royallib.html

Aside from moral considerations, the sheer practicality of the LVT on development is compelling. By reducing the up-front acquisition cost of land we can invest more in capital improvements, using the urban land we have more efficiently.

Just hire a lawyer to represent you and submit your offer. That's what I did some years (decades) ago.

Who cares if everyone else is put off by your buyers' agent being a lawyer? It's your money.

Did Yellowstone live in America for the past 20 years? This is the oldest car salesman in the book...

"there is an unknown bidder who wants it just a bit more than you do, and if you don't pay more in next X days you will not get it". It's a lie creating a sense of urgency under false pretenses to see if you are willing to give them more money for their junk. If I were this Yellowstone person, I would drop that agent, and drop the bid completely.

Besides 650,000 is a lot of money and he is not getting a mansion for that, just a measly 1200sf house.

It does come across to me that "Yellowstone" person is a bit naive. He even bid up $650,000 because an agent told him its worth that much. He didn't actually compare incomes in the area.

The house is still for sale. So the realtors were definitely lying about the other offers.
Business as usual.
When will it finally become illegal for realtors to block all access to the actual seller and to other buyers?
Why don’t we finally get an open market for real estate sales, with all bids and asks publicly listed?

They will never let it happen. Profit comes from others not knowing how low they can bid.

Don’t believe any realtors!

Do you believe the same for politicians? You know, the people that start wars for reasons beyond the propaganda? At least Realtors (small R symbol here) aren't killing innocent people. Why is it that politicians get such an easy pass?

RayAmerica says

Don’t believe any realtors!
Do you believe the same for politicians?

Where I live RE firms pretty much run the town politics. Corruption pretty rampant!

Anybody notice that the selling agent works for the same brokerage as the listing agent? Why even request the letter?

And I'm willing to bet everyone overbidded because their agent recommended it.

Spam Zombie! KILL IT WITH FIRE!

Although, it looks like the house closed less than 2 months after listing, so they probably did have other offers, and spent a few weeks playing them off of each other.

why don't people just use a real estate lawyer? It will be much cheaper than paying some middle man 3% just because they have a pulse.

Either way, you dodged a bullet there.

sfbubblebuyer says

Although, it looks like the house closed less than 2 months after listing, so they probably did have other offers, and spent a few weeks playing them off of each other.

Oldest trick in the book, yet so many people fall for it so easily.

EMan says

why don't people just use a real estate lawyer? It will be much cheaper than paying some middle man 3% just because they have a pulse.

Either way, you dodged a bullet there.

I do not understand the process an making an offer in CA, so I refer to the model used in AZ:

The listing agent is given 6% of the selling price if they complete the entire transaction as per the listing contract. If MLS is used, reciprocity of 3% goes to the buyer agent.
Someone is required to open the door to view the property; this is usually the seller or buyer agent. I do not know of any lawyers that provide this service.
If the buyer is to make an offer, a standard real estate contract is used that can be modified with additional language and/or addendums. A date/time is set to receive a response.

A lawyer or title service can provide services during the escrow process, but this is after the offer is accepted. Therefore, I do not see how you can use a lawyer and save 3% of the sales price.

Edzakory says

I do not see how you can use a lawyer and save 3% of the sales price.

you have to present the offer when the listing falls off contract basically and the listing agent is not longer legally in the picture.

CAR forms are not required to buy a house. Realtor®s just inserted themselves into the process.

Troy says

CAR forms are not required to buy a house. Realtor®s just inserted themselves into the process.

100% correct-a-mundo

Edzakory says

Someone is required to open the door to view the property; this is usually the seller or buyer agent. I do not know of any lawyers that provide this service.
If the buyer is to make an offer, a standard real estate contract is used that can be modified with additional language and/or addendums. A date/time is set to receive a response.

A lawyer or title service can provide services during the escrow process, but this is after the offer is accepted. Therefore, I do not see how you can use a lawyer and save 3% of the sales price.

What stops you from negotiating 3% off of the sales price for not having a buying agent? Other than cartel-like behavior by realtors, of course.