Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout11-22-2011 Tax Classification fy2012 FISCAL YEAR 2012 TAX CLASSIFICATION HEARING November 22, 2011 tfi3o Fiscal Year 2012 Tax Classification November 22, 2011 Tax Rates and the Commercial Shift The first step in setting the tax rate is to determine the tax levy or that amount of money that is to be raised by real and personal property taxation. FY 11 levy $ 72,354,348 includes debt service start FY 11 levy limit $ 71,929,016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + 2.50% $ 1,798,225 + New Growth $ 989,403 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = FY 12 levy limit $ 74,716,644 + Debt Service $ 372,391 under levy limit $ (6,291) caused by rounding - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a 3.78%increase over = FY 12 levy $ 75,089,035 Fiscal 2011 The second step in setting the tax rate is to determine what percentage share of the tax levy each class of property will bear. For Watertown, there are essentially two property types or classes that collectively raise the levy: Residential Commercial/Industrial &Personal Property(CIP) Very simply stated, the tax rate is determined by dividing the total amount of taxes (levy) to be raised by the total taxable valuation of all real and personal property as determined by the Assessors. For example: For Fiscal Year 2012 the Watertown tax levy of$75,089,035 divided by the total value of all real and personal property of$4,931,676,975 yields a tax rate of$15.23 per thousand dollars of valuation. This calculation results in what is known as the flat or single tax rate. Massachusetts Law permits cities and towns to classify property according to use or property type, and to establish separate tax rates for the different classes. Historically, like many cities and towns, Watertown has chosen to split or"shift"the flat rate into two rates; a residential rate and a commercial (CIP)rate. The shift in the tax rates was originally intended to help alleviate rapidly rising residential tax rates by "shifting" more of the tax burden onto the commercial (CIP) class. Page 1 Originally the law permitted the flat or single rate to be shifted by up to 150%. So the flat tax rate of $15.23 per thousand could be as high as $22.85 for the CIP class resulting in a lower tax rate for the residential class. Later in the 1980's the legislature amended the law to allow for a shift of up to 175% and more recently in Fiscal Year 2004 the shift ceiling was placed at 200% with a sunset clause that expired in Fiscal Year 2009. Over a long period of time, residential property values have risen much more rapidly than commercial property values and without these shifts, residential property owners would today be paying considerably more in real estate taxes than they are today in towns like Watertown that have a split tax rate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Certain suburban and rural towns have a third split in the tax rate for"open space"which permits a lower tax rate for vacant parcels (of which Watertown has very few) to help alleviate development pressure and preserve farmland and woodlands. The Watertown experience Chart A on the following page shows the history of residential and commercial tax rates for the last fifteen fiscal years and the corresponding shifts that were voted in those years. During the late 1990's, the commercial shift continued to increase until it reached the 175% ceiling in Fiscal Year 2002. Without these shifts, the average residential tax bill would have seen much bigger increases. Soon after the ceiling was hit, you can see that residential tax bills suddenly jumped up because shifting the commercial rate up was no longer an option. Over the past year, residential values have increased due to two reasons, the completion of a town wide cyclical recollection program and our improved annual permit recollection. Having accurate residential building data has assisted the Assessors office in implementing a more realistic depreciation schedule for all our residential property. This improvement alone represents half of our residential base increase. The other half is attributed to new growth which is collected through the permit process between January and June of each fiscal year. Commercial values recently dipped town wide with the recent settlement of several appealed properties that were hardest hit by the global recession. Our current Commercial, Industrial, and Personal Property base appears stable heading into calendar year 2012. The impact of selecting different CIP shifts is displayed on Chart A on the following page. Page 2 CHART A RESIDENTIAL CIP COMMERICAL Fiscal tax tax average average exempt exempt tax tax bill tax average tax tax bill Year shift rate assmnt tax dscnt amount bill change rate assmnt bill change 1997 1.50 i 15.45 $ 193,120 $ 2,984 10 $ 298 $ 2,685 24.97 $ 769,100 $ 19,204 I H 1998 1.60 i 15.13 $ 203,640 $ 3,081 10 $ 308 $ 2,773 3.26% 26.75 $ 783,300 $ 20,953 9.11% 1999 1.60 i 14.21 $ 221,320 $ 3,145 10 $ 314 $ 2,830 2.07% 25.28 $ 880,200 $ 22,251 6.20% S 2000 1.64 1 13.39 $ 241,650 $ 3,236 10 $ 324 $ 2,912 2.89% 24.93 $ 1,010,500 $ 25,192 13.21% T 2001 1.66 1 11.93 $ 281,350 $ 3,357 10 $ 336 $ 3,021 3.73% 23.06 $ 1,240,000 $ 28,594 13.51% O 2002 1.75 1 12.51 $ 299,600 $ 3,748 20 $ 750 $ 2,998 -0.74% 22.66 $ 1,331,200 $ 30,165 5.49%1 R 2003 1.75 1 12.65 $ 315,900 $ 3,996 20 $ 799 $ 3,197 6.62% 22.68 $ 1,422,600 $ 32,265 6.96%1 Y 2004 1.75 1 10.35 $ 426,456 $ 4,414 20 $ 883 $ 3,531 10.45% 19.90 $ 1,600,000 $ 31,840 -1.32%1 2005 1.75 1 10.91 $ 452,069 $ 4,932 20 $ 986 $ 3,946 11.74% 20.09 $ 1,630,000 $ 32,747 2.85%1 2006 1.75 1 11.17 $ 455,372 $ 5,087 20 $ 1,017 $ 4,069 3.13% 20.35 $ 1,630,000 $ 33,171 1.29%1 2007 1.75 1 10.45 $ 499,310 $ 5,218 20 $ 1,044 $ 4,174 2.58% 19.15 $ 1,825,600 $ 34,960 5.40%1 2008 1.75 1 11.39 $ 466,647 $ 5,315 20 $ 1,063 $ 4,252 1.87% 21.01 $ 1,825,600 $ 38,356 9.71%1 2009 _ 1.75 1 12.24 $ 443,666 $ 5,430__ 20 _ $ 1,086_$ 4,344 __2_16%22.54_$ 1,825,600_$ 41,149__ 7.28% 2010 1.75 1 13.31 $ 417,310 $ 5,554 20 $ 1,111 $ 4,444 2.28% 24.58 $ 1,734,300 $ 42,629 _ 3.60%1 2011 1.75 1 13.92 $ 407,408 $ 5,671 20 $ 1,134 $ 4,537 2.10% 25.87 $ 1,598,735 $ 41,359 _ 0.51%01 I 2012 1.70 1 14.60 $ 410,554 $ 5,994 20 $ 1,199 $ 4,795 5.69% 25.87 $ 1,564,500 $ 40,474 -2.14% 2012 1.75 1 14.96 $ 410,554 $ 6,142 25 $ 1,535 $ 4,606 1.52% 26.64 $ 1,564,500 $ 41,678 0.77% pg 9 2012 1.75 1 14.40 $ 410,554 $ 5,912 20 $ 1,182 $ 4,730 4.25% 26.64 $ 1,564,500 $ 41,678 0.77% pg 8 Page 3 The Residential Exemption Thirteen municipalities in Massachusetts have adopted the Residential Exemption. This provision in the law allows for a shift of the tax burden within the residential class by granting a discount to owner occupied properties. There are no age or income requirements. The only requirement is that the property owner occupy the property on January 1 of the year preceding the benefit year. So to qualify for the residential exemption for Fiscal Year 2012, the property must have been owned and occupied by the applicant on or before January 1 of 2011. The Residential Exemption discount is voted on each year by the Town Council and it can range anywhere between 1% to 30% of the average residential property assessment. Like the commercial shift, there is no loss of tax revenue for the town, but instead the tax burden is shifted from one group of taxpayers to another. Qualifying residential properties receive a tax decrease while non-qualifying residential taxpayers receive a tax increase. For example: If the total value of all residential property is 750 million with a tax rate of $10. per thousand, the residential class raises 7.5 million dollars in property tax revenue. Now if the average residential property is assessed for $100,000 and receives a 20% discount, the new taxable assessment becomes $80,000. This discount when applied to many qualifying properties has the effect of lowering the total assessed value of the residential property class. The same amount of tax revenue must still be collected, so now a total residential property value of 675 million must raise 7.5 million dollars and the result is an adjusted residential tax rate of$11.11 per thousand. So the qualifying property assessed for $100,000 would be discounted to $80,000 and pay $888.88 in taxes (a savings of$111.11) while a non qualifying property assessed for $100,000 will pay$1,111 (an increase of$111.11). The chart on the previous page (Chart A) shows the history of the Watertown residential exemption discount over the last thirteen years. As the average residential assessment increased over time, the exemption amount also increased, giving a greater benefit to the owner occupied qualified properties and exacting higher taxes from non-qualifying properties. With recent declines in residential values, the dollar benefit has continued to increase because the residential tax rate has increased. For Fiscal Year 2012 the Assessors are projecting 6,307 qualifying properties. Because the total tax collected from the residential class must remain the same, this has the effect of driving up the residential tax rate from a projected $12.53 per thousand with no exemption to $14.40 utilizing the historic 20% exemption discount and a CIP shift of 175% (Chart B on page 5). Page 4 Fiscal Year 2012 Residential Exemption (For Owner Occupied properties) SHIFT= 1.75 / Projected Tax Rates \ CHART B page 5 $ 12.53 $ 12.95 $ 13.40 $ 13.88 $ 14.40 $ 14.96 $ 15.56 Discount% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% I 25% 30% non non Exemption Exemption Exemption Exemption Exemption Exemption Exemption qualifying qualifying value credit 0 $ 20,528 $ 41,055 $ 61,583 $ 82,111 $ 102,639 $ 123,166 property property tax credit 0 $ 266 $ 550 $ 855 $ 1,182 $ 1,535 $ 1,916 at 20%factor at 25%factor Assessment taxes taxes taxes taxes taxes taxes taxes taxes taxes $ 100,000 $ 1,253 $ 1,029 $ 790 $ 533 $ 258 $ - $ - $ 1,440 $ 1,496 $ 150,000 $ 1,880 $ 1,677 $ 1,460 $ 1,227 $ 978 $ 709 $ 418 $ 2,160 $ 2,244 low $ 200,000 $ 2,506 $ 2,324 $ 2,130 $ 1,921 $ 1,698 $ 1,457 $ 1,196 $ 2,880 $ 2,992 $ 250,000 $ 3,133 $ 2,972 $ 2,800 $ 2,615 $ 2,418 $ 2,205 $ 1,974 $ 3,600 $ 3,740 $ 300,000 $ 3,759 $ 3,619 $ 3,470 $ 3,309 $ 3,138 $ 2,953 $ 2,752 $ 4,320 $ 4,488 $ 350,000 $ 4,386 $ 4,267 $ 4,140 $ 4,003 $ 3,858 $ 3,701 $ 3,530 $ 5,040 $ 5,236 $ 400,000 $ 5,012 $ 4,914 $ 4,810 $ 4,697 $ 4,578 $ 4,449 $ 4,308 $ 5,760 $ 5,984 ave $ 410,554 $ 5,144 $ 5,051 $ 4,951 $ 4,844 $ 4,730 $ 4,606 $ 4,472 $ 5,912 $ 6,142 $ 450,000 $ 5,639 $ 5,562 $ 5,480 $ 5,391 $ 5,298 $ 5,197 $ 5,086 $ 6,480 $ 6,732 $ 500,000 $ 6,265 $ 6,209 $ 6,150 $ 6,085 $ 6,018 $ 5,945 $ 5,864 $ 7,200 $ 7,480 $ 550,000 $ 6,892 $ 6,857 $ 6,820 $ 6,779 $ 6,738 $ 6,693 $ 6,642 $ 7,920 $ 8,228 $ 600,000 $ 7,518 $ 7,504 $ 7,490 $ 7,473 $ 7,458 $ 7,441 $ 7,420 $ 8,640 $ 8,976 $ 650,000 $ 8,145 $ 8,152 $ 8,160 $ 8,167 $ 8,178 $ 8,189 $ 8,198 $ 9,360 $ 9,724 $ 700,000 $ 8,771 $ 8,799 $ 8,830 $ 8,861 $ 8,898 $ 8,937 $ 8,976 $ 10,080 $ 10,472 high $ 750,000 $ 9,398 $ 9,447 $ 9,500 $ 9,555 $ 9,618 $ 9,685 $ 9,754 $ 10,800 $ 11,220 $ 800,000 $ 10,024 $ 10,094 $ 10,170 $ 10,249 $ 10,338 $ 10,433 $ 10,532 $ 11,520 $ 11,968 $ 850,000 $ 10,651 $ 10,742 $ 10,840 $ 10,943 $ 11,058 $ 11,181 $ 11,310 $ 12,240 $ 12,716 $ 900,000 $ 11,277 $ 11,389 $ 11,510 $ 11,637 $ 11,778 $ 11,929 $ 12,088 $ 12,960 $ 13,464 $ 1,000,000 $ 12,530 $ 12,684 $ 12,850 $ 13,025 $ 13,218 $ 13,425 $ 13,644 $ 14,400 $ 14,960 - The residential exemption amount(value credit)is based on the average residential assessment(yellow) multiplied by the chosen discount factor which can range between 1 and 30% - This value credit is then subtracted from the assessed value of every qualifying property. The reduced assessment is then multipled by the tax rate that results from the selected discount factor. - Essentially,the residential exemption is funded by the non-owner occupied residential properties which are taxed at the full assessed value with no value credit. - As the property assessment increases,the tax savings from the exemption diminishes to a point where high value properties actually pay more with the residential exemption in place than without it(pink shaded area). Who is receiving the benefit of the Residential Exemption? type total# exempt percent single fam. 2898 2474 85.4% condos 3310 2103 63.5% 2 family 2820 1542 54.7% 3 family 397 147 37.0% apts 4-8 uni 128 12 9.4% other 166 29 17.5% totals 9719 6307 64.9% Page 5 Community Comparison When considering the impact of tax rates and shifts, it is useful to look beyond our borders to discover how nearby communities are dealing with similar issues. Chart C on the following page provides a view of the tax structure of other nearby cities and towns. Some of our neighbors have split tax rates while others do not. Generally, the smaller the commercial/industrial and personal property (CIP) share is of the total assessed value, the less benefit there is to shifting the tax rate. Arlington and Belmont both have very low CIP shares while Boston and Cambridge have high CIP shares. Boston and Cambridge also offer a larger residential exemption percentage which coupled with large commercial tax bases, serves to push down the average residential tax bill. While Newton does have a commercial shift, they have chosen not to utilize the residential exemption and consequently the average residential tax bill is very high. Waltham, which is most similar to Watertown in its socio- economic structure, has a much larger commercial tax base which results in a lower residential tax rate and like Watertown they also have utilized a 20% residential exemption discount in the past. Taxpayers often cite that other nearby cities and towns have lower tax rates but they fail to realize that the average residential assessments in those municipalities may be considerably higher. Just looking at the tax rate in Newton for example, a taxpayer might conclude that taxes are lower there than in Watertown. But with a much higher average assessed value, taxes in Newton are in fact much higher. While it is true that more affluent cities and towns have many more high end properties which tend to drag up the average, it is also safe to say that the typical home in Watertown would be considerably more valuable were it placed in Newton or Belmont and conversely, somewhat less valuable if placed in Waltham. Page 6 Chart C COMMUNITY COMPARISON For Fiscal Year 2011 FISCAL YEAR 2011 RES COMM share of value AVE RES AVE TAX TAX RES CIP 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 :RES VALUE RES EXEMPT.: RES MUNICIPALITY: RATE RATE % % SHIFT: SHIFT: SHIFT: SHIFT: SHIFT : SHIFT: FY 2011 EXEMPT: SAVINGS: TAX ARLINGTON $ 12.41 $ 12.41 ; 93.99 ; 6.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 $ 479,345 ; no $ - ; $5,949 BELMONT I $ 13.24 I $ 13.24 93.88 I 6.12 I 1.00 I 1.00 I 1.00 1.00 I 1.00 I 1.00 I $ 730,850 I no I $ - ; $9,676 I I I I I I I I I I I I BOSTON $ 12.79 $ 31.04 ; 65.16 34.84 ; 1.90 1.83 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 $ 420,760 30% $ 1,595 $3,787 CAMBRIDGE I $ 8.16 I 19.90 61.35 138.65 I 1.75 I 1.75 11.675 1.683 11.694 11.693 I $ 654,087 I 30% I $ 1,601 I $3,736 NEWTON $ 10.90 $ 20.89 89.53 10.47 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 $ 788,246 no $ - $8,592 I I I I I I I I I I I I WALTHAM $ 13.09 ; $ 30.43 ; 67.14 ; 32.86 ; 1.90 1.79 1.75 1.749 ; 1.75 1.75 $ 372,300 ; 20% $ 1,019 ; $4,086 WATERTOWN ; $ 13.92 ; $ 25.87 ; 80.58 :1 19.42 ; 1.75 :1 1.75 :1 1.75 :1 1.75 :1 1.75 :1 1.75 :1 $ 407,408 :1 20% :1 $ 1,134 ; $4,537 im Page 7 ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2012 RESIDENTIAL TAX INCREASE page 8 (at a CIP shift of 1 .75% and a residential exemption 20%)VIIIIIIIII FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL * $ 4,537 13.92 tax rate FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL (EST) ** $ 4,730 14.40 tax rate ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 193 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 4.25% * Based on a FY2011 average residential assessment of$407,408 and receiving an estimated residential exemption of$81,482 in value (20%) and $1,134 in taxes ** Based on a FY2012 average residential assessment of$410,554 and receiving an estimated residential exemption of$82,111 in value (20%) and $1,182 in taxes FOR NON OWNER OCCUPIED PROPERTY FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL $ 5,671 FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL $ 5,912 ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 241 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 4.25% ----- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2012 COMMERCIAL TAX INCREASE (at a CIP shift of 1.75%) FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL * $ 41,359 25.87 tax rate FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL (EST) ** $ 41,678 26.64 tax rate ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 319 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 0.77% * based on an average assessment in fiscal 2011 of $1,598,735 ** based on an average assessment in fiscal 2012 of $1,564,500 Page 8 Page 8 ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2012 RESIDENTIAL TAX INCREASE (at a CIP shift of 1 .75% and a residential exemption 25%) FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL * $ 4,537 13.92 tax rate FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL (EST) ** $ 4,606 14.96 tax rate ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 69 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 1.52% * Based on a FY2011 average residential assessment of $407,408 and receiving an estimated residential exemption of $81,482 in value (20%) and $1,134 in taxes ** Based on a FY2012 average residential assessment of $410,554 and receiving an estimated residential exemption of $102,639 in value (25%) and $1,535 in taxes FOR NON OWNER OCCUPIED PROPERTY FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL $ 5,671 FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL $ 6,142 ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 471 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 8.31% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2012 COMMERCIAL TAX INCREASE (at a CIP shift of 1.75%) FISCAL YEAR 2011 AVERAGE TAX BILL * $ 41,359 25.87 tax rate FISCAL YEAR 2012 AVERAGE TAX BILL (EST) ** $ 41,678 26.64 tax rate ESTIMATED AVERAGE DOLLAR INCREASE $ 319 ESTIMATED AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE 0.77% * based on an average assessment in tiscal Z011 of $1,595,735 ** based on an average assessment in fiscal 2012 of $1,564,500 Page 9