In the years since 2006, when the legislature passed Act 388, I have seen endless editorials calling for repeal of the act.
The act has only one flaw, the "point of sale" provision that mandates a reassessment to market value upon transfer of ownership. This reassessment has resulted in the doubling and more of property taxes on a transfer of property between relatives in coastal communities, and frequently, a forced sale of the property because of inability to pay the tax.
Act 388 did the following positive things:
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Island Packet
One charge against the act baffles me. It is the claim that the act shifts the tax burden from 4 percent (owner-occupied) property, to 6 percent (business and rental) property. Because all properties pay the same tax rate, and the 1 percent sales tax replaces the school operating portion, how is it possible that there is a shift in the burden? Owners of 4 percent properties are still taxed for the other components of the property tax, the major components being county operating, county debt and school debt.
David C. CannonEdisto Beach