Officials don’t want tax burden shifted

Local government officials are worried that state plans to revamp property and sales taxes might wind up costing homeowners.

Reforming the state tax code appears to be a big issue this year, with legislators proposing sweeping overhauls of property and sales taxes and Gov. Mark Sanford advocating a serious discussion of the issue in his State of the State address last month.

But among many proposals floated in the Legislature are a handful that Midlands’ officials say would unfairly shift the tax burden. One such bill would allow counties to cut boat taxes as low as 2 percent of the assessed value, while another would cap home reassessment increases.

Officials said while tax bills will decrease for those who own boats or have high reassessments, others will have to pay more to maintain county revenues.

“It’s a game of who’s going to pay the tax. Somebody’s got to pay more,” said Richland County Assessor John Cloyd. “All of these gimmicks are just trying to fool somebody.”

But others said it was premature for counties to worry, since legislators were busy trying to balance the state budget.

“It’s too early to see if any are getting any real traction,” said Robert Croom, assistant director of the S.C. Association of Counties.

The association keeps a close eye on such legislation every year, and Croom said the broadest plans still are coalescing.

But Lexington County Auditor Art Guerry is leading county officials across the state against some of the bills.

Guerry testified before the Legislature on the boat bill, noting the proposal — at a 2 percent rate — would cost the county $1.7 million in tax revenues. The county collected $2.1 million in boat property taxes in 2002.

Lexington could cut services, Guerry said, but it was more likely that homeowners would be charged higher millage. In effect, Guerry said, homeowners would be subsidizing the cost of owning a boat.

Likewise, capping assessment increases would lessen another home’s tax reduction.

The bill also would break up the uniform tax codes among the county, Guerry said, and some counties might bid against each other for the lowest tax rates.

“Now you’re pitting county against county,” Guerry said. “We need a unified tax code. If (the Legislature) want(s) to lower the personal property tax, let it be unified.”

For Richland’s Cloyd, it is another example of state government making local decisions.

“There’s never been any dialogue about it,” Cloyd said. “Bills just get put in the hopper.

“I don’t think anybody’s been willing to give home rule a chance.”

In Kershaw County, Auditor Robin Watkins said she would not worry about tax changes until they appeared to have wider support.

“We do have concerns,” she said. “I think now it’s too early to worry about.”

But some local officials, such as Richland County Councilman Greg Pearce, thinks the Legislature should do something to reduce property taxes.

Richland residents are receiving reassessment notices this week, and Pearce said more than half of his property taxes fund schools.

“The continuation of reliance on property taxes is literally going to sink us all,” Pearce said. “People can’t keep up with the property taxes we put on them.”

Pearce did not know whether the answer was higher sales taxes, capping assessments or more state funding for schools, but he said the General Assembly had included local government in the discussion.

Croom, with the association of counties, praised the homework being done by legislators and said his group would be watching the debate.

“We always monitor tax legislation closely,” he said.

“It’s better to be aware and be following.”

Reach O’Connor at (803) 771-8435 or johnoconnor@thestate.com.