Congrats Milwaukee

[Tugg Speedman]

Must be a special place to be #2 nationally!!!

Who Pays America’s Highest (and Lowest) Property Taxes?

http://www.zillow.com/blog/highest-and-lowest-property-taxes-149303/

Highest Property Taxes as a Percent of Home Value

   1 Allegany County, NY (3.76%)
  2 Milwaukee County, WI (3.68%)
   3 Kendall County, IL (3.57%)
   4 Sullivan County, NY (3.56%)
   5 Orleans County, NY (3.49%)

[Blackhat]

[warriorchick]

Wisconsin property taxes are high in general.  If you read any of those "best places to retire" articles, it's one of the things that is listed as a negative for Wisconsin (besides the winter weather, natch).

[Spotcheck Billy]

I find it difficult to judge total tax by property taxes, plenty of ways to fund Big Brother besides property taxes.

[mu_hilltopper]

I find it difficult to judge total tax by property taxes, plenty of ways to fund Big Brother besides property taxes.

Bingo.  It's all about the mix of taxes you pay.  MKE has high property, but comparatively low(er) sales tax.

Couple property taxes with sales and income taxes, and Wisconsin's tax burden is high, but somewhere around 15th in the country.

[brandx]

I go to Tennessee a lot and Sales Tax is between 9% and 10% depending on city.

More to life than Property taxes.

[DanceHallPlayer]

Bingo.  It's all about the mix of taxes you pay.  MKE has high property, but comparatively low(er) sales tax.

Couple property taxes with sales and income taxes, and Wisconsin's tax burden is high, but somewhere around 15th in the country.

Nice try, but according to this study, Milwaukee has the third highest overall tax burden of any city in the country behind Bridgeport, CT and Philadelphia.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/02/19/cities-paying-the-most-and-least-in-taxes/3/

[spartan3186]

Bingo.  It's all about the mix of taxes you pay.  MKE has high property, but comparatively low(er) sales tax.

Couple property taxes with sales and income taxes, and Wisconsin's tax burden is high, but somewhere around 15th in the country.

This. The average family of 4 spends ~ $200/week on groceries (USA Today), saving them $600/year at a 6% sales tax rate

[Tugg Speedman]

Nice try, but according to this study, Milwaukee has the third highest overall tax burden of any city in the country behind Bridgeport, CT and Philadelphia.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/02/19/cities-paying-the-most-and-least-in-taxes/3/

Third highest tax burden in the nation ...

3. Milwaukee, Wisc.
> Taxes for family earning $25,000: $3,245 (26th highest)
> Taxes for family earning $150,000: $26,296 (2nd highest)
> Unemployment rate: 7.4%

Like a number of other cities with high tax load, Milwaukee residents faced especially high property tax burdens. The effective property tax rate in the city was 3%, higher than all but a few regions reviewed. Also driving up taxes were the especially high income tax burdens in the city. The state used a graduated income tax system, meaning tax rates are higher for families that earn more, although Milwaukee had no local income taxes.In 2013, the state reformed its tax code, lowering the highest rate as well as the number of overall tax brackets. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker recently pushed the state assembly to cut both property taxes and and the income tax rate for the state’s lowest tax bracket.

[augoman]

I go to Tennessee a lot and Sales Tax is between 9% and 10% depending on city.

More to life than Property taxes.

true- coupled with no state income taxes and lower property taxes TN is a bargain.  Cook county sales tax is also about 9 but IL has income tax and higher property taxes than TN.

I guess those that have money to spend should bear the tax burden and those that can't afford to buy things shouldn't have to.

[Tugg Speedman]

true- coupled with no state income taxes and lower property taxes TN is a bargain.  Cook county sales tax is also about 9 but IL has income tax and higher property taxes than TN.

I guess those that have money to spend should bear the tax burden and those that can't afford to buy things shouldn't have to.

Residential property taxes in Cook county are actually very low.  Mine are less than 1% to 1.2% of market value.  And that can go down to less than 1% if you hold long enough (moved 5 years ago, take about three Tri-annual assessments to get them below 1%).

Yes Cook county/Chicago has very high taxes in everything else (tied for LA in sales tax at 9.75% and the highest gas prices in the country, highest parking fees in the country) and has unbelievably high commercial real estate taxes.

But, for the moment, reasonable income taxes and cheap residential are a plus ... and yes Rahm is trying to change.

[augoman]

my daughter sold her goldcoast condo last year and bought a home in Franklin, TN.  The new home cost over twice what she sold for, but the property taxes are very close, within a couple of hundred dollars.

[mu_hilltopper]

Nice try, but according to this study, Milwaukee has the third highest overall tax burden of any city in the country behind Bridgeport, CT and Philadelphia.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/02/19/cities-paying-the-most-and-least-in-taxes/3/

I see the point, but I commented on Wisconsin's tax burden.  (Which I admit, is off from the original post, which is about MKE.)

I can see why Milwaukee ranks high in that article.  There's no doubt, if you are making $150k a year, you will pay a crapload of taxes on your $400k house.  Move 5 miles north/west/south and your total tax burden plummets for that same house.

So .. ok.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I see the point, but I commented on Wisconsin's tax burden.  (Which I admit, is off from the original post, which is about MKE.)

I can see why Milwaukee ranks high in that article.  There's no doubt, if you are making $150k a year, you will pay a crapload of taxes on your $400k house.  Move 5 miles north/west/south and your total tax burden plummets for that same house.

So .. ok.

That article had me somewhat confused?  Bridgeport, CT is a only city of 130,000 people and the article was talking about next door Fairfield and Fairfield County and it listed an average salary (which does not reflect Bridgeport).  So is it the city proper or the metro area or county?  Yes Bridgeport has high property taxes, but the real estate values are far lower than next door Fairfield.

[warriorchick]

true- coupled with no state income taxes and lower property taxes TN is a bargain.  Cook county sales tax is also about 9 but IL has income tax and higher property taxes than TN.

I guess those that have money to spend should bear the tax burden and those that can't afford to buy things shouldn't have to.

I love my home state, but I have to say their method of relying on sales taxes is regressive and inequitable.  Poor and lower-middle class people don't have  lot of property or income to tax, but they spend a higher proportion of their money on things that are subject to sales tax, which in Tennessee, is just about everything (including food and prescription drugs).

[Tugg Speedman]

Milwaukee is a good flipper market.

May 1, 2014, 11:05 a.m. EDT
House flipping becomes more profitable

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/house-flipping-becomes-more-profitable-2014-05-01

 If you’ve been dreaming of fixing up a home and unloading it for a tidy profit, now may be the time to do it.

In the first three months of this year, home flippers raked in a 30% gross return on their investment — one of the highest levels in years, according to data released Thursday by RealtyTrac ; that’s compared to just 4% in the last quarter of last year. Flippers bought the homes for an average of $183,276 and sold them for $238,850, the data showed.

Of course, most flippers have to shell out some loot to spruce the home up before they unload the house for a higher price, but even taking that into consideration, the profits were likely considerable as, on average, the median amount spent on improvements for home flips is only about $4,800, according to BuildZoom.



These impressive returns are thanks, in part, to a more stable housing market, slower new-home building, and fewer total home flips (flips were down to just 3.7% of all single-family home sales in the first quarter), says Daren Blomquist, vice president of RealtyTrac. And he adds that this is a trend that will likely hold steady in the coming months. “Flippers are behaving rationally this time around as opposed to the last boom when they helped create a price bubble,” he says.

That said, flippers in some markets fare better than others. In Pittsburgh, flippers bought homes for an average of just under $55,000 and sold them for almost double that, and in the Philadelphia area they bought homes for about $166,000 and sold them for $258,000. Meanwhile, flippers in Charlotte, Houston, Tampa and Indianapolis tended to lose money on their deals.



Market-by-market data should be taken with a grain of salt because in some markets, there were only a small number of flips with which to base the data. And, the ROI numbers don’t take into account the cost to renovate the homes. Plus, flipping is risky and can lead to substantial monetary losses.

Still, the news that flippers are churning out profits will no doubt delight those willing to gamble on the real estate market once again. So MarketWatch asked some real estate experts what potential home flippers need to know beyond picking out a property with potential.

Type of flip. Some properties require just cosmetic work and others require multiple building permits — and it’s the latter that usually yields the biggest profits. Flips that were associated with building permits had a median ROI of 50%, compared to just 13% across all properties, RealtyTrac data revealed. What’s more, BuildZoom data shows that the more an investor spends on the home flip, the higher his return on investment. Still, Zillow’s real estate expert Brendon DeSimone, author of “Next Generation Real Estate,” says that the heftier flips are usually best left to developers and those who are experienced flippers.

Cost. The median cost for improvements on flipped homes was nearly $5,000. But depending on how much work you want to do, those costs could skyrocket. Consider: A major kitchen remodel costs roughly $55,000, bathroom $16,000, and a new roof $19,000, according to Remodeling Magazine. To get a budget for your project, DeSimone says that potential flippers need to tally up all the costs for every project they want to do and then add 10% to that.

What’s more, flippers shouldn’t assume they will make a profit, experts say. “You need to be financially comfortable even if you just break even,” says Julie Davis, a real estate agent at Alain Pinel Realtors. To help ensure that you will make money, DeSimone says that the location of the property is essential (you may want to think about school districts, for example): “Look for a fixer upper in a great location,” he says. And he adds, try to buy a property that is very undervalued. “You make the most on the buy side,” he says. And Davis says that good flippers are “obsessed with numbers” on everything from historical area home prices to interest rates.

Timing. The average flip took 101 days to complete, up from 79 during the same period last year, RealtyTrac data revealed. And during that period, homeowners will need to devote a lot of time to rehabbing the house. “This is not a part-time job,” says DeSimone, who notes that those with 9-to-5 jobs may find it difficult to find the time to oversee and do the work it takes to flip successfully.

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168770/half-illinois-connecticut-move-elsewhere.aspx

[MUsoxfan]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168770/half-illinois-connecticut-move-elsewhere.aspx

I'd move to Wisconsin in a heartbeat if I could ever sell my home that I bought at the peak of the market

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168770/half-illinois-connecticut-move-elsewhere.aspx

A Hartford Courant columnist had a good write-up on this.  Interesting read of the poll results.

http://courantblogs.com/dan-haar/half-of-connecticut-residents-want-to-leave-but-why/

Half of Connecticut Residents Want To Leave, But Why?

by Dan Haar Categorized: Economic Development, Economy Date: May 1, 2014

There’s a lot of hand-wringing in the Land of Steady Habits over a new Gallup poll that shows just under half of Connecticut residents — 49 percent — would flee their home state if they could.

We come in at No. 2, barely behind Illinois, where exactly half the population dreams of departing.  Lowest on the list are Maine, Montana and Hawaii, where less than a quarter of residents say they’d head for the borders if they could.

Gallup: States Where The Most Residents Would Leave If They Could (%)
•Illinois 50
•Connecticut 49
•Maryland  47
•Nevada  43
•Rhode Island 42

Gallup: States Where The Fewest Residents Would Leave If They Could (%)
•Montana  23
•Hawaii  23
•Maine  23
•Oregon 24
•New Hampshire  24

The tax-conscious business lobby would have us believe our problem is largely about high levies, regulations and road congestion.  Yes, of course, Connecticut has some of the highest costs, in fact we rank No. 6 overall in cost of living according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

But is that really why 49 percent of people want to leave?  Nope. Hawaii is the most expensive state by far. What we have here is a much more complex picture, a conundrum with a contradiction and a story that might not be so bad for Connecticut.

Thousands of people who head for the exit are hauling their young, professional, mobile butts to Brooklyn, Manhattan, Boston, DC, Seattle, San Francisco and Atlanta — metro areas that are not known for their low cost, and except for Atlanta, are among the most expensive places to exist on the planet.

Having been here for a lot of years, I certainly recall a time when people left for the Carolinas and other low-cost destinations, especially in times when jobs were shrinking. But lately I can hardly think of anyone who left Connecticut other than to stake out a big metro — and that includes several who are well into middle age.

So from that viewpoint it looks like Connecticut’s problem is our lack of urban vibrancy — a major metro area that doesn’t have to fork over $100 million in taxpayer graft to attract apartment dwellers, concert venues and university campuses.

In fact, when we look at the actual numbers of people uprooting from Connecticut to other states, New York is by far the biggest destination. And get this news bulletin: They’re not moving to low-cost Utica or Syracuse.

Click here for a fabulous interactive graphic by Vizynary.com showing migration patterns from every state.

Thus the conundrum. Depending on who they are, people want to flee Connecticut because costs are too high; because urban energy and vibrancy, which usually means higher cost, is too low; because the job they want is elsewhere; because it’s too cold; or because they’re miserable wherever they live. And we can’t do anything for the cold and miserable.

So the issue comes down to value. It’s neither about cost nor urban vibrancy, but rather, how you feel about what you’re getting back in exchange for your $1,800-a-month rent or mortgage payment, your half-hour commute, your 45-hours a week of toil, your hard-earned engineering degree.

States are a poor measure if we want to gauge lifestyle choices. Massachusetts, for example, is 2 percent less expensive than Connecticut according to the federal government measure. But metro Boston, where more people want to be, is more expensive than metro Hartford or New Haven. Likewise, in Illinois, where the highest percentage of people want out, are they eager to abandon Chicago or corn country? Maybe they should just switch places for half of each year.

Connecticut’s problem is this: If you’re willing to live in a 700-square-foot apartment for 40 percent of your income and travel 45 minutes to a job where there are lots of people like you with hip glasses and the whole world is at your sidewalk — there are better places to be than here.

And if you’re willing to live in a region with no great urban centers nearby, where the political and cultural climate is far more conservative but you can buy a big house with a greener lawn or maybe a few acres of woods — there are better places to be than here.

As for the number who told Gallup they are at least somewhat likely to actually pack out in the next 12 months, Connecticut is closer to the middle of the pack — 16 percent, compared with a national average of 14 percent, well within the margin of error.

And as for the actual number of folks who move out compared with the number moving in, Connecticut’s departure rate is far smaller than that of Illinois and New York. It was also a smaller departure rate than Minnesota had in 2012, and that state had only 25 percent who wanted out in the Gallup poll.

Cutting through the clutter of numbers, the Gallup poll measured this, when it comes to Connecticut: A majority don’t think it’s perfect. But for an even larger majority, it could still be very good.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Seems like the author is using a lot of anecdotal info...when he says stuff like "But lately I can hardly think of anyone who left Connecticut other than to stake out a big metro" it doesn't scream much other than opinion.

I think his opinions have some merit, but CT is more about people just moving to the big city, after all there are many NYC employees that purposely reside in CT for which CT gets that plus.

Not sure I buy his Hawaii argument either.  Yes, they have high taxes, they also are #1 in welfare benefits in the country.  Lots of people aren't dying to leave Hawaii because of the lifestyle and because Uncle Sammy is helping them stay.

It pays not to work in Hawaii, benefits at $49K.   http://www.hawaiireporter.com/it-pays-not-to-work-hawaiian-residents-receive-highest-welfare-benefits-in-us/123