Out-migration, Property Taxation and Pennsylvania!

The figures are in for Pennsylvania’s out-migration and, once again, it doesn’t look good for Pennsylvanians.  The measure of good-government isn’t in it’s political spin but in the reality of the environment in which we live.  Once again Pennsylvania scores badly as  more Pennsylvanians are choosing to live elsewhere..

The Census Bureau reports Pennsylvania’s total population fell by more than 7,600 from 2015 to 2016.   We are one of just eight state that actually lost population.  While 34,678 people migrated to the state the net out-migration was 45,565.  When you calculate births and deaths the total loss to the population of the Commonwealth, you’ll find there was a total loss of 7,677 people.

It’s no secret that states with lower tax burdens are faring better than states with the higher tax burdens.  People leave Pennsylvania for a more friendly tax environment.  They leave Pennsylvania to follow jobs in other states: jobs that aren’t here because of the burden of the tax environment in the state.

Let that sink in for a moment.  We invest in a child’s education, as we should.  That child will spend 12 years in the tax-payer funded public education system.  Then, for many, it’s off to college.  Depending on where they go to school, that means more tax-payer money.

In 2014 111,000 students in higher education attended one of the 14 campuses of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education.  Pennsylvania’s State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) is the largest provider of higher education in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and a large public university system in the United States. It is the tenth-largest university system in the United States and 43rd largest in the world.

It’s not just the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. Pennsylvania’s other state-funded university system is the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (Lincoln, Penn State, Pitt, and Temple Universities).  The Commonwealth System of Higher Education establishes the schools as an “instrumentality of the commonwealth” and provides each university with annual, non-preferred financial appropriations.

Then there’s the grants and subsidies offered to other Higher education institutes like community colleges.  The 2016 budget for higher education came to $744.9 million dollars.

Pennsylvania spends about $30 billion each year on education.  Almost half of that comes from school property taxes with the rest coming from the Sales/Use tax and monies appropriated from other collected taxes as appropriated by our General Assembly.

The return on that investment for those who still live in the state is to watch the college graduates leave the state and then take their future income and invest that income in another state.  For every student who graduates and then leaves the state to work elsewhere, the Pennsylvania tax-payer sees no return on their investment towards that education.

We also see where Pennsylvania’s investment in the retirement of Public Sector workers is not producing its contracted obligation leaving us with a $60 billion plus unfunded-liability in the state’s pension obligations.  One has to question how many of these people are retiring elsewhere other than Pennsylvania where the tax-payer’s investment in their retirement once again goes to benefit the residents of another state.

It should be obvious that Pennsylvania has a spending problem that is leading to higher taxes and that leads many to suspect that if we could control the spending we could reduce the tax burden on the residents of the commonwealth opening doors for job creation and retaining our population with jobs and a lower tax burden.

It seems like the easy option and that’s the problem with the cut-spending mentality.  It looks at the cuts today as a win but never guarantees perpetuated results.  Spending cuts this year are never going to become permanent cuts.  It will be a constant annual battle in budgets and appropriations where the loser is always going to be the working family of the Commonwealth.

Any real reform on taxation must include caps on future spending to prevent the ease of future administrations and legislators from undoing any spending cuts we can obtain now.  I’m not saying we shouldn’t pursue spending cuts to ease the tax-burden on working families.  I’m just saying that if we think that will automatically translate into long-term tax savings were are mistaken.

Those of you who have followed my published blog know that I advocate for total school property tax elimination through House Bill and Senate Bill 76.   I am continually frustrated by those who oppose this legislation while calling for spending cuts.

In a recent post by the Commonwealth Foundation  they call for spending cuts.  They make the claim that “lower taxes starts with limiting government spending. Had Harrisburg limited spending growth to inflation and population since 2000, Pennsylvanians would be saving nearly $22.2 billion in taxes, or $6,952 per family of four.”

Here’s the thing…I agree with the Commonwealth Foundation on limiting spending growth to inflation and population so why don’t’ they agree with us on HB/SB 76.  That’s exactly what HB/SB 76 does.  HB/SB 76 caps future spending on the replacement revenue needed to eliminate the property tax to the rate of inflation and population and yet the Commonwealth Foundation will not support this legislation.  HB/SB 76 guarantees that this replacement revenue grows but is limited to inflation and population.

HB/SB 76 is also a clean bill.  It isn’t a corporate welfare bill.  It treats the business community the same way it treats the homeowner in eliminating the annual school tax on the property owned.  We don’t cut out millions of dollars and divert that into the programs where the state picks the winners and losers.  We also eliminate the needs for tax-payer subsidized property tax programs like KOZs and LERTAs.

In other words, we begin to break down the need for government agencies in administering government programs that become unnecessary under HB/SB 76.  This is another thing that the Commonwealth Foundation talks about as being a necessity and yet, when you give them a bill that delivers, they won’t support it.

Well-crafted legislation like HB/SB 76 that is written by the people will account for future spending by limiting the ability of the legislators to spend at will. HB/SB 76 realizes that there may be local need for revenue like new school renovation or construction or other locally driven need and it leaves that open through alternative funding but only when actually approved by the community.

We simply can’t expect to win the battle over our property taxes at the local level because much of the spending is driven by  Harrisburg.  HB/SB 76 realizes that accountability should lie with the state because they are the originators of the unfunded mandates that are paid for through a local property tax.  It is the state that paved the path for the pension debacle.

I suspect that is also behind why some legislators would oppose this type of legislation.  After all we’ve seen many, including the recent op-eds by the likes of Lt. Governor Mike Stack and Senator Gordner, who roll out their excuse talking points citing “facts” that just aren’t facts according to the actual bill.  When presented with the facts from the bill their tactic is to change the subject: never to admit that we are right and admit that their talking points are wrong.

Equally frustrating to me is the way the talking points referring to shifting to the Sales tax as a regressive tax while ignoring that the fact that the property tax is far more regressive.

When it comes to the sales tax if you purchase a $50 sales-taxable item you’ll pay a 6% sales tax on it.  That will cost you an additional $3.00 regardless of your income.  Under HB/SB 76 you’d pay an additional $0.50 cents to help provide the replacement revenue needed for the property tax.  Obviously if you spend more, say $250 on a sales taxable item, you’ll pay more total sales tax ($15.00) but it’s still only 6% of the cost.  Under 76 that would be an additional $2.50.   The more expensive item garners more tax revenue but it’s still only 6%…under HB/SB 76-7%.

The same applies to the PIT tax.  You currently pay 3.07% in Personal Income Tax.  If your family is earning $50,000 a year your family is paying $1,535.  The family earning $250,000 is paying $7,675.  The higher income family pays more to total taxes but it’s still the same percentage.

The Sales Tax and the PIT have not seen the increases that the property tax has.  The IFO report from 2013 on HB/SB 76 reported that the revenue generated by the Sales and PIT tax increased over the last 20 years even though the actual percentages did not increase.

Contrast this to the School Property Tax.  Chances are real good that your property taxes have increased substantially over the past 20 years.  The revenue generated from the property tax increased by 149% in the last 20 years but that’s because the millage rates have increased and the common level ratio has also been adjusted, unlike the sales or the PIT tax.

Also unlike the sales tax or the PIT tax, the amount of money you pay on your homes as a percentage of home worth varies from county to county and from school district to school district.

The median property tax in the commonwealth is supposed to be, according to tax-rates.org, $2,223.00 per year for a home worth the median value of $164,700.00.  That’s not really how it works though.  By that reasoning a $50,000 home should see a property tax bill that is at least 2/3 less or $741.00.  That’s not what we see though.

I’m going to use Lebanon County again because this is where I live.  The millage rate in Lebanon city is $27.9135 per thousand dollars of home value.  The property taxes on a $50,000 home in the city would be $1,395.68 which is much higher than one would assume looking at tax-rate.org’s numbers.

Let’s take tax-rate.org median numbers.  The $164,700 median assessed home would pay $4,597.35 in property taxes if it was located in the city or $2,374.35 more than the state average for property taxes.   A home assessed at the same value in North Cornwall would pay $3,182.37.  That’s still more than the state average but it’s also $1414.98 less than the taxes in the city limits even though those homes may simply be across the street from one another since North Cornwall borders the city limits.

We hear all the time that HB/SB 76 rewards the wealthy while punishing the poor.  The median household income in the city limits is about $32,000 in the city.  The median income in North Cornwall is about $50,000 yet the property taxes on a $164,700 home would be more than $1,400 less than it is in the city.

This is what led West Lebanon, where the children attend the city schools, to consider requesting a redistricting of their municipality to send their children to the Cornwall-Lebanon school district: they are fighting for lower property taxes.

To begin with a home is assessed at a value that very often does not reflect actual selling price.  In fact, the assessed value is usually higher than the price the home can be sold on the open market.  That already makes the property tax different from Sales and PIT tax.   With both the Sales and the PIT tax we see a tax on an actual value.  That value is determined by the market, not by some government hired assessment company.

As the market fluctuates, wages and the cost of our sales-taxable goods also fluctuate.  It an economic recession home values can drop drastically but that drop in value will never see a like adjustment in the property taxes on a home.  In fact, looking at the historic trends, during a recession taxes actually increased on homes whose values had dropped as a result of the recession.  That’s what our opponents like to call stability.

That’s what I call paying taxes on property you don’t actually own.  If you home is assessed at a value that is higher than it can be sold on the open market your are paying taxes on property worth you do not own.  That’s not stability…that’s extortion!

The government doesn’t hire people to assess the taxable value of the item you purchase or the wages they think you should be earning and then tax you on that imagined value.  Your home, however, is taxed based on an assumed worth.

Lt. Governor Stack also make’s the claim that the business community pays 25.6% of the property tax burden.  That’s true (sort of)! What’s wrong are his conclusions.

His logic for his opposition is that we must continue to punish the 74.4% of the homeowners to avoid giving business an elimination of the school property tax.  What he doesn’t tell you is that the homeowners paying property taxes pays 100% of their own property taxes even though their property earns no income and then they pay the property taxes for the business community through higher prices for goods and services making it more difficult for those businesses, especially smaller businesses, to remain competitive.

In fact, the system of property taxation gives an unfair advantage to the larger more-corporate box stores.  The larger stores can spread that cost of their property tax over pricing on more goods than it’s smaller counterpart giving the larger store a competitive edge over the smaller family-owned business that has nothing to do with the market and everything to do with government control through taxation.

When you factor in the “Cascade Effect” of the property tax we are paying much higher prices for our goods and services than we should be paying all to support a system of taxation where the only uniformity is its non-uniformity.  It is uniform only in that its variance from district to district and even from home to home is consistent and guaranteed.

Using taxation to force cost on to the consumer has never worked well for the consumer or for the business.  Driving up the costs for our goods and services through taxes that are passed back down to the consumer only limits the purchasing power of the consumer giving them less total disposable income that could go back in to the economy.

When the consumer is determining how and where his hard earned income is spent there is more economic freedom.  Why the government decides, there is tyranny no matter how benevolent that tyranny is to those the government determines should benefit.

It’s not like the business owners, the CEOs and the managers are suddenly exempt from paying taxes to help fund education but that’s what Lt. Gov. Stack would have you believe.  Those owners, CEOs and managers will still be paying the PIT and the Sales /Use tax for their personal purchases just like the rest of us.

The Lt Governor says “That plan (HB/SB 76) would have hurt small businesses as well. Because many local mom-and-pops pay the personal income tax rate, it would have shifted a huge chunk of the tax burden from big companies (often headquartered in another state) onto the backs of small ones.”

Well gee, the headquarters in another state already isn’t paying property taxes in this state on that headquarters building so what’s his point.

Does he mean to imply that the local managers in that corporate-owned business aren’t paying a PIT tax or don’t pay a sales tax when they go out shopping with their family? Besides, the corporation isn’t paying that property tax….they are adjusting prices so that the rest of us are paying for it.

We’re also seeing a rise in the corporate-owned chain stores using their legal teams to fight back against the property taxes and appealing their assessed values.  When they win, and they often do, guess where that lost revenue gets redirected….on to the rest of the community through higher millage rates on everyone else including on the backs of those smaller mom-and-pops who can’t afford to legal teams to fight their assumed and assessed property worth determined by a government-hired assessment company.

It is the existing system that pushes things on to the backs of those same mom-and-pop stores Stack claims to want to protect.  The property tax is hurting those businesses.  The high property taxes in malls drives up the cost of rent making it harder for the mom-and-pop to compete in the convenience of the mall environment where the shopper has ease of parking and  protection from the weather while shopping.  Without the property tax. mall rental space would be lower making it easier for the local mom-and-pop to establish a business in that environment.  Look at your local mall food court…how many of the restaurants are completely locally owned and not part of a major chain?  Look at the shops in those malls.  How many are locally owned mom-and-pops and not part of a chain?

Now ask yourself why?

Certainly reigning in government spending would help ease the burden but it won’t fix the disparity of the property tax problem.  Cutting spending at the state level for education funding without reducing many of the mandates and the bureaucracies involved in education will only result in higher education costs through the local property taxes.   Without the elimination of the property tax the legislators have no need to fix the unfunded mandate problem because they don’t have to be held accountable for the tax increases they mandate that take place at the local level.

The pension problem we face in this state will never be dealt with the way that it needs to be as long as the state legislators can pass the responsibility of paying for it down to the local property owners. Paycheck protection will never be viewed as the important issue it is as long as the property tax exists because they can shift that responsibility down to the local school district.

Keeping taxes in check at the state level is a good thing as long as institutions like the property tax do not exist where the cost can be tax-shifted to local communities driving up their property taxes and making them pay more for the goods and services they purchase and use at the local level.

Cap that funding into an account that is sealed from budget appropriations the way HB/SB 76 does and the responsibility for the unfunded mandates reverts back to Harrisburg where they would have to become accountable for the spending.  That then becomes the only way to realize the spending cuts necessary to do what must be done and to see those cuts become more permanent in nature.

Place all future local increases into a no exception voter referendum contract that way HB/SB 76 does and you restore real local control to the locals.

You see, to my way of thinking HB/SB 76 isn’t just a good bill for the issue of property tax elimination.  Its mechanisms should be studied and applied to every reform measure the state faces.  It should become the shining example of the way things should be done.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Response to Senator John Gordner’s comments on School Property Tax Elimination (SB 76)

This is written in response to Senator John Gordner’s comments about school property tax elimination through SB 76.  The original article can be found here:

http://www.dailyitem.com/news/tax-reformers-say-timing-is-finally-right/article_ce8c47b5-0fcc-56b4-86ae-f4c8e864c1e6.html

Senator Gordner says “the plan forces the state to lean too heavily on revenue that fluctuates with the economy. Should the economy tank, and sales and income tax revenue fall through the floor, the result would be catastrophic”

The 2013 IFO report shows that both the Sales/Use Tax and the PIT taxes stayed well above the the Consumer Price Index even during the hardest hit part of the recession. The Consumer Price Index is a way of measuring inflation and is factored into future funding increases in HB/SB-76.

image43

From the 2013 Independent Fiscal Office Report

Gordner’s statement is fear-mongering and unsubstantiated by the historical record.

Since 1993 the Sales/Use Tax and Personal Income Tax have stayed above the Consumer Price Index. The real catastrophe is that the school property tax increases during this time, far outpacing the CPI, SUT and PIT taxes, and average weekly wage. slowed the recovery.  Take note that the Property Tax continued to rise while all other economic indicators dipped.

It could, in fact, be argued that, in that slower recovery, the sales tax took a harder hit because there is a school property tax that continued to increase during that difficult economic turn from 2008 through 2010. People had less money to spend but their school property taxes continued increasing making it more difficult to recover. People saw wages stagnate or faced losing their jobs during the recession. Their school property taxes, however, continued to increase. That gave them even less purchasing power. Eliminate the school property tax and the sales tax will not take as big a hit in future down economic times. That’s good for business, good for home owners, and good for the state.

How many jobs in the small businesses community could be saved in down economic times if there wasn’t a school property tax on the small business? That would help stabilize the PIT as well.

The rising school property taxes made the recession more difficult to handle for many working families and the graph certainly reflects that. Those taxes made the recovery time last longer and some would argue that for many working families they still haven’t seen the recovery. Statistics show that wages have not recovered for working families below the median household income levels of per-recession time.

The fact of the matter is that taxes income should fluctuate in down economies but this will never happen with your home.  Your assessed value will be your assessed value adjusted by a Common Level Ratio that works on county-wide averages that may or may not reflect in the area of the county where you live.  If home values drop, your assessment will stay the same unless a county-wide assessment takes place or you pay the price for a reassessment of your property.  If you assessed value is higher than you can sell that home than your assessed value reflects property you do not own.  In those cases you are paying a tax on the property you do not own.  The Property Tax is the only tax that works like this.

Gordner has chosen to ignore this data in making his statement.

Gordner also makes the claim  “The legislation gets rid of property taxes for businesses, along with homeowners. Wal-Mart won’t pay property taxes, for example, but its customers will pay more in sales taxes. It’s a $3 billion to $4 billion tax shift”

Gordner is advancing class warfare rhetoric that smells of being anti-business.  Since the replacement revenue for the school property tax is more than $12 billion dollars the lions share of those taxes aren’t coming from businesses.  Even at $4 billion that leaves working families in the Commonwealth paying the other $8 billion.

There’s that whole cascade effect of of property taxes that forces us to pay higher prices for the goods and services we use.  (see: The Cascade Effect Of Property Taxes).  As the property taxes result in higher prices for the goods and services we already see that $3 to $4 billion dollars being tax shifted through higher prices.

The business property taxes are not applied Wal-Marts alone.  Why isolate and name them?  

The school property tax impacts small businesses.  Those property taxes are passed on to consumers through higher prices for goods and services.

As we saw recently in North Cornwall an appeal by the local Lowe’s regarding their property taxes will cost the taxpayers an additional $22,000 in retroactive repayment for an incorrect and over-assessed property. That will reflect a tax shift that will be directed to the rest of the population. It was estimated that this retroactive action would cost the school district an additional $500,000.

Because of an assessment error, the loss of that revenue will have to come from everyone else.  That’s not Lowe’s fault, it’s the fault of a bad assessment.

Lowe’s isn’t alone. We are seeing these types of appeals coming from many major large corporations across the Commonwealth. In many cases they win those appeals because of the inherent problems of assumed property worth that exists in the assessment process. Those appeals cam mean millions of dollars in revenue that has to be shifted on to the rest of the community.

Gordner also chooses to ignore the fact that owners and CEO’s of business would also see an increase in their PIT. So would the Store Managers. Instead of taxing an assumed and often incorrect property worth, we tax actual income. Instead of assuming worth the tax is based on ability to pay.

Those same people will also pay the higher sales and use tax on the personal purchases. It isn’t like they aren’t treated the same way as everyone else and become entirely exempt from paying any taxes to fund education.

Wal-Mart is not just a thing to be rolled out and attacked for convenience sake. It’s a business model that requires people to make it the success it is. That includes those who work there and those who shop there.  These business create jobs.  The employees and the owners are paying a PIT tax that goes to the state.  The consumers are paying a slaes tax that goes to the state.

What Senator Gorden just admitted is that because of the Property Taxes on businesses, consumere in the Commonwealth are paying $3 to $4 billion more in increased costs to good and services because of the property tax and he seems to be okay with that!

Let’s look at this from a different perspective.  A business with a bad business model in the same location would not generate the same revenue. That revenue will be reflected in the wages of everyone involved.

Two things will kill a business any business model.  1) A bad model that is reflected in providing services the consumer does not want or with over-inflated pricing coupled with lousy customer service.  2) Government interference through bad tax policies or over-regulatory means.

How many small businesses did our General Assembly kill last year with their retroactive vaping tax?  How many more businesses have closed their doors or relocated because of the over-inflated property taxes?

A good business model will see higher wages that wouldn’t be hindered by the burden of a school property tax. Instead of artificially increasing wages through government mandates we begin to let the economy do what it should do in a free-market society.

Gordner points to Wal-Mart but ignores that the property tax will also be eliminated for the many small businesses in the Commonwealth.

For every Wal-Mart there are hundreds of small family owned businesses in our communities. In the grand scheme of things, far more employees work in these small businesses and those workers also contribute to our economy through the PIT and Sales/Use Tax.

That money goes to support other local businesses. The more disposable money you put in their hands, which school property tax elimination would do, the better it is for everyone.

Those small business include the smaller family farms who are being crushed by the property tax and forced into government controlled programs like Clean and Green.

Those small business may not be able to afford to hire the team of lawyers that their corporate counterparts have on their payroll to fight for these assessment appeals. Of course if your goal is to keep crushing the small business to the benefit of their corporate counterparts then you would want to maintain the status quo.

That is the status quo that Gordner seeks to protect to the detriment of the working families in this Commonwealth.

School Property Tax Elimination will attract more business to the state without the need for corporate welfare programs like KOZ’s and LERTA’s because of the property tax. Those KOZs and LERTA’s punish existing businesses who have been there supporting their community by not giving them the same exemptions.  It’s also true that in many cases once a KOZ expires the business will relocate.  The promises of higher taxes to invest in our communities future is shattered.  We paid higher taxes for nothing.

Exempting all business properties from the school property tax will attract more business to the state.  That means more jobs creating more disposable income. It also means more money generated through the PIT and Sales/Use Tax resulting in less need for the government to increase our taxes.  It will go a long way towards helping to end this growing problem of out-migration of working families who can no longer afford the excesses of the school property taxes in this state and leave that state for lower property taxes..

The majority of our state ranks in the highest 15% for property taxes in the entire Nation. That’s just one more fact that Gordner chooses to ignore.  (See: A County by County Analysis of Property Taxes in Pennsylvania.)

Senator Gordener complains about the $3 to $4 billion tax shift while ignoring that, because the property tax we’ve seen decades of tax shifting policies all of which is hurting the working families in this Commonwealth!  (See: HB/SB 76: Helping Undo Decades of Tax Shifting Policy!)

As a final point, Gordner ignores that more jobs in our local communities means more local EIT without increasing the local EIT rate in our communities.  This would make them making them more solvent.

These EIT Taxes are based on ability to pay not on some assumed and fictional worth of property determined by an assessment company hired by the government that never fluctuates to reflect the actual fair-market value of a home or business.

Wouldn’t it be nicer to see more solvent local communities who aren’t cutting local police protections to rely on the State Police?

Wouldn’t it be nice to stop seeing cuts in important health and human services departments because of shifting to a tax funding mechanism that creates jobs instead of protecting the status quo the ends up sending those jobs packing?

Wouldn’t it be better to keep our seniors who are physically able in their homes rather than force them into state subsidized assisted-care facilities?

Wouldn’t it be better to make it easier for first-time homeowners trying to escape rental servitude?  Would it be better to allow them to establish roots in our communities rather than driving them from rental property to rental property as the increase in property taxes drives them out of their rented home?

Studies show that the increase in rent correlates to the increases in property taxes.  This had led to more need for government subsidized rent.  In other words as we pay higher property taxes, rent increases creating more need for government subsidies which impacts the state budget needs every year.  That’s the impact of property taxes on those who rent.

Image1

Compare to the IFO graph above in relation to the Property Tax increase.

The Independent Fiscal Office report from 2013 had this to say about SB 76:

• The elimination of school property taxes increases the disposable income of property taxpayers. The analysis assumes that 70% of the property tax cut goes to individuals. It further assumes that homeowners spend 80% of the increase in disposable income. (Pages 17-18) (This would be a huge stimulus for Pennsylvania’s economy.)

• The analysis indicates that HB 1776 will cause home values to increase, on average, by more than 10% statewide. (Page 23) (This will restore a large amount of the equity that was lost to homeowners during the 2008 housing downturn.)

• (Regarding business entities) … the income flows through to individuals as higher disposable income. For pass through entities, the analysis assumes that owners and shareholders spend 80 percent of the increase and 70 percent is spent on taxable goods and services, yielding another secondary effect of $34 million in increased sales taxes for FY 2013-14. (Page 18)

• Working age homeowners realize a tax cut. The analysis finds that the increase in federal income tax (through lower itemized deductions), state income tax, and sales tax is more than offset by the reduction in property taxes. (Page 21)

• Retired homeowners realize a significant reduction in taxes. The analysis finds that the property tax reduction easily offsets any increase from the higher sales tax. (Page 21)

• Benefits would also accrue to home builders, home developers, and other land owners who convert current land holdings into new housing plots. Employment would increase in the construction sector as well. (Page 23)

• The elimination of property taxes would significantly reduce the property tax share and would clearly increase the attractiveness of the Commonwealth for business location and expansion. (Page 25) (Expansion of existing businesses and attracting new businesses to the Commonwealth will generate jobs for Pennsylvanians.)

I am really sick and tired of the mouth-pieces for campaign-funding special interests who are working against the best interest of the working families of this Commonwealth.  The re-spouting of these misleading and often actual downright misrepresentations of the facts is becoming a growing concern among citizen advocates who have taken the time to research and review these issues that are so important to us.

We have listened to them for 6 years now using the same tired talking points that have been refuted time and time again.  More than 90% of this blog has been to inform us all when the misleading and misdirection comes.

Until they start offering real solutions to a very real problem in this Commonwealth; until they come up with something better all they offer us are excuses.  We deserve better! (See: Excuses Without Solutions)

Rant over!

For more on the plan to eliminate the School Property Tax in Pennsylvania visit www.ptcc.us

A County by County Analysis of Property Taxes in Pennsylvania

Introduction

The following Data was collected from http://www.tax-rates.org/.   Because this information is based on median income which varies from county to county and can vary even more within each county you could be paying far more than the averages presented here.  If you and your family fall below the median average, your personal data will reflect a higher percentage of your income going to pay the Property Tax.  It should also be noted that millage rates within each county can vary greatly as well.  A higher millage rate with  lower than median income levels will drastically change your personal statistics.

Using the data presented here the percentage of the property’s assessed fair market value varies from 1.02% to 2.22%

Ranking among Counties compared to the national median property tax ranges from 59th highest to 1744th highest of all the 3143 counties in the United States.  Of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties 43 counties fall in the highest 20% in the nation.

Percentage of yearly income varies from 5.52% of their yearly income to 1.99% of their yearly income.

Factoring in the millage rate variable demonstrates how much worse this data actually is for many families.  Taking Lebanon County as an example the median household income is $56,173 according to census data for the county.   The City of Lebanon, however, has a medium household income of $35,313 or $20,860 less than the county average.  Millage rates in the county range from 15.0134 to 24.7435.  The highest rates are applied to the city which has the lowest household income.  The data set from tax-rates.org  shows Lebanon county residents paying 1.27% of property’s assessed fair market value and yet everyone within the city limits is actually paying 2.47%, or almost double the county average even though their average household income is $20,860 less than the county average.  Those variables will greatly change the percentage of your individual yearly income that goes to pay the property tax.

The data set has been compiled to allow you to compare how your county compares to when it comes to property taxation.  Because it uses averages, it does not show the actual impact or the true regressive nature of the property tax.

As bad as this data set is, it’s actually much worse for many individuals and families.

To assess your individual rates within your county you will have to factor in your household income compared to the county average and then explore your county’s millage rates to see where you stand.

Remember as you read this data, your PIT, EIT and Sales Tax applies only to new earnings and new purchases.  The Property Tax is a tax you pay annually and will be applied to that property as long as it exists, not just on new value added to the home and property but on an assumed worth of the property annually.  In down markets, your Property Taxes are not adjusted to reflect declining home prices.

The Property Tax is based on a flawed system that an assumes worth of property through an even more flawed assessment system.  According to http://www.tax-rates.org statistics show that about 25% of homes in America are unfairly overassessed, and pay an average of $1,346 too much in property taxes every year.  County-wide reassessments demonstrate this to be true as appeals follow county-wide assessments where the overwhelming majorities of those appeals are successful.

Other factors come in to play here like the common-level ratio which, because it is also based on averages, makes the problem worse rather than uniformly applying the tax.  None of this is based on actual ability to pay but all framed around an assumed worth that often inaccurately reflects the actual worth of the home.

An average of 2/3 of the cost of local property taxation is the School Property Tax.  The majority of those cost drivers are through unfunded mandates coming down from the state level and out of the control of the local school district.    You may pay that tax at the local level but the reasons for the cost originates with the state.

County by County

(Listed Alphabetically)

Adams County: Adams County collects, on average, 1.07% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Adams County is ranked 387th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Adams County residents amounts to about 3.33% of their yearly income. Adams County is ranked 444th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Allegheny County:  Allegheny County collects, on average, 2.22% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Allegheny County is ranked 259th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Allegheny County residents amounts to about 4.09% of their yearly income. Allegheny County is ranked 209th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Armstrong County:  Armstrong County collects, on average, 1.87% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Armstrong County in the United States, and is ranked 657th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Armstrong County residents amounts to about 3.35% of their yearly income. Armstrong County is ranked 434th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Beaver County:  Beaver County collects, on average, 1.7% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Beaver County is ranked 503rd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes. The average yearly property tax paid by Beaver County residents amounts to about 3.49% of their yearly income. Beaver County is ranked 375th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Bedford County:  Bedford County collects, on average, 1.03% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Bedford County is ranked 1223rd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Bedford County residents amounts to about 2.56% of their yearly income. Bedford County is ranked 916th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Berks County:  Berks County collects, on average, 1.77% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Berks County is ranked 154th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Berks County residents amounts to about 4.66% of their yearly income. Berks County is ranked 112th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Blair County:  Blair County collects, on average, 1.05% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Blair County is ranked 1445th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Blair County residents amounts to about 1.99% of their yearly income. Blair County is ranked 1441st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Bradford County: Bradford County collects, on average, 1.45% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Bradford County is ranked 817th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Bradford County residents amounts to about 3.06% of their yearly income. Bradford County is ranked 565th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Bucks County:  Bucks County collects, on average, 1.27% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Bucks County is ranked 63rd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Bucks County residents amounts to about 4.68% of their yearly income. Bucks County is ranked 109th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Butler County:  Butler County collects, on average, 1.28% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Butler County is ranked 432nd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Butler County residents amounts to about 3.03% of their yearly income. Butler County is ranked 580th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Cambria County: Cambria County collects, on average, 1.34% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Cambria County is ranked 1235th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Cambria County residents amounts to about 2.4% of their yearly income. Cambria County is ranked 1048th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Cameron County: Cameron County collects, on average, 1.85% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Cameron County is ranked 941st of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Cameron County residents amounts to about 3.07% of their yearly income. Cameron County is ranked 562nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Carbon County:  Carbon County collects, on average, 1.56% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Carbon County is ranked 372nd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Carbon County residents amounts to about 4.02% of their yearly income. Carbon County is ranked 228th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Centre County:  Centre County collects, on average, 1.25% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Centre County is ranked 368th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Centre County residents amounts to about 3.34% of their yearly income. Centre County is ranked 438th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Chester County:  Chester County collects, on average, 1.25% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Chester County is ranked 59th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Chester County residents amounts to about 4.21% of their yearly income. Chester County is ranked 185th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Clarion County:  Clarion County collects, on average, 1.12% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Clarion County is 1333rd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Clarion County residents amounts to about 2.2% of their yearly income. Clarion County is ranked 1252nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Clearfield County:  Clearfield County collects, on average, 1.47% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Clearfield County is ranked 1145th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Clearfield County residents amounts to about 2.83% of their yearly income. Clearfield County is ranked 707th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Clinton County:  Clinton County collects, on average, 1.53% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Clinton County is ranked 771st of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Clinton County residents amounts to about 3.21% of their yearly income. Clinton County is ranked 497th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Columbia County:  Columbia County collects, on average, 1.17% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Columbia County is ranked 920th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Columbia County residents amounts to about 2.72% of their yearly income. Columbia County is ranked 776th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Crawford County: Erie County collects, on average, 1.83% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Erie is ranked 693rd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  Crawford County collects, on average, 1.65% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  The average yearly property tax paid by Crawford County residents amounts to about 3.46% of their yearly income. Crawford County is ranked 392nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Cumberland County:  Cumberland County collects, on average, 1.14% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Cumberland County is ranked 455th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Cumberland County residents amounts to about 2.8% of their yearly income. Cumberland County is ranked 724th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Dauphin County:  Dauphin County collects, on average, 1.54% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Dauphin County is ranked 309th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Dauphin County residents amounts to about 3.48% of their yearly income. Dauphin County is ranked 382nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Delaware County: Delaware County collects, on average, 1.67% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Delaware County is ranked 73rd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Delaware County residents amounts to about 5.04% of their yearly income. Delaware County is ranked 73rd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Elk County:  Elk County collects, on average, 1.55% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Elk County is ranked 886th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Elk County residents amounts to about 2.89% of their yearly income. Elk County is ranked 668th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Erie County: The average yearly property tax paid by Erie County residents amounts to about 3.64% of their yearly income.  Erie is ranked 430th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.   Erie County is ranked 335th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Fayette County:  Fayette County collects, on average, 1.3% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Fayette County is ranked 1376th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Fayette County residents amounts to about 2.49% of their yearly income. Fayette County is ranked 973rd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Forest County: Forest County collects, on average, 1.08% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Forest County is ranked 1744th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Forest County residents amounts to about 2.38% of their yearly income. Forest County is ranked 1076th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Franklin County:  Franklin County collects, on average, 0.99% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Franklin County is ranked 613th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Franklin County residents amounts to about 2.94% of their yearly income. Franklin County is ranked 631st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Fulton County:  Fulton County collects, on average, 1.03% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Fulton County is ranked 685th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Fulton County residents amounts to about 3.17% of their yearly income. Fulton County is ranked 515th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Greene County:  Greene County collects, on average, 1.69% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Greene County is ranked 930th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Greene County residents amounts to about 2.77% of their yearly income. Greene County is ranked 746th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Huntingdon County:  Huntingdon County collects, on average, 1.02% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Huntington County is ranked 1374th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Huntingdon County residents amounts to about 2.25% of their yearly income. Huntingdon County is ranked 1206th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Indiana County: Indiana County collects, on average, 1.51% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Indiana County is ranked 796th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Indiana County residents amounts to about 3% of their yearly income. Indiana County is ranked 596th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Jefferson County: Jefferson County collects, on average, 1.39% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Jefferson is ranked 1307th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Jefferson County residents amounts to about 2.52% of their yearly income. Jefferson County is ranked 949th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Juniata County: Juniata County collects, on average, 1.11% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Juniata County is ranked 874th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Juniata County residents amounts to about 2.78% of their yearly income. Juniata County is ranked 739th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lackawanna County:  Lackawanna County collects, on average, 1.43% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Lackawanna County is ranked 477th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Lackawanna County residents amounts to about 3.4% of their yearly income. Lackawanna County is ranked 413th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lancaster County: Lancaster County collects, on average, 1.43% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Lancaster County is ranked 244th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes. The average yearly property tax paid by Lancaster County residents amounts to about 4.01% of their yearly income. Lancaster County is ranked 231st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lawrence County: Lawrence County collects, on average, 1.55% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Lawrence County is ranked 846th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected. The average yearly property tax paid by Lawrence County residents amounts to about 2.94% of their yearly income. Lawrence County is ranked 636th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lebanon County: Lebanon County collects, on average, 1.27% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Lebanon County is ranked 465th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Lebanon County residents amounts to about 3.2% of their yearly income. Lebanon County is ranked 501st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lehigh County:  Lehigh County collects, on average, 1.48% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Lehigh County is ranked 157th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Lehigh County residents amounts to about 4.39% of their yearly income. Lehigh County is ranked 149th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Luzerne County:  Luzerne County collects, on average, 1.4% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Luzerne County is ranked 705th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Luzerne County residents amounts to about 3.02% of their yearly income. Luzerne County is ranked 586th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Lycoming County:  Lycoming County collects, on average, 1.53% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Lycoming County is ranked 552nd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes. The average yearly property tax paid by Lycoming County residents amounts to about 3.53% of their yearly income. Lycoming County is ranked 364th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

McKean County:  McKean County collects, on average, 1.71% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  McKean County is ranked 1120th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by McKean County residents amounts to about 2.6% of their yearly income. McKean County is ranked 874th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Mercer County: Mercer County collects, on average, 1.47% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Mercer is ranked 787th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Mercer County residents amounts to about 2.88% of their yearly income. Mercer County is ranked 672nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Mifflin County:  Mifflin County collects, on average, 1.55% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Mifflin County is ranked 842nd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Mifflin County residents amounts to about 3.27% of their yearly income. Mifflin County is ranked 459th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Monroe County:  Monroe County collects, on average, 1.67% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Monroe County is ranked 115th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Monroe County residents amounts to about 5.52% of their yearly income. Monroe County is ranked 53rd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Montgomery County:  Montgomery County collects, on average, 1.29% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Montgomery County is ranked 76th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Montgomery County residents amounts to about 4.17% of their yearly income. Montgomery County is ranked 197th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Montour County: Montour County collects, on average, 1.04% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Montour County is ranked 778th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Montour County residents amounts to about 2.86% of their yearly income. Montour County is ranked 689th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Northampton County: Northampton County collects, on average, 1.5% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Northampton County is ranked 129th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Northampton County residents amounts to about 4.75% of their yearly income. Northampton County is ranked 100th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Northumberland County:  Northumberland County collects, on average, 1.13% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Northumberland County is ranked 1401st of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Northumberland County residents amounts to about 2.23% of their yearly income. Northumberland County is ranked 1219th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Perry County:  Perry County collects, on average, 1.27% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Perry County is ranked 550th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Perry County residents amounts to about 3.11% of their yearly income. Perry County is ranked 538th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Philadelphia County:  Philadelphia County collects, on average, 0.91% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Philadelphia County is ranked 1120th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Philadelphia County residents amounts to about 2.57% of their yearly income. Philadelphia County is ranked 900th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Pike County:  Pike County collects, on average, 1.34% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Pike County is ranked 173rd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Pike County residents amounts to about 4.65% of their yearly income. Pike County is ranked 116th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Potter County:  Potter County collects, on average, 1.48% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Potter County is ranked 990th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Potter County residents amounts to about 2.95% of their yearly income. Potter County is ranked 624th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Schuylkill County:  Schuylkill County collects, on average, 1.57% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Schuylkill County is ranked 923rd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Schuylkill County residents amounts to about 2.84% of their yearly income. Schuylkill County is ranked 700th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Snyder County:  Snyder County collects, on average, 1.17% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Snyder County is ranked 842nd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Snyder County residents amounts to about 2.79% of their yearly income. Snyder County is ranked 728th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Somerset County:  Somerset County collects, on average, 1.15% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Somerset County is ranked 1392nd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Somerset County residents amounts to about 2.35% of their yearly income. Somerset County is ranked 1104th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Sullivan County:  Sullivan County collects, on average, 1.05% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Sullivan County is ranked 1075th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Sullivan County residents amounts to about 3.1% of their yearly income. Sullivan County is ranked 549th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Susquehanna County:  Susquehanna County collects, on average, 1.44% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Susquehanna County is ranked 572nd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Susquehanna County residents amounts to about 3.66% of their yearly income. Susquehanna County is ranked 331st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Tioga County:  Tioga County collects, on average, 1.52% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Tioga County is ranked 695th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Tioga County residents amounts to about 3.44% of their yearly income. Tioga County is ranked 401st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Union County:  Union County collects, on average, 1.22% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Union County is ranked 608th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Union County residents amounts to about 3.25% of their yearly income. Union County is ranked 476th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Venango County:  Venango County collects, on average, 1.67% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Venango County is ranked 1052nd of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Venango County residents amounts to about 2.76% of their yearly income. Venango County is ranked 753rd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Warren County: Warren County collects, on average, 1.69% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax. Warren County is ranked 878th of the 3143 counties in the United States, in order of the median amount of property taxes collected.  The average yearly property tax paid by Warren County residents amounts to about 2.92% of their yearly income. Warren County is ranked 652nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Washington County: Washington County collects, on average, 1.18% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Washington County is ranked 749th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Washington County residents amounts to about 2.54% of their yearly income. Washington County is ranked 928th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Wayne County:  Wayne County collects, on average, 1.11% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Wayne County is ranked 491st of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Wayne County residents amounts to about 3.78% of their yearly income. Wayne County is ranked 287th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Westmoreland County:  Westmoreland County collects, on average, 1.49% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Westmoreland County 520th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Westmoreland County residents amounts to about 3.31% of their yearly income. Westmoreland County is ranked 451st of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

Wyoming County:  Wyoming County collects, on average, 1.46% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  Wyoming County is ranked 422nd of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by Wyoming County residents amounts to about 3.73% of their yearly income. Wyoming County is ranked 304th of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.

York County:  York County collects, on average, 1.52% of a property’s assessed fair market value as property tax.  York County is ranked 234th of the 3143 counties in order of median property taxes.  The average yearly property tax paid by York County residents amounts to about 4.01% of their yearly income. York County is ranked 232nd of the 3143 counties for property taxes as a percentage of median income.