Can't pay property tax

[kingofjong]

Hello

What happens if I own a home for example a mobile home. I loose my job and can't pay the property tax what happens? Do I loose my home? How many years can I go without paying property tax?

Thank you
Kingofjong

 

[army judge]

Hello

What happens if I own a home for example a mobile home. I loose my job and can't pay the property tax what happens? Do I loose my home? How many years can I go without paying property tax?

Thank you
Kingofjong

I suggest you posit your questions to the taxing authority(ies).

There is no way strangers could properly answer your tax questions.

Thread closed,

 

[cbg]

Thread re-opened.

The answer to your question is to a certain extent state- and municipality-specific. I doubt you will find a law with a bright line: you may go without paying your property tax for x years but not x plus one. This is a question you will have to take up with the tax authorities in the relevant jurisdiction.

 

[welkin]

Hello

What happens if I own a home for example a mobile home. I loose my job and can't pay the property tax what happens? Do I loose my home? How many years can I go without paying property tax?

Thank you
Kingofjong

You have not indicated your jurisdiction so all we can do is give you a general answer.

The way it works is that when taxes are due on real property but are not paid, interest begins to accrue on the unpaid balance. Most jurisdictions, whether municipal or county, will give you 12 (or more) months to pay the back taxes plus the interest that accrued.

If not paid in the time period, then the property will be listed for a tax sale and advertised in the local newspaper. A tax sale auction will be held. Some jurisdictions only sell tax sale certificates based on the taxes and interest owed and on the interest rate someone is willing to pay for the certificate. Some jurisdictions will sell the property outright and provide a tax deed to the high bidder giving them the property.

In the case of a tax sale certificate, after it is sold at auction, the property owner will have 12 months to redeem the certificate (the back taxes, prior interest, and post sale interest) by paying the amount due. If it is not redeemed, then the certificate holder gets the property free and clear.

You can lookup what your jurisdiction does about delinquent taxes in any search engine on the internet. It's not something that should be messed around with. There are no extenuating circumstances. You either pay your property taxes or lose you property.

 

[adjusterjack]

What happens if I own a home for example a mobile home. I loose my job and can't pay the property tax what happens? Do I loose my home? How many years can I go without paying property tax?

If you are in Schaumburg IL as your IP address suggests you are either in Cook County or DuPage County.

Do an internet search for delinquent property tax for whichever county you are in (even if you are not in those locations) and you'll find the answers to your questions.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Welkin provided a pretty good explanation of the general process used in most states. You'll get some time to pay it, but all the while interest is being added to what you owe. If your state indexes the interest rate to some widely used interest rate then the interest rates now will be rather high. Pay attention to all notices and letters you get from the tax collector's office so you know what's going on and can try to raise the money needed to pay off the amount owed before it goes to sale. As Welkin mentioned, in some states you might also have the opportunity to redeem the property from the buyer after the sale, too, but that gets even more costly.

You might inquire at the tax collector's office to see if they offer any programs to help distressed homeowners in situations like yours. Some states will at least offer you more time to pay it if you show the tax collector you are in financial difficulty.

 

[flyingron]

Note that in addition to all the other info provided here, there has been a recent SCOTUS decision (Tyler v. Hennepin County ) that says laws that allow the municipality (NY in this instance) retain more from the sale than what they were owed in taxes, are unconstitutional.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Note that in addition to all the other info provided here, there has been a recent SCOTUS decision (Tyler v. Hennepin County ) that says laws that allow the municipality (NY in this instance) retain more from the sale than what they were owed in taxes, are unconstitutional.

A decision that I was happy to see as I have long thought that practice unconstitutional and in an event simply wrong. The taxing authority does not have any good claim to anything beyond the taxes, penalties, and interest that were charged for the delinquent tax and any reasonable fees incurred in the sale.

 

[welkin]

A decision that I was happy to see as I have long thought that practice unconstitutional and in an event simply wrong.

Kind of like Civil Forfeiture when no crime has been committed.

 

[army judge]

Kind of like Civil Forfeiture when no crime has been committed.

That particular seizure I find most abusive.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Kind of like Civil Forfeiture when no crime has been committed.

I've been against most civil forfeiture laws for a long time. I particularly oppose those laws that let the arresting agency get the excess proceeds. That just provides more incentive for the cops to do what they really shouldn't be doing in the first place. After the person is found guilty and has a fine to pay that he or she is not paying, then the cops would have the right to seize the car to auction to pay the fine. But any excess money from the sale over and above the fine imposed must go back to the (former) car owner.

Congress some years ago reformed federal civil forfieture laws to remove at least the most troubling aspects. Federal asset forfeitures have declined significantly since then, if I recall correctly. That's an indicator that most the forfeitures done before that change should never have been done. The states are all over the place with their laws on civil forfieture. They need to finally wake up and reform their laws to eliminate what is, IMO, nothing more than theft of the property from the owner.

Before civil forfeiture became a major tool for law enforcement, they had a more narrow, but Constitutionally more sound, method of at least handling the cash they seized. They would call the IRS, which would send out an agent to make a determination of the income that the alleged criminal had made so far that year, calculate the tax, and terminate the tax year. Then collection would use the jeopardy seizure rules to take the cash while the police still had it. Because the cash becomes a tax issue, the taxpayer has all the rights of any taxpayer to contest the assessment and seek return of the cash. The process took time, but at least the cash the IRS took that ended up exceeding the taxpayer's actual tax liability for the year would be refunded to him/her. The law enforcement agencies didn't get a penny of it, the IRS only took what the tax says the owner owed, with the owner getting the rest back.

It was not a perfect system in that the process for the owner to get that refund sometimes took many months to sort out. But at least the IRS was only keeping the cash to satisfy the owner's actual tax liability and the taxpayer has all the rights of due process of all taxpayers to guard against the abuse that civil forfeiture laws created.

After agencies started using the civil forfieture the number of instances where the IRS is called to make a prompt assessment and jeopardy seizure have dropped to practically zero. After all, why would the law enforcement agencies go that route and not see a penny go into their budget when civil forfieture laws allow them to take more cash and to put that money in the agency's own account?

 

[adjusterjack]

My opinion for the two cents that it's worth is that criminals and those who abet criminals should lose all their money and property and the proceeds placed in a crime victims fund for the benefit of the innocent victims.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

[welkin]

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Don't travel with cash Jack.

If you get pulled over for a traffic violation and you have a few thousand in cash on you, you may just lose it. Then the cops send it to the Feds and get a kickback.

And the crazy thing about you getting you cash back, to contest the forfeiture, you must file suit and put in a claim as a "third-party claimant." That's right. You have to sue the money not the Feds or the cops.

What's remarkable about these actions is that the government can forfeit property on a lower standard of proof (preponderance of the evidence) without ever actually securing a criminal conviction.