No one is changing the taxation of farms, just for country clubs which are currently paying a lower rate than the rest of Maryland residents. If the nature of their business requires more land, they should pay the fair rate on that land rather than requiring Maryland taxpayers to subsidize them. |
+1 No reason for country clubs to pay lower taxes than a grocery store owner. |
But farms produce tangible things that benefit everyone: food, domestic animals, etc. What do private country clubs produce? Back-nine business deals? Good old boy networks? Corruption? Bleed them dry. |
I'm perfectly fine with that. |
Again, no one is proposing to change the taxation on farms, just country clubs which are paying a lower rate than the average Marylander.
|
+1 My business may require more electricity than other businesses. But I don't pay a lower rate on electricity because my business requires more of it. |
Anonymous wrote:
14:39 - They are not being subsidized they are receiving a reduction on property taxes because the nature of their business requires more land. The Agri tax rate is not about environmentalism. Farms are not a plus to the environment anymore than a gold course is in terms of wildlife, tree cover etc. The Agri tax rate is to enable business that requires more land with fewer building facilities and lower density to operate. The small farms throughout the Agricultural Preserve do not serve a high % of residents. They aren't open to the public or required to participate in farmers markets. By your logic, these farms in MoCo should all be paying the same tax and ones that aren't open to the public or operating a roadside stand most of the year should be hurt and punished. Why should a business that only really supports people who like expensive local produce and farm to table dining experiences be encouraged or supported in MoCo. Who do I call to burn these down? See where your logic takes you. The scenario with the club on more land due to a golf course, tennis court or pool is the same. It receives the lower tax rate for land because it requires more land with fewer facilities than other commercial businesses or residences. Its not different than the farm. I also think you are not understanding economic principles if you think it would be wiser for MoCo to drive farms and clubs out of the county. These businesses are attractive to the surrounding communities, quality of life and help keep up property values. MoCo has already driven all the private sector jobs over to VA and small business out to Howard and Frederick. If you now start driving out quality of life businesses then why would people live here? No one is changing the taxation of farms, just for country clubs which are currently paying a lower rate than the rest of Maryland residents. If the nature of their business requires more land, they should pay the fair rate on that land rather than requiring Maryland taxpayers to subsidize them.
|
Anonymous wrote: 14:39 - They are not being subsidized they are receiving a reduction on property taxes because the nature of their business requires more land. The Agri tax rate is not about environmentalism. Farms are not a plus to the environment anymore than a gold course is in terms of wildlife, tree cover etc. The Agri tax rate is to enable business that requires more land with fewer building facilities and lower density to operate. The small farms throughout the Agricultural Preserve do not serve a high % of residents. They aren't open to the public or required to participate in farmers markets. By your logic, these farms in MoCo should all be paying the same tax and ones that aren't open to the public or operating a roadside stand most of the year should be hurt and punished. Why should a business that only really supports people who like expensive local produce and farm to table dining experiences be encouraged or supported in MoCo. Who do I call to burn these down? See where your logic takes you. The scenario with the club on more land due to a golf course, tennis court or pool is the same. It receives the lower tax rate for land because it requires more land with fewer facilities than other commercial businesses or residences. Its not different than the farm. I also think you are not understanding economic principles if you think it would be wiser for MoCo to drive farms and clubs out of the county. These businesses are attractive to the surrounding communities, quality of life and help keep up property values. MoCo has already driven all the private sector jobs over to VA and small business out to Howard and Frederick. If you now start driving out quality of life businesses then why would people live here? No one is changing the taxation of farms, just for country clubs which are currently paying a lower rate than the rest of Maryland residents. If the nature of their business requires more land, they should pay the fair rate on that land rather than requiring Maryland taxpayers to subsidize them.
You lack an understanding of how subsidies work. Marylanders are paying one tax rate. Country clubs are paying a discounted tax rate. My higher tax rate, and the tax rate of every other Marylander, make up the revenues that pay for government services. Because country clubs pay a lower tax rate while receiving same services of the state of Maryland as businesses with higher tax rates, they are being subsidized. |
No you don't understand economics. You aren't subsidizing the country clubs. Also land value differs depending on whether its zoned for residential, agricultural or commercial use. Clubs and farms are unique in that they operate on more land that has less development and facilities. Its pretty normal for those businesses to not pay the same tax rate as a home owner or an office park building.
Go ahead get rid of the all the clubs and do one more thing to make MoCo go down hill further. |
The definitions of subsidize are: 1. support (an organization or activity) financially. 2. pay part of the cost of producing (something) to reduce prices for the buyer. We are supporting the country clubs financially. We are lowering their costs so that they can offer lower membership rates to their members, e.g. the users of the club. This is most definitely a subsidy. I have no problem with golf courses. I have a problem with exclusive and restrictive membership organizations receiving a tax subsidy. You are giving tax money to a service that is only available to a limited portion of the public that is paying into it. I also have a problem with churches and other religious institutions receiving tax discounts and exemptions. Such organizations can make their money from tithing being supported by their membership. As for such clubs moving to Virginia, there is a certain equilibrium between how far people are willing to go for a luxury and where people want it. There are plenty of people with money who will pay higher rates to be a part of an exclusive club with restrictive membership. And as has been pointed out in other threads, MD has the most millionaires and wealthy individuals than any other state. Those individuals can pay for the club if they want it. And many of them don't want to have to drive an hour to Virginia to go to their country club, more if they are trying to get there during any busy traffic time. Plus, there are already gold country clubs in Virginia. The market will only bear so much and they will be competing for much of the same clientele. They can move, but there's no guarantee that they won't be dividing up the patronage with other courses. |
I understand economics well. You're welcome to cite the evidence that providing beneficial tax rates to country clubs promote economic growth, but you haven't done so. Businesses use inputs at different levels. Country clubs use a lot of land. Manufacturers use more electricity. But every manufacturer in Maryland is not getting a tax break on electricity rates the way country club owners get a tax break on land. |
“if _________ has to pay a full tax rate, it’ll just shut down and sell the land to developers”
Yeah? And? Why is that a bad thing? So there’s one less, or ten less, private country clubs. So what? Why should I care if rich a-holes have to play golf at Lake Needwood County Golf Course where I play? If they sell the land to developers, and houses get built on it, those houses will generate more tax revenue than the club did. Under Kelo v. New London, that was grounds for eminent domain in and of itself. |
The property values in Potomac would decline if the clubs and private schools left for VA. They're one of the few reasons why wealthy people still move to Potomac. Montgomery County has been going downhill for over a decade and is already getting really trashy. This would just put one more nail in the coffin. You won't raise enough in additional property taxes to offset the overall decline in value across the area. You lose income and sales tax revenues when you push out the wealthier base too. Its just cutting off your nose to spite your face. The county has hired consultants to tell them why MoCo can't attract new business while neighboring counties, cities and states are flourishing. Amazon didn't even give MoCo a second look despite MoCo/MD waving 8 B in incentives. MoCo is seen as so hostile to business that almost no responsible businesses will consider relocating or starting here. Its not going to help anything to become even more hostile to more types of businesses. Getting rid of the smaller swim and tennis clubs really screws normal non wealthy people that enjoy these places. This is where the swim teams practice, labor day parties happen and people meet new neighbors. There are plenty of smaller older houses that aren't in developments with an HOA pool. Its just stupid to spend time on this when the county is in REAL trouble. Its just so sad to see how idiots have wrecked what once was a good place to live. |
Yes it is. It used to be one of the best places in the US and now it’s just an embarrassment and many of us are making exit plans. |
Don’t let the door hit you in the ass, then.
And those former country clubs would be fantastic places to build new schools and affordable housing. Buh byeeeeee!! . |