Don’t freeze taxes for seniors

The idea of freezing property taxes for senior citizens is one that sounds great in theory, but that’s exactly where it should stay ‘ in theory.

In reality, freezing property taxes for senior citizens is simply not fair to the rest of the taxpayers, and I hope our city and county governments have the willpower to steer clear of this wolf in sheep’s clothing.

The only reason a tax freeze is currently an issue is because voters overwhelmingly supported the measure when it was put on the November ballot. The problem is voters were only given half a question.

What voters were asked, and excuse me if I paraphrase, is whether they support giving local governments the right to freeze property taxes for senior citizens 65 and over.

At first glance, it’s a no-brainer. Just think of all those heart-breaking stories about little old ladies having to choose between medicine and food. Of course those seniors deserve a tax freeze.

But here’s the rest of the question. Would you be in favor of freezing property taxes for seniors if it means a bigger increase in your taxes. Now that’s a different question. Folks may like the idea of lending seniors a hand ‘ just don’t raise their taxes even more to do it.

That’s only the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to problems with this property tax freeze. Oh let me count the shortcomings.

For starters, if this tax freeze becomes law there will have to be some income stipulations. In other words, seniors who earn $60,000 a year would not be eligible.

So I’ll just toss out a number and say all seniors who earn less than $20,000 a year will get to have their taxes frozen. What does that do to the seniors who earn $21,000 a year? Suddenly they’re handed a burden of not only paying their share of tax increases, but paying someone else’s share too.

Also noteworthy is the fact income would likely be the only consideration in determining tax freeze eligibility. That means a little old lady with a $200,000 house and $150,000 in savings could potentially have her taxes frozen if she earns $19,000 a year.

Perhaps my biggest contention of all is I don’t like the fact seniors have been singled out for this special tax treatment. We all know you don’t have to be over 65 to have financial troubles.

That said, why don’t we freeze the property taxes for all the single moms of Warren County? Or why don’t we freeze taxes for married couples putting two kids through college? Or maybe we could freeze taxes for people who have lost their job to Mexico.

But for some reason, people always say seniors need help because they are on ‘a fixed income.’ My question is who is not on a fixed income?

My wife, Cupcake, and I both work full-time jobs. I get paid every two weeks and she gets paid once a month. And here’s a news flash. Outside of some insignificant fluctuations, our paychecks never change.

I can’t just tap my heels together and make my paycheck increase by $350. Thus, we are on a fixed income. So where’s my property tax freeze?

All this doesn’t even begin to consider the accounting nightmare a tax freeze for seniors could create. I sure wouldn’t want to be the one to try to figure it out.

It’s for all these reasons, we should not move forward with any plans to freeze property taxes for seniors. It may seem like a nice thing to do, but a closer look reveals it’s not the least bit fair. Perhaps the most convincingly argument is it will hurt other seniors who just miss the income requirements.

James Clark is editor of the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].