Editorials

Editorials

i

Elderly Tax Relief

i • ■ • ■(

The Boiird of Superivsors has agreed to take another 1 look at the county’s program for real estate tax relief for the elderly and disabled.

Currently property owners who are elderly or disabled and who have limited incomes and limited real estate other than their homes and one acre ar^ exempt from real estate t axes. The limit on incomes is $12,000 and the limit on other property is ($75,000. The program reduces the taxes collected by the county by approximately $20,000.

County Administrator John McCarthy told the supervisors Commissioner of Revenue Beverly Atkins said because of cost of living increases in social security, some ■ people who had been eligible were no longer eligible, but weren’t substantially better off financially and more able to pay the taxes. He suggested they consider raising the income ( , limitation. The board agreed to review the program at the December meeting. t

Several other counties provide tax relief for the elderly and disabled on limited incomes but use a sliding scale for income and other property and for the percentage of taxes exempt. The county should consider such an Approach. ,

The county may have made a mistake in making some taxpayers entirely exempt from real estate taxes. By leaving the limitation on income where it is for 100 percent exempt and setting a higher income limitation, for example household income between $12,000 and $14,500 would be\90 percent exempt, the county could gradually adopt such a sliding scale without dramatically reducing taxes collected in unpredictable ways. Another step could be adopted for property that is 75 or 80 percent exempt in another year, with perhaps the highest at 25 or 30 percent exempt.

Following the next assessment, the county could also consider creating a sliding scale for the value of property owned other than the house and one acre, but still avoid making this basically humane program excessively complex.