Re: Nanny & taxes
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
complicated question. review this and see what applies to your situation http://www.irs.gov/publications/p926/ar02.html
Posted on: 2013/10/14 14:47
|
|||
|
Re: An open letter to the Dog Owners of DTJC (brace yourselves)
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
JCPD could go and issue tickets one time for off-leash dogs and then I'm fairly sure word would spread through the dog community and it would never happen again.
Posted on: 2013/7/2 14:17
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
![]() ![]() |
After reading the full threat its clear that there are many sensibly points well argued but also plenty of anger and fear.
Fact remains that a revaluation would cause not just taxes to change across Jersey City, it would also cause house values to rise and fall accordingly. Most of us will probably agree that this is problematic for people who have purchased houses in the past 10 year span. One solution would be to stop using property value as basis for taxation. No matter how you twist or turn it, property value is a poor indication for how much the municipality spend on services to said property (and its inhabitants). I would suggest that a fair way of valuing a property would by by internal square feet since this is generally a better indicator of government services being provided (trash collection, education, FD, PD etc). This would still be a progressive taxation since "well off people" tend to live on more square ft then poor people and hence get to pay a higher amount of tax per person. I'm not naive enough to think that this idea would be liked by anyone, but nevertheless it was worth taking the 3 minutes and type it out :)
Posted on: 2013/7/1 20:34
|
|||
|