North Dakota voters could end property taxes — and pour ‘gas on the spark’ of a growing tax revolt

Originally published at Market Watch.

​Supporters of Measure 4 say it would repeal the 'most egregious and least moral of all the taxes.' Critics say it would 'create chaos.'

Many homeowners across the U.S. aren't happy with property-tax bills that have climbed alongside a pricier real-estate market. But voters in North Dakota have a chance to act on that discontent next month by repealing property taxes and barring counties, towns and other local governments from levying them.

If the ballot measure passes, North Dakota would become the first U.S. state to end property taxes. Its passage could also add muscle to the push to eliminate the tax elsewhere, property-tax skeptics say. The idea has been floated in states like Texas, Nebraska and Michigan, while lawmakers in the Great Plains and Mountain West states say big reforms are needed quickly.

Property taxes are the "most egregious and least moral of all the taxes," according to Rick Becker, chair of the organization that put Measure 4 on the North Dakota state ballot. The ballot measure would repeal residential, commercial and agricultural property taxes, he noted.

These taxes uses opaque formulas to make homeowners keep paying for property they already own, he said. They're also based on the "unrealized" paper value of a home, he added.

For Becker, a "yes" vote is a win inside the state and beyond. "Once that happens, the light turns on for so many people. As soon as a state steps outside that box, the other states see how possible that is," Becker said. "The sky didn't fall, and maybe we should give it a try."

On the other hand, Chad Oban, who chairs Keep It Local, a coalition opposing the ballot measure, argued that property taxes need fixes - but not a "sledgehammer approach." The group's members include utility companies, farmers, educators, business groups and law enforcement.

"I think we're going to defeat Measure 4," said Oban. "But I do think if it passes, there will be a lot of other states doing something similarly, or feeling like there's a political appetite."

However, "if North Dakota - ruby-red North Dakota - thinks it's a bridge too far," it could make others reconsider their bids to bury the tax, Oban noted. The measure leaves it to state legislators to figure out where money comes from next for schools, parks and roads, he said. "It will create chaos, frankly, if it passes."

Four in 10 North Dakota voters say they oppose the ballot initiative and 28% say they'll vote for it, according to a late-September poll of 500 voters commissioned by the North Dakota Monitor, a state news outlet. One-third of voters hadn't made up their minds, the poll said.

Same proposal, rising property-tax frustration

North Dakota voters easily rejected a 2012 proposal to end the state's property taxes. But the current proposal is coming at a time when voters are more frustrated, Becker and Oban both said.

Municipalities across the country collected $363.3 billion in property taxes from single-family homes last year, according to Attom, a real-estate data-analytics company - a nearly 7% annual increase. The average property-tax bill climbed 4%, to more than $4,000, Attom said.

Nationally, homeowners faced an effective tax rate of 0.87% on their home's estimated market value, per Attom data. North Dakotans paid a higher-than-average rate, at 0.99%, but still far less than residents of top-taxing states like Illinois, New Jersey and Connecticut.

Seven in 10 people (69%) say their property taxes are too high, slightly more than the 67% who say their federal income taxes are too steep, according to a poll conducted in December 2023 by the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy and the Associated Press NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Six in 10 people say their property-tax bill is unfair, the survey said.

Though property-tax bills have climbed on the back of higher assessed values, people feel they aren't getting the same increase in services, said Jared Walczak, vice president of state projects at the Tax Foundation, a center-right think tank. Even when municipalities hold their property-tax rates steady, they are still collecting more tax revenue from rising property values, he noted.

"To some degree, it's been opportunistic," he said. "That's why it's rubbed so many homeowners the wrong way."

Read more: My property-tax bill spiked 40%. I fought the city - and won. Can I get tax write-offs for my time and costs?

Property-tax ire isn't new, Walczak added. California voters famously capped property-tax hikes with the Proposition 13 ballot measure way back in 1978. States also have all sorts of tax breaks geared toward property-tax relief, especially for senior citizens.

Talk of repealing property taxes has long occurred at the margins, Walczak said. "It's one thing to have this ongoing low murmur; it's another thing to have it start to bubble up to the surface," he said. "That seems to be where we are going now." Still, while there are good justifications to reform the tax, "none of this is a good reason to repeal the property tax," Walczak said.

Karla Wagner, executive director of the organization AxMiTax, led an effort in Michigan this year to get a property-tax repeal on the ballot. The first-time attempt didn't gather enough signatures, but Wagner said her organization would try again.

The taxes are salt on the wound when people are already stretched thin, according to Wagner. "Pickleball courts or someone's home - which is more important? Stop spending our money foolishly. Stop taking our homes away when we can't afford our bill," she said, referring to the state's tax-foreclosure laws.

If they catch on, repeals are "going to spread like wildfire," Wagner said. Approval of the ballot measure in North Dakota, she added, would be "the gas on the spark."

How Measure 4 might play out

Measure 4 would "require the state to provide replacement payments" to the local government entities at "no less than the current real property-tax levies," according to the ballot measure's text. It could cost the state's coffers $3.15 billion over a two-year window, according to the measure.

The projected aftermath of Measure 4 is a good reason to vote "no," according to North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, a Republican.

"What you will do is, you will cause someone else to pick up the tab. That's what this whole thing is about. It's about, who's going to pay for it? It doesn't lower the cost of delivering anything in our state," Burgum said in August, according to the radio news outlet Prairie Public.

Burgum's office did not respond to a request for comment.

Becker, a Republican former lawmaker who served 10 years in the state's House of Representatives, said the state can afford the change with better decisions on its own budget. It's on counties, towns and cities to figure out how to pay for costs above what the state covers, he noted. One idea is establishing formulas for residents and businesses to pay their share of those costs.

In response to critics who say the measure would take away local control over spending decisions, Becker said the approach keeps local residents in control - just not with a tax pegged to a property's assessed value. He added that, by design, the specifics of legislative next steps aren't part of the state constitutional measure; those are for elected lawmakers to decide.

Vance Ginn, an economist in Texas, said state and local governments should find a way to move past property taxes, which he views as an "immoral form of taxation."

Spending guardrails and changes to sales taxes could be part of the answer, according to Ginn, president of an economic consulting firm whose clients include conservative-leaning think tanks like Americans for Tax Reform.

Ginn said he supports Measure 4 generally, but is concerned there "isn't a tangible path forward." If the vote fails, it's a lesson that crystal-clear funding alternatives need to accompany future repeal attempts, he added.

Nevertheless, "what North Dakota is doing is helping to drive the narrative for the need to do something about property taxes," Ginn said.

As Walczak sees it, turning to other taxes as a replacement would hurt "far more than a property tax does now." He's waiting to see what happens with the North Dakota vote, and what could come next.

"It's likely to turn out very poorly - but it could be hard to reverse," he said.

-Andrew Keshner

This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.


 
(END) Dow Jones Newswires

10-21-24 0600ET

Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.