Memos
-
news
cocklebur blog
Archives
- December 2008 (6)
- November 2008 (17)
- October 2008 (30)
- September 2008 (21)
- August 2008 (30)
- July 2008 (26)
- June 2008 (24)
- May 2008 (25)
- April 2008 (23)
- March 2008 (26)
- February 2008 (31)
- January 2008 (19)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (9)
- September 2007 (7)
- August 2007 (5)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (14)
- May 2007 (30)
- April 2007 (16)
- March 2007 (12)
- February 2007 (18)
- January 2007 (13)
- December 2006 (13)
- November 2006 (5)
- October 2006 (11)
- September 2006 (6)
- August 2006 (1)
- July 2006 (1)
- June 2006 (9)
- May 2006 (20)
- April 2006 (16)
- March 2006 (12)
- February 2006 (9)
- January 2006 (4)
- December 2005 (4)
- October 2005 (2)
- September 2005 (2)
- August 2005 (1)
- July 2005 (5)
- June 2005 (4)
- May 2005 (1)
- April 2005 (3)
- November 2004 (6)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (2)
- March 2003 (2)
- 0 (1)
-
Recent Comments
- Palmetto Conservative on the bcs needs to go, but not with gov’t intervention
- your voter on the bcs needs to go, but not with gov’t intervention
- Palmetto Conservative on Are these workers here legally?
- Mike on Are these workers here legally?
- vin b on cockfight, rabies, junk car, frigidaire bust
- Hannah on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- John Warner on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- John Warner on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Ted Nugent on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Hannah on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Gene on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Gene on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
Many constituents have contacted me with their concerns over the acceptance of windfalls produced by property reassessments. Upon further research (and assistance from Senate staff), I have found that South Carolina law remains very clear on the subject. SECTION 12-37-251. (E) says that “ Rollback millage is calculated by dividing the prior year property tax revenues by the adjusted total assessed value applicable in the year the values derived from a countywide equalization and reassessment program are implemented. This amount of assessed value must be adjusted by deducting assessments added for property or improvements not previously taxed, for new construction, and for renovation of existing structures.”
This means that a taxing authority may not take more of your money simply because they decided that the value of your property rose, i.e. they may not take a windfall due to their reassessment. The law cited above provides for a rollback of the proposed tax burden to equal the amount of reassessment by inflation as opposed to reassessment of new or substantially improved structures or property bought at a new price since the last assessment. The law is clear—government may not simply decide that your property is worth more and then take more money from you.
![]()
government must pass wind(fall)