What really fries me is learning that Little restricted pharmacists from dispensing hydroxychloroquine for off label use. Now…he is calling a special session of our do-nothing legislature to skate away from any damage done to patients that might have been helped by HCQ. 217 may have died needlessly because of his stupid move. Who is HE listening to?…the poop for brains agency know-nothings that are on a political witch hunt vs doctors that know better and of course….President Trump. And Brad Nailer Little just helped them.

https://www.cityofboise.org/news/parks-and-recreation/2019/october/city-of-boise-receives-75-acre-foothills-land-donation/

Let’s keep in mind, Gov Little could have DONATED the land- you know since it was so little value, and grazing it was likely a nuisance- due to bikers, hikers, and horses using the property anyway. Would I want to lease it for my cows? No, I would be chasing loose cows every Monday from city-people not closing the gates.

###
The collective 325 acres plot was assessed for $19,000 valuation.

$19,000 vs $1,200,000(+).

Sure, based on a few cows grazing it each summer- and using the income method, “Little” income= “Little”‘ tax.
But it is just 1 more example of the inequity in our property tax assessment system.

As suggested there should be a mechanism to ‘catch-up’ the gross underpaying of property taxes.

When the federal govt does not pay property taxes on US Forest land they pay the counties, a “payment in lieu” of taxes- because obviously the counties get hosed by the feds not paying the taxes for a county that might be 90% fed land.

OR just not give the ag exemption unless a “farmer or rancher’s” income is 70% from the farming business.

Nate’s example above is the 2nd epitome of the problem. Sorry Nate, but your 5 aces is 5 acres of residential land and should be tax accordingly. A couple cows, goats, and chickens should not allow a person to pay less tax. Can’t afford property taxes on 5 acres? Don’t buy it.
Subsidies? ha.

But instead of equalizing things, IDAHO legislators grant a capital gains deduction when a land-owner sells real estate such as this.
So Little’s won’t even pay full rate on the 1.2million. Idaho grants a 60% deduction on the profit.
https://tax.idaho.gov/i-1100.cfm

No, it’s not ‘gaming the system’. It’s using a system that is skewed to the advantage of those making the rules for the game.

I have pointed it out previously on the Guardian, that high value residences are also clearly undervalued for tax assessments. Commercial properties are undervalued, and now this is clear ag properties are not carrying their water either. $300,000 house? you get hammered!

End result: high net-worth land owners such as the Littles are not paying a fair share of property taxes. The burden is shifted disproportionately to the low and middle income.
Ha, suckers!!!

These laws are at the state level, not the city or county. Farmers are controlling the state tax rules? (sly and selfish)

May I repeat- or NOT give an ag exemption unless the owner is really a farmer or rancher —- at least 70% of their income is from that property.

However, After looking at the average price per acre in the area, it became immediately apparent, that the Littles, sold the land at a very fair price. They could have gotten a lot more. So, I don’t feel as if it was unethical at this point. (I reserve the right to change my opinion at any time!!)

Whether or not Boise really needed this parcel, I’m not sure…so I’ll let that part go.

After reading the article and some of the posts, I wanted to add some context, in regards to the Ag exemption.

I have a just over 5 acres parcel, so I qualify and use the Ag exemption. I raise a couple cattle and about 20 sheep a year on about 4 acres of my property. I pay normal property taxes on my house and the land around my house that is not used for raising animals. I pay a lower rate for the 4 acres. I pay more than the 79 cents per acre that was mentioned, but I’m not offended by someone paying less in an area that isn’t a “neighborhood”. Let me assure you, plenty of taxes get paid. I donate a good amount of my sheep and beef to the local food bank and keep some for myself and neighbors. I don’t make money on this. This is a way of life, and the Ag exemption really helps with that for us small guys too.

In regards to running cattle on land and the cost of fires…Running cattle on a large swath of privately owned land is a good thing for fire safety. Hundreds of head of cattle eating up all of that brush actually helps with the
fire abatement, it doesn’t make fires more likely to start. So cattle ranchers, actually do the city/county a service by clearing all of that brush.

That being said, my property and most of my neighbors are not speculators, these are our homes. But, speculating with land is a tough business, your money could be tied up for years and if you took a gamble and put your hard earned dollars to work, you should be rewarded. Regardless of the ridicule, those who didn’t take a leap, give you, when they say, that you somehow gamed the system. The system is there for everyone and the opportunities are out there. God Bless.–N

The problems are twofold in my analysis. Urban renewal puts all the property in the zone into the hands of a developer, thus excluding the right of the individual property owner to develop or not, or if, in the case of family ownership. Urban renewal also seeks to change zoning for more density. It requires homeowners to pay for developers dreams. It builds density, which is currently equated with viruses.

The parcel of the Little’s which the city bought would be excellent dense new housing. People who rent can live on a hill with a view. But it is bought to protect other foothills owners from apartments, duplexes, skinny houses and homeless parking of cars and motor broken down homes.

Those hills have never ever been farm land. Unless of course you’re using advanced Japanese hillside family farm techniques.

1.2 million for something that was not in the original plan is simply unnecessary. But it is over now, and done. So much for 1.2 mil for other city needs.

The City website page for Levy Projects shows the following:
$40,000 – Highway 21 wildlife overpass
$200,000 – Daylight Cottonwood Creek
$440,270 – Intermountain bird sanctuary
= $680,270

Various articles shown on the City website include another $790,000 for:
$435,000 – Hillside to Hollow land expansion, near Bogus Basin Road
$355,000 – Purchase parcel next to Hill Road Parkway which resulted in approximately a $100k quick profit for Cory Barton/CBH

Recently, the March Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes for this fund show the receipt and review of an application to fund a flood plain study for a private developer. Granted no action has been taken on this application, I find this to be coloring way outside of the lines of the intent of this fund.

They will pay long-term capital gains to the state and to the fed.

To the Guardian’s point, though, it’s not about the tax levied at the time of sale — every property owner is subject to that. It’s about the fact that the ag and timber exemptions permit people like the Littles to hold incredibly valuable real property without paying tax like everyone else. The effect is that the rest of us have to pay more tax to make up for what they are not paying. The Guardian is right: that just is not fair. It would not be inaccurate for someone to say “we have all been paying Brad Little’s taxes for him.”

Regarding automated and flash trading: both are still transactions involving the purchase and sale of capital assets, so they are subject to short-term capital gains. Short-term capital gains are taxed at the ordinary income tax rate, according to the standard tax brackets.

Your suggestion of a 0.1% sales tax or transfer tax on equity trades is a fantastic idea. Imposing even a tiny transaction cost in that environment would do a lot to cabin an industry which, we should remember, does not actually create economic value. (I know, I know, automated traders point to “liquidity” as their value but that’s pretty thin soup.) Anyway, I think your idea is a good one. So does Elizabeth Warren, incidentally, which makes me uncomfortable to say but it’s true.