It would appear that Gov. Kaine thinks so. (thanks to Richmond Sunlight for pointing out this article)

Kaine is proposing a statewide 25-cent increase in the grantors tax, which is now 10 cents per $100 of assessed value, that owners pay on the sale of a house.

First, the grantor’s tax is paid based on the sales price of the house, not (thanks, Danilo) or the assessed value (still not corrected five days after the original article was published).

Nuts and bolts - currently the median price in the Charlottesville area is about $275,000. Thus, the grantor’s tax paid by the seller on that particular transaction would be about $275 - and that’s a lot of money! If the tax is increased to 25 cents $687.50. Note also that this tax is paid only when a property sells (which is happening less and less frequently).

Make no mistake - Virginia’s (and the localities’) transportation systems need help; they need maintenance and they need new infrastructure - roads, bike paths, rail lines - but taxing only one segment of the population that uses the system is wrong. It is difficult to get hard, accurate data on what percentage of people in this area own their homes, but let’s assume it’s anywhere from sixty to seventy percent. Thirty to forty percent of people in the area won’t pay this tax, yet they will still use our roads, buses, etc. This is not a question of fair, but one of whether this is a reasonable proposal.

One reason that the grantor’s tax is proposed is because it is a bit of a hidden tax - it’s just another one of those fees that gets thrown together on the HUD-1 at closing. In the hot market, no one questioned the tax; now every nickel counts.

Why not a broad-based tax that everyone would pay (gas tax), other than lack of political and intestinal will and fortitude?

To target one segment of the population for a tax that needs to be focused on the entire population, regardless of the state of the housing market, is not right.

The best prediction from the Washington Post article goes to lobbyist Charlie Davis -

“At the end of the day, maybe putting a ‘lockbox’ on transportation funds, maybe a local taxing authority, but that is it. Give Kaine credit for pushing for something. The Republicans can be tagged as obstructionists but . . . Kaine came back with almost the identical plan that was shot down last year, so which is more foolhardy? But the session will provide ample opportunity for a lot of social interaction to discuss the presidential campaign and enjoy some wonderful cuisine at the Capitol snack bar.”

And he’s probably right.

Related posts -

Whom should we tax?

A few Transportation bills

Text of Governor Kaine’s speech to the General Assembly

Transportation talk revs up in Richmond

Too funny not to post - Copy of the Republican Transportation Plan

Paul Krugman validates* what I’ve been saying to clients/readers/prospects for some time.

Any serious reduction in American driving will require more than this — it will mean changing how and where many of us live.

My belief is this - properties that are closer to urban cores - roughly defined as having a coffee shop/grocery store/park/gathering place - will appreciate at a greater rate than those that require more driving to get to said urban centers.

Using back-of-the-napkin math - if when gas costs five bucks a gallon -

If driving to the store/work/etc costs an additional ten to fifteen dollars for those properties not close to urban centers, and the properties the are close to urban centers are able to save that gas money - isn’t it reasonable to conclude that that theoretical savings of three to five hundred dollars a month would then be applicable to one’s mortgage payment?

I am seeing a contraction of the geographic area I service, and clients are now asking more and more about bikeabilty, walkability and public transport. Higher gas prices are likely to impact our business in fundamental ways - among them -

- Business models - buyers pay up front or do more legwork on their own. Hybrid Redfin models or derivations thereof may become more popular and prominent.

- Denser suburbs and fewer exurbs

- Increased taxes - property tax and sales tax - to increase infrastructure, thus affecting affordability

- Fewer Realtors and real estate agents as more discover that the Realtor pot of gold is harder to find.

- MLS’s may have to change their restrictions on neighborhood and area photos and videos - consumers (and Realtors!) want to see more than what is currently offered. If MLS’ want to remain the primary point of contact, they will have to adapt and provide more. Including or excluding properties without physically visiting properties will be more and more important.

- More boutique brokerages will emerge and thrive as the cost of doing business becomes too great for many of the bigger brokerages.

When we are looking back at this recession in five years with the benefit of hindsight, what opportunities will we be thankful we took advantage of? What opportunities will we wish we had seen and seized?

A question for the Virginia Realtors - are you seeing this trend happen now? Are you seeing your market area contract due to gas prices’ precipitous increase?

Could Realtors use this opportunity to advocate for alternative methods of transportation in new developments? Just a thought.

* Don’t shut down as soon as you see Paul Krugman’s name. Sure, the NYTimes has a unique slant, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the information presented in this article is not relevant, applicable and true.

The original article by Jim Duncan on 20 May 2008 on Agent Genius

Related reading:

Could Higher oil prices be a good thing?

High Gas prices are good

Downtown Real Estate Bypasses Housing Crisis: Gas Prices Are Making City Centers More Attractive

The Oil-to-Mortgage-Rates Chain Reaction