South Carolina voters last week overwhelmingly approved a 15 percent cap on property reassessments. Although this amendment didn't garner as much attention as the so-called marriage amendment, it will have more impact on every South Carolinian than any other measure on last week's ballot.

That the amendment passed by a 69-31 percent margin is not surprising. On its face, the idea of capping property reassessments sounds appealing. But capping assessments does not mean capping taxes.

In general, the amendment means a tax break for those who own expensive homes that are rapidly increasing in value -- beach front homes, for example. But that break will come at the expense of those who have more modest homes that are increasing in value more slowly.

Here's why: Taxing entities won't be capping taxes. Instead, taxes will be levied against property that isn't growing in value as quickly as it should. In other words, because the highest-value properties aren't being allowed to increase in assessed value according to their actual value, the millage levied against all homes will have to be higher to compensate for the artificial cap. Consequently, taxes on more modest homes that aren't increasing rapidly in value will increase more rapidly relative to homes that are reaching the 15 percent cap.

Advertisement

No doubt, a few who need relief will benefit. But for the most part those who can least afford significantly increased property taxes could get just that. This amendment may well need fixing in the future.

On the other amendments:

Marriage amendment: The amendment that got the most attention leading up to the election was least in doubt. By an overwhelming margin of 78 percent to 22 percent, voters said they wanted the state constitution to reaffirm that marriage is defined exclusively as a lawful union between one man and one woman. This reinforces the traditional family structure, and it makes it more difficult for marriage to be redefined without the consent of the people.

Eminent domain: Though South Carolina already had some of the nation's strictest rules on when government could take an individual's property, this amendment makes it even harder for government to take private property for development. That's good. Under these rules, government would only be able to acquire private property by eminent domain if that property will be developed for public use.

Expanding state investments: Voters wisely gave the state authority to invest pension fund money in foreign stocks. Wise investors in the private sector use international stocks to help bolster their portfolios, and there's no reason the state shouldn't do this, too.

Adjournment provision: State government will be more efficient because voters passed this amendment, which allows the House and Senate to adjourn temporarily when no business is being conducted.

Post a Comment   View All Comments ludwig If you think the tax situion is unfair and will impact all south carolinians more than Amendment 1 you are dead wrong and really are very gullible to the propaganda about Amendment 1 that affects all south carolinians by taking away their civil rights, establishes a special class of people with special unequal rights and puts this state back to the days before plessy vs fergusson. These laws not only apply to gay people but also the man and woman --especially for whatever reason you do not want to get married (perhaps you are a millionaire and do not want a messy divorce) but want the companionship of such a relationship. If your companion or you have problems they not you can make decisions for you if you are incapacitiated and if you and your partner have worked together to put together a business or other joint adventure----the law opens up both of you to your relatives fighting it out and taking everything from you or your surviving companion even though you meant for your surviving partner to inherit everything and this is just the tip of the iceburg that this pandoras box of evil law opens. The Cap as you mention it is unfair and unequal. If you voted Yes for amendment one then you got your and all other people got just desserts on this amendment. What goes around comes around. Amendment one was put on the ballot illegally by the Southern Baptist Church who have violated the Separation of Church and State clause of the US Consitution. ludwig Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:37 am Post a Comment   View All Comments