Dues property tax estimated + actual. Anyone care to help gather data?

[disneyberry]

i know this is very difficult, but i was interested in trying to gather data points so we can actually calculate how much the dues really were each year.

i don't know how far back the more senior members keep their Annual Dues Statements, but if all members of the boards contributed, i'm sure we could piece together the history.

anyway, here is all that i have:

OKW 2004 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.7959 per point
BWV 2004 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.7954 per point
VBR 2004 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.5382 per point
BCV 2003 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.7868

OKW 2003 Property Tax - Actual = $0.8035 per point
BWV 2003 Property Tax - Actual = $0.8050 per point
VBR 2003 Property Tax - Actual = $0.5139 per point
BCV 2003 Property Tax - Actual = $0.7867

OKW 2003 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.7764 per point
BWV 2003 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.7760 per point
VBR 2003 Property Tax - Estimated = $0.5251 per point

BWV 2002 Property Tax - Actual = $0.6588 per point


btw, what is up with BWV's 2003 Actual taxes being so low?

(just in case, the data i'm looking for is under the "Rate" column on the dues statement)

edit:

okay i think i know why my BWV Actual is so low. i believe you have to be an owner all 365 days of the year to get the accurate rate on your dues statement. i just checked some other recent posts and updated my numbers. originally i had posted BWV 2003 Actual was .3379 but that is probably just for my case since i added on at BWV in the middle of the year. actually now i'm not sure the # i have for OKW Actual is correct either.

 

[spiceycat]

good luck - I just asked why OKW property taxes were so high and I haven't found my post here anywhere????

I through property tax was based on the purchase price that was current.

So BWV and BCV would be higher than OKW????

I don't understand it either.

 

[RobDoc]

I have the info for the past 3 years for OKW and HH:

OKW- Property Taxes

2001 Estimated- .7157
2001 Actual- .6879

2002 Est- .7608
2002 Actual .6576

2003 Est- .7764
2003 Act- .8034

2004 Est- .7959

HH- Property Taxes

2001 Est- .2259
2001 Act- .2257

2002 Est- .2601
2002 Act- .????

2003 Est- .2789
2003 Act- .2604

2004 Est- .2858

I hope this helps. I'll keep looking for the 2002 actual amounts

 

[DebbieB]

I bought at BWV in 1999 and my tax rate that year was .3272, which was before pro-rating. I got a big credit. There must be some kind of special tax deal for points purchased mid-year.

My actual tax rates for BWV were:

1999 .3272
2000 .6954
2001 .6924
2002 .6588
2003 .8050

That's a 22% increase from 2002 to 2003!

 

[PamOKW]

I haven't got any historical info handy at the moment but I've been bothered by something and this seems as good a place as any to bring it up.

We all have to pay a bit more because the 2003 estimated tax is lower than the actual. I'm wondering why the 2004 estimated tax is less than the 2003 actual? Did they do that to keep the dues number down on the budgets? Shouldn't we plan on the taxes being at least the same, if not more?

 

[JimC]

PamOKW,

Did the 2003 property taxes include any special assessments? Absent a prior year special assessment, a county wide reassessment of property values or a change in the Florida tax structure it would seem unlikey that property taxes would decline from year to year.

How do property taxes work in Florida? Are they a primary means to pay for schools as in PA? How do they assess property values and how often are those assessments reviewed?

 

[DebbieB]

I was thinking that too Pam. But in looking at the BWV numbers, it went down slightly from 2000 to 2001 and down more from 2001 to 2002. Maybe there was some kind of special assessment for 2003 that they don't expect next year. Maybe that caused the large increase this year. Maybe they set the 2004 rate before they got the final 2003 bill. At the annual meeting, they acted like the 2003 bill came in late and was a surprise (because it was over the estimate).

 

[PamOKW]

Maybe they set the 2004 rate before they got the final 2003 bill.

That's kind of what I've been thinking. Maybe they can't and/or decided against making an adjustment in the budgets that they sent out prior to the meetings.

My understanding is that the property tax went up because there was a reassessment. I would be very suprised to see them go down again next year.

 

[PamOKW]

Well, I found some property tax info that I've been tracking and had forgotten about! Property tax seems to be very "flexible" and does go up and down. Here's what I've got (with a few holes) for OKW

OKW 1995 Estimated -- .8447
OKW 1995 Actual -- .7666

1996 Estimated -- .9077
1996 Actual -- .7809

1997 Estimated -- .8995
1997 Actual -- .7850

1998 Estimated -- .8150
1998 Actual -- MISSING

1999 Estimated -- .7974
1999 Actual -- .6881

2000 Estimated -- .7707
2000 Actual -- .6940

2001 Estimated -- .7157
2001 Actual -- MISSING

2002 Estimated -- .7608
2002 Actual -- .6576

2003 Estimated -- .7764
2003 Actual -- .8033

2004 Estimated -- .7959

Kind of a big jump (22%) from 2002 to 2003 .6576 vs. .8033

 

[WDWDaisy]

I think the big prat of the jump in 2003, they said this at the annual meeting, was the county reassesed the prop. value. The inc. value could have been more that what DVC was thinking would happen. With this, it does seem a little odd the est. is .0075 less than what it is for '03. That little amount on aprx. 7.5 mil point is over 56,000. I hope we don't is a short fall again next year.

 

[JimC]

If they did a reassessment, then last year's tax bill could have included the retroactive portion of the new assessment. Generally the reassessment and appeal process takes so long that the first billing includes catchup payments for prior periods.

Possibly the difference in 2002 (estimated versus actual) was the expected reassessment that did not get billed until 2003.

 

[Tagrel]

From what I can find...

VWL 2001 Est. -- .7400
VWL 2001 Act. -- MISSING

VWL 2002 Est. -- .7604
VWL 2002 Act. -- .6601

VWL 2003 Est. -- .7760
VWL 2003 Act. -- .8065

VWL 2004 Est. -- .7954


BCV 2002 Est. -- .7400
BCV 2002 Act. -- .0319 -- Not sure why? Prorated? New?

BCV 2003 Est. -- .7676
BCV 2003 Act. -- .7867

BCV 2004 Est. -- .7868


The first year for both VWL and BCV seems 'off' - probably due to Prorating for a portion of the year from time of purchase...

 

[PamOKW]

It would make sense that the real estate tax would be lower for the first year a resort is open. DVC would only be paying tax for the part of the year the resort was open.