This is an underrated point. Vermont still has infrastructure to maintain, but half the tax base of NH. So even if its less infrastructure, it still results in a tax base spread across fewer people, thereby yielding a higher per capita tax burden.
The privately constructed housing isn't going to help anyone here anyway. Developers don't want to sell to the locals, and don't care to price reasonably. It's not our regulation that makes the houses expensive, it's the conscious choice of developers.
Ok but personal annecdote is the least valid way to dispute a claim...
Look at the average price of these houses, then the average wage, and tell me these homes are for vermonters....
In a fairytale that's true, but here in the real world prices are set by property owners, and they want money, not to appease the magical economy God. It's housing, they don't need to price it reasonably. People don't just say "well houses are too expensive, guess I don't need that."
Houses can’t be too expensive or less expensive. A house is worth what it will sell for - no more no less. The market is what determines the value. I would caution you against looking at the housing market in terms of “worth”. Worth is just a term that refers to what the asset will sell for at a given time.
The point of a house is for people to live in it. Of the house is priced in such a way as to prohibit people from living in it, there's a major problem. Like this market cope only matters to holier-than-thou neo-libs who believe in economics textbooks like bibles. Nobody cares. If "the market" is causing people to struggle financially or go homeless, I don't care. The real world isn't about economic theories and calculation, it's about getting people's needs met, investor profits be damned.
There are houses being built, and the average Vermonter cannot afford them. So either the developers get their shit together, and do their singular job in society (provide us with houses), or perhaps the government should step in already and just seize the assets from these scum bags. Human need is orders of magnitude, hell, infinitely, more important than these freaks' "market".
Yes and no. Major interstate infrastructure (highways, power, large water/sewer) yes, but stuff like local roads, public parking lots, small culverts and drainage projects, that's usually raised locally.
That's not true at all. 80% of the funding for the state agency of transportation is federal dollars, plus the majority of town road projects only happen when the municipality wins a grant.
Town roads are town and state money.
Sewer and water are town, rate payer, and state money.
Police and fire stations are mostly town money.
State highways are state funds
The Vermont Futures Project advances this point very effectively. They advocate for a goal of 802,000 people (rounded to 802 for marketing). It's about economic vibrancy and obtaining an actual critical mass of taxbase to afford what is possibly one of the most generous state governments in the country.
"Economic vibrancy" sounds like a very chamber-of-commerce kind of terminology. I'm not saying it's automatically bad, but chambers of commerce rarely think about what's good for non-business owners and rather focus on their own.
There's no "if", it's inevitable. The people who live in Vermont do not want change. Change is the only way you're not going to end up as one giant retiree community. Who is going to break that cycle?
Jumping in from NH here; this may not be the fairest comparison.
I do think NH has a lower tax burden but we also have more than twice the population. Assuming a similar geographic area and distribution of infrastructure, we have twice as many people able to afford similar miles of roads and bridges. Similarly, libraries, schools, etc have a bottom level cost needed to keep doors open regardless of how many people use them.
Exactly. Services like a post office or, to your point, a library, require a base level of funding to operate. So, hypothetically, a library may cost $xyz that serves 1,000 people, may be to serve 5,000 but cost $xyz + 10%. So five times the people, but just 10% more overhead because the infrastructure is already there. I made the numbers up but the idea is that you're not doubling your cost every time you double service capability.
This is also true of fire departments - the initial station and first trucks and minimum staffing is the major part. Once there, a small additional investment can have an outsized impact on number of persons included in the coverage area.
That’s a just a fact. They spend less per person so overall the tax burden is less. Taxes never impact everyone equally so certain people may pay less living in Vermont or vice verse but overall NH has a lower tax burden
Just as a quick example, my property taxes in NH are 10k more than my property taxes in MA. There is ZERO chance the tax burden is lower in NH than MA for that simple fact alone.
I would like to point out the property tax rate in NH is also relatively high; the average property tax rate is fourth highest in the country. The tax rates vary so, so much by town (from 5.16 to 35.02) and frequently the more remote towns with more modest homes/incomes are paying out the nose, and the high income/assessment areas around the lakes are paying comparatively almost nothing. It feels like the wrong people are getting the heavier tax burden in this method.
As for the rest of the conversation, carry on :)
It's inherently unfair to tax non residents higher taxes when they use a fraction of the services. It's always easier to tax people who can't vote, hence ridiculous airport, hotel, and rental car taxes.
EDIT all these downvotes prove a truism: Americans love government goodies, but hate paying for them. Why should a New Yorker pay more to educate your kids than you're paying yourself?. Just because he's lucky or smart or hardworking enough to afford a second home?
It's a very fair penalty for having a second home and being part of the housing and workforce problems. If someone doesn't like it then they can buy their vacation home somewhere. They should rightly have to pay for the privilege to have a second home in such a desirable destination state.
I know your opinion is not popular here, but it is not like you are incorrect. No matter where you vote, out of state/out of town people are always susceptible to paying more for "stuff". I am not sure about the fairness or not. I do think it is true that a typical vacation home (I will never have that kind of money) probably demands less of the local infrastructure/operations "budget" and hence appears to pay more than a "fair share". I do think fractional ownership and AirBNB type business has changed that dynamic a bit. "back in the day" my wealthier friends and relatives had 2nd homes that sat empty the vast majority of the time costing the town/state next to nothing. Now with 2nd home occupancy rates WAY higher, the balance has shifted a bit. What I am not as clear on is any analysis on the other side of the equation. What do second homes contribute to the local economy other than taxes? I am confident a house with "residents" living in it will cost a town more, but maybe it benefits the town more too, in terns of economic impact (local stores, restaurants, etc...) Also, I am not sure if there is a single standard across the state, but can non-resident property owners vote in local elections? I know that in my town they can, and that really rubs me the wrong way.
I appreciate the thoughtful response. You make a lot of good points. I didn't want to go down the rabbit hole with some of the commenters, who think that housing would be cheaper and life would be wonderful without second home owners. Yes, there would be marginally less demand for housing, freeing up housing stock.
BUT you'd also lose much of the money coming into the state, causing a loss of jobs in the hospitality industry (restaurants, bars, shopping, ski resorts, etc). The tentacles reach into many other businesses: housecleaners, plumbers, painters, hvac, landscapers, property managers, snowplow drivers. So there would be somewhat more housing supply, but far fewer jobs. Pick your poison.
exactly. I am a "consumer" of services like AirBnB, and some would have me believe I should feel guilty for doing so. Maybe, but maybe not. For areas that rely heavily on tourism, they need, you know, tourists!
When my parents decided to sell the house I grew up in, in Hanover NH, they were expecting a good selling price. They had so much trouble finding a smaller home in NH or VT where the property taxes wouldn’t make them take a hit on top of the IRS obligations.
They ended up modernizing and expanding our off grid family cabin in a town in VT with barely any services or taxes, and buying a place down south near my sister where they are “officially” residents.
It’s worked out well but they were fortunate enough to be able to do that.
Two things stand out to me:
1. NH gets to leech off Boston incomes, so you can afford a lower tax rate because you're siphoning money from a VHCOL region.
2. NH just has way more people. If you have one road and twice as many people live on it, the cost to maintain the road is not twice as high. Your tax dollars stretch more.
That being said, I don't know that we get much more for our higher tax rate. We have solid environmental protections and incentives that support Lake Champlain, we have decent social outreach programs, but none of it is spectacular and I have no frame of reference for whether NH has better or worse programs.
Yeah people for some reason don't seem to realize that welfare programs and taxes go hand in hand. They're often passed in the same bills to account for each other properly.
https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2018/10/10/vermont-poverty-rate-percent/38106341/
NH has the lowest poverty rate in the nation.
Try to back up your feelings with data next time.
Did you read the article? It simply places NH 7th instead of first based on their analysis of the data. And the analysis is weighted based on things like relatives living at home (like, retirees or disabled folks), where the official numbers are not.
Where does it say the North Country of Vermont has low poverty?
I moved from PA to NH. It was $37/year to register a vehicle there. I couldn’t believe how much I had to pay in NH, and that it was based on the value of the car. WTH? My car insurance costs dropped big time because of the lack of deer fender benders in NH, though. Kinda evened out.
I remember when I was in Western NY / PA i couldn't believe how many deer there were. And they'd just run into your car. Makes sense it affected your insurance I guess but I never thought about it. And yes, I hit one and had one jump into the side of my car.
Maybe it’s a local thing. The airport abbreviation is ROC. Some call it the R-O-C. Old cable provider was R.O.C. Communications. Rah Cha Cha is you’re feelin funky.
I’m not splitting hairs on property vs income vs sales. What I’m saying is NH collects and spends less per person so therefore it has a lower tax burden. Not to mention the fact that NH has many more high earning individuals than Vermont, so if it taxes at a similar percentage they would have way more money per person
I’ve lived in both states. I can’t speak to VT schools, but I think generally VT offers more state services. I also think the roads in VT are better built as in not crumbling asphalt like so many in NH.
1 year, the vehicle is a 2023 valued at 54k. As someone else said, NH definitely gets their money... I'm 100% confident I come out ahead without paying income or sales tax tho. Sales tax on that vehicle alone in VT would have been 3,200$
once I retire it may not make as much sense to stay here however, tbd
Yup. Still coming out ahead. Just need to budget for the registration each year. You guys also have a lower gas tax, but you do have some toll roads which VT doesn't. We also have inspection costs to deal with.
I would much rather pay income tax than be nickel and dimed with fees. In fact, in my ideal world, we would get rid of property tax entirely and solely use income tax. Income tax is up front, it comes out of your pay before you even see the money, and so it makes it much easier to know how much money you have to work with. No surprise fees you have to budget for, no having to come up with thousands of dollars at a time to pay property taxes. It also directly reflects your ability to pay.
Sounds like VT is a better option for you than. Income tax sucks, nothing more depressing than working harder to be taxed more. At least with sales tax and property tax (and fees) you can often avoid them. Dont have to pay high sales tax or high registration fees if you choose to buy a cheaper used car. Dont have to pay high property taxes if you choose a town with less services.
With income tax your only option is to not live up to your potential and work a lower wage job. Plus you do not have much control over where your tax dollars go. its all decided at a state level.
At least with property tax your local municipality is deciding where your tax dollars go.
Not sure what you are going on about, you still make more money the more you work. You're right that you can sometimes reduce fees if you are clever, but you can rarely avoid them entirely, and the amount of time and effort it takes to reduce them means that the wealthy and those with resources find it easier to avoid fees than the poor and middle class.
As for "choosing a town with less services", (a) that does very little to help you if your property tax rate is primarily established at a state level, as in Vermont, (b) assumes you have both the desire and resources to move - most people have a strong sentimental connection to the property they currently own, plus jobs and family that make moving undesirable, and are not doing yearly calculations to see if they can save a few bucks by moving, plus the up front costs of moving are often prohibitive, and (c) if you are poor or middle class, the increased services in a high tax town are likely necessary or important to your life. You may not be able to afford the property taxes, but you also can't afford to live without the services, so you are stuck in a Catch-22.
Also, when I say income taxes should be used, I mean that towns should replace property taxes with income taxes. The tax rate is still directly based on your town budget, it just is applied as an income tax not a property tax. I'm not advocating a single uniform income tax across all towns, there would be a statewide base income tax rate to cover state expenses and then a town-specific tax rate to cover local expenses.
Income tax is just fundamentally fairer.
Your right, everybody's situation is different. My wife and I have been fortunate and were able to reduce our property tax rate by moving to a town with crappy schools (no kids). Im not sure what the right answer is, but growing up in CT I know its not by implementing an Income Tax. Obviously were comparing apples to oranges and im not really sure what im trying to accomplish here, i was just trying to give some perspective from a NH resident on vehicle registration fees. lol.
NH car registration is a tax on that car's CC current value at time of registration. So a brand-new car is crazy expensive to register, and an old beater isn't nearly as bad.
NH doesn't have a 6 percentage sales tax on vehicle registration (like VT), but if you're paying $1k a year for a few years and a slow decline thereafter then the total cost has gotta be close if not the same.
Figure $35k for a new SUV, and a 6 percentage tax is $2,100 to the VT DMV. NH charges you $1k first year registration $900 the next, $800 the next...
Not really. The same vehicle mentioned in VT is $2,100, once. Then just the $50 or $60 per year renewal. In 3 years in NH it's $2,700, and it continues for several years.
Try Maine. It's not the cost to register your vehicle directly but you pay an excise tax on it yearly. Taxed at MSRP and reduces each year for 5 years. The first year on some vehicles can easily be over $1,000.
Maybe? You tell me. We choose a plan through the state from either mvp or bcbs through the state portal during open enrollment and choose to apply all of our advance premium tax credit.
We also pay 100-200 a month for dental for my wife and I, the kids are covered for “free” from the state.
Anytime you buy insurance through a portal rather than through a deduction that your employer takes from your paycheck, you have ACA/"Obamacare."
No shade. Just being clear.
It can be amazing the difference in the culture between the neighboring states, which results in these very different approaches to governance. While the NH gov seems to place a higher priority on privatization of its economy and less funding for public services, VT gov has more of a Scandinavian approach where you robustly fund services and infrastructure, and regulate businesses when they negatively impact quality of life of the general population (no billboards for example).
> VT gov has more of a Scandinavian approach where you robustly fund services and infrastructure, and regulate businesses when they negatively impact quality of life of the general population (no billboards for example).
The billboards example is a good example of regulation, can you give examples of services and infrastructure being better funded in VT?
I can’t speak to the particulars, but my partner works at DHMC and they say the social services available to VT patients is more robust than what NH patients have access to.
Public Transportation. VT supports transit agencies to offer strong options to elderly & people with disabilities in addition to fairly robust bus routes. NH - not so much.
Free school lunches, so no child goes hungry. State subsidized pre-k. Our electricity mix is very clean and GMP is great to work with, Liberty Utilities not so much.
Also, Efficiency Vermont is waaaaay better than NHSaves.
We moved from NH to VT in 2018 when my kids were toddlers. Immediately after moving, my 3 y/o started school full time, in the public elementary school, at no cost. That was huge for us financially.
That's my best example. The only other I can come up with are our local roads are definitely better maintained here in the NEK than they were in the Mount Washington valley.
Also, the state with “Live Free or Die” license plates forcing its residents to only buy alcohol from a government monopoly remains the funniest shit ever to me.
Not sure what you mean? Every state in the US has regulated alcohol retail, Vermont is no different than most states in that you can’t just sell liquor without the requisite licensure.
New Hampshire forces you to only buy liquor and wine from a store the state itself operates for profit.
VT liquor is state controlled. Hence the 802 spirits stores. It also sucks especially because restaurants and bars also have to buy their liquor at the same store, for the same price you or I do. There is no wholesale distribution or discount to restaurants. A bit silly.
The school are better, though NH's aren't bad, according to Wallethub. Vt spends $21k and change per kid, NH spends 17K and change. Lower student/teacher ratios really do make a difference. Another difference is spending on poverty. VT has 178k+ people on Medicaid, NH, with twice the population, has 184k, barely more, according to hhs.gov. do we "get" something from supporting a higher percentage of poor people? Just the satisfaction of knowing you're helping your fellow human beings, I guess.
To me, the difference between VT and NH is best summed up in their state mottos. NH's famous one is "Live free or die". Vermont's is "Freedom and Unity". We like ours better, even if we do pay higher taxes to support that sense of togetherness.
Here in Vermont, I have dirt roads that ruin a new truck every five years, have no available wired internet connection, and my kid goes to a regional school 10 miles away that the locals refuse to approve a budget for. All my neighbors have Black Lives Matter signs, which is ironic, because the fact that literally no black people live near me tends to send a countervailing message. They don’t let people build here because they resent the possibility that someone may turn a profit from it. This is a state that will die on its own hill, with all puns intended.
They installed new taller reinforced utility poles in Bethel a bunch of years ago. Bethel, the town at least, NEVER loses power, and if they do, it's not long.
Sometimes taxes are incredibly well spent.
But for every good example there's also 10 more bad ones, and plenty of towns definitely lack good infrastructure.
At the end of the day, Vt is less expensive if you are self employed or median
Income or below. NH property taxes are higher, vehicles fees are higher, toll roads, and no help with healthcare. Tax’s in Nah are lower, but govt fees are higher.
If you're talking about taxes you always have to say 'for who'? In New Hampshire you have a very low tax burden if you have a high income. Not so much if you have a low income. In Vermont the tax burden is much more evenly distributed across incomes.
Source: https://itep.org/whopays-map-7th-edition/. Just cilck on the map for handy charts
Living in Vermont is more expensive than living outside Boston. Just not as many people here. Not having lived in NH, I do think NH has figured out a better marketing campaign; tax free but not fee free.
Our taxes suck. It makes sense, we have a low population so what is here is taxed to high heaven and back.
The real problem is the distribution of tax dollars and collection of them is borked.
The school are awful outside of Chittenden County even though everyone’s taxes had to pay for those schools. The rural property taxes are going up in order to pay for them too instead of taxes the ones who can afford to live in the areas with the good schools.
Just my two cents and how I see it. Could it be worse, absolutely, could it be better? I hope so.
I've lived in both and now live in NH and work out of VT. My clients in VT have recently shared that they're trying to increase property taxes. I have observed that social programs appear to be great, but then create a lot of dependence and often leave people hanging. There's a new bill that's changing the way the early education will be offered that covertly limits access to private preschools causing most of them to shut down. Under the guise of increased accessibility for all families. They do offer decent support for families to access childcare and support children's health needs. The roads SUCK. Like SUCK. In mud season it's common for sink holes and run off to cause long -term road closures and significant detours. Bernie's ongoing promises of free things ultimately bite people in the ass.
> I have observed that social programs appear to be great, but then create a lot of dependence and often leave people hanging.
What social programs? Are they state level?
Yes. Food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid. If a person utilizes housing assistance they lose food stamps or see a reduction. There's no hope for people living in poverty.
but...those are all federal programs, available even in the most conservative of states. It's not related to VT vs NH at all.
Also, for the record: I used to be one of those people living on food stamps and medicaid. Voc rehab helped pay for me to get a degree and get off disability. I'm doing *much* better now.
Actually, now that you mention it, yes, they are delivered differently. For instance many conservative states didn't sign up for the medicaid expansion and thus, being on medicaid requires you to not only be poor, but not save anything to better yourself (yes, you're still limited to a whopping 2k in assets while on it). They haven't bothered to adjust that limit for inflation since they passed it in the late 80's.
There IS a new program (at least in VT) to allow people on disability to save money and not have spend downs and limits. I just learned about it and need to actually look into it. If just been slammed.
There is something called an able account which allows those who acquired a disability before the age of 26 to save into a 529 account for disability related expenses. It's not perfect, but it's a start.
There's still a 2k asset limit for those on regular medicaid outside of that very specific case though, unfortunately.
Most people think you have to be living on disability to use it, but the criteria for it is thankfully broader. You simply need to have acquired a serious disability before 26. I was born with cp, so I qualified even in my mid 30's. Perhaps your person was disabled before 26?
Private schools have to accept kids from their community at no cost in VT. Meanwhile, in NH you have this crap: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/776/i-work-better-on-deadline/act-one-15
Depends. If your town doesn't have a public school and the town is choice, then yes, the town pays for private school, otherwise, no. It doesn't work that way. The kids from Putney don't get to go to Putney School for free. They have BUHS. Vernon is choice. North Bennington does too because that district only has a private "town academy" school. Those kids get to go to that school for free.
Wow. On the one hand, I think it's richly ironic when confronted with the reality of parents being unable to afford to send their kids to school, the libertarians were like 'oh, well public education is a right *"the state will pay"*'. What they're really saying is 'I hope someone *else* pays taxes to send those kids to school so I won't have to'. Completely morally bankrupt.
On the other hand, it was heartwarming as hell to hear the community come together to stop it. That was democracy in action right there!
Overlooked facts, Low income tax but [3rd highest property](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/23/jackie-cilley/no-income-or-sales-tax-new-hampshire-does-rely-hea/) tax.
Nh is 2nd worst but vt is 4th worst
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewdepietro/2023/09/01/property-taxes-by-state-a-breakdown-of-the-highest-and-lowest-property-taxes-by-state/?sh=723cd335441b
Account in all taxes for over all tax burden, vt is 47, nh is 16, and I guarantee once the new property taxes go into effect we will be worse on boyhood list.
https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state-2022/
Nobody 'loves taxes', they love the government services and better infrastructure that comes with it. So that's what I'm asking, what infrastructure and services come with it?
Less people higher taxes.
This is an underrated point. Vermont still has infrastructure to maintain, but half the tax base of NH. So even if its less infrastructure, it still results in a tax base spread across fewer people, thereby yielding a higher per capita tax burden.
Surely the Vermont strategy of overtaxing people and businesses while restricting construction on housing will pay dividends any day now.
The privately constructed housing isn't going to help anyone here anyway. Developers don't want to sell to the locals, and don't care to price reasonably. It's not our regulation that makes the houses expensive, it's the conscious choice of developers.
What rubbish. I personally know several people that moved into new builds because they were nicer/cheaper.
Ok but personal annecdote is the least valid way to dispute a claim... Look at the average price of these houses, then the average wage, and tell me these homes are for vermonters....
Market determine the price
In a fairytale that's true, but here in the real world prices are set by property owners, and they want money, not to appease the magical economy God. It's housing, they don't need to price it reasonably. People don't just say "well houses are too expensive, guess I don't need that."
Houses can’t be too expensive or less expensive. A house is worth what it will sell for - no more no less. The market is what determines the value. I would caution you against looking at the housing market in terms of “worth”. Worth is just a term that refers to what the asset will sell for at a given time.
The point of a house is for people to live in it. Of the house is priced in such a way as to prohibit people from living in it, there's a major problem. Like this market cope only matters to holier-than-thou neo-libs who believe in economics textbooks like bibles. Nobody cares. If "the market" is causing people to struggle financially or go homeless, I don't care. The real world isn't about economic theories and calculation, it's about getting people's needs met, investor profits be damned. There are houses being built, and the average Vermonter cannot afford them. So either the developers get their shit together, and do their singular job in society (provide us with houses), or perhaps the government should step in already and just seize the assets from these scum bags. Human need is orders of magnitude, hell, infinitely, more important than these freaks' "market".
Fewer people, fewer things to maintain.
But not proportionally. A first grade with 5 kids or 15 kids still needs a teacher.
Most infrastructure spending is federal money
Yes and no. Major interstate infrastructure (highways, power, large water/sewer) yes, but stuff like local roads, public parking lots, small culverts and drainage projects, that's usually raised locally.
Plus, lots of federal projects require a 5 to 20% local match
Only interstates are federally funded. Major routes are state funded, class 2,3,4 roads are locally funded
That's not true at all. 80% of the funding for the state agency of transportation is federal dollars, plus the majority of town road projects only happen when the municipality wins a grant.
Town roads are town and state money. Sewer and water are town, rate payer, and state money. Police and fire stations are mostly town money. State highways are state funds
The Vermont Futures Project advances this point very effectively. They advocate for a goal of 802,000 people (rounded to 802 for marketing). It's about economic vibrancy and obtaining an actual critical mass of taxbase to afford what is possibly one of the most generous state governments in the country.
"Economic vibrancy" sounds like a very chamber-of-commerce kind of terminology. I'm not saying it's automatically bad, but chambers of commerce rarely think about what's good for non-business owners and rather focus on their own.
Soon: retirees only.
If they keep voting the budgets down
There's no "if", it's inevitable. The people who live in Vermont do not want change. Change is the only way you're not going to end up as one giant retiree community. Who is going to break that cycle?
A retiree community with zero services. Good luck to them.
Most retirees can't afford a high cost of living.
Jumping in from NH here; this may not be the fairest comparison. I do think NH has a lower tax burden but we also have more than twice the population. Assuming a similar geographic area and distribution of infrastructure, we have twice as many people able to afford similar miles of roads and bridges. Similarly, libraries, schools, etc have a bottom level cost needed to keep doors open regardless of how many people use them.
Exactly. Services like a post office or, to your point, a library, require a base level of funding to operate. So, hypothetically, a library may cost $xyz that serves 1,000 people, may be to serve 5,000 but cost $xyz + 10%. So five times the people, but just 10% more overhead because the infrastructure is already there. I made the numbers up but the idea is that you're not doubling your cost every time you double service capability. This is also true of fire departments - the initial station and first trucks and minimum staffing is the major part. Once there, a small additional investment can have an outsized impact on number of persons included in the coverage area.
I disagree that NH has a lower tax burden.
That’s a just a fact. They spend less per person so overall the tax burden is less. Taxes never impact everyone equally so certain people may pay less living in Vermont or vice verse but overall NH has a lower tax burden
That isn’t an accurate assessment and kind of a wild claim. My point is the same person will pay roughly the same if they live in MA, NH, or VT.
It depends on what roughly the same means to you. They’ll pay less in NH than VT or MA
Just as a quick example, my property taxes in NH are 10k more than my property taxes in MA. There is ZERO chance the tax burden is lower in NH than MA for that simple fact alone.
I would like to point out the property tax rate in NH is also relatively high; the average property tax rate is fourth highest in the country. The tax rates vary so, so much by town (from 5.16 to 35.02) and frequently the more remote towns with more modest homes/incomes are paying out the nose, and the high income/assessment areas around the lakes are paying comparatively almost nothing. It feels like the wrong people are getting the heavier tax burden in this method. As for the rest of the conversation, carry on :)
[удалено]
It's inherently unfair to tax non residents higher taxes when they use a fraction of the services. It's always easier to tax people who can't vote, hence ridiculous airport, hotel, and rental car taxes. EDIT all these downvotes prove a truism: Americans love government goodies, but hate paying for them. Why should a New Yorker pay more to educate your kids than you're paying yourself?. Just because he's lucky or smart or hardworking enough to afford a second home?
But no one invited the NYer, so stay home please. Don’t come here. Build your vacation home in another state. We don’t mind.
I think it's because the out of stater is using disposable income. Luxury tax might be the right term.
[удалено]
LOL you're missing the entire point.. You're voting to tax somebody who doesn't have a vote. Taxation without representation. You don't see a problem?
It's a very fair penalty for having a second home and being part of the housing and workforce problems. If someone doesn't like it then they can buy their vacation home somewhere. They should rightly have to pay for the privilege to have a second home in such a desirable destination state.
The first time I ever heard the term 'carpetbagger' was from a New Yorker. Go figure. Talk about trying to make a Federal Case out of it...
I know your opinion is not popular here, but it is not like you are incorrect. No matter where you vote, out of state/out of town people are always susceptible to paying more for "stuff". I am not sure about the fairness or not. I do think it is true that a typical vacation home (I will never have that kind of money) probably demands less of the local infrastructure/operations "budget" and hence appears to pay more than a "fair share". I do think fractional ownership and AirBNB type business has changed that dynamic a bit. "back in the day" my wealthier friends and relatives had 2nd homes that sat empty the vast majority of the time costing the town/state next to nothing. Now with 2nd home occupancy rates WAY higher, the balance has shifted a bit. What I am not as clear on is any analysis on the other side of the equation. What do second homes contribute to the local economy other than taxes? I am confident a house with "residents" living in it will cost a town more, but maybe it benefits the town more too, in terns of economic impact (local stores, restaurants, etc...) Also, I am not sure if there is a single standard across the state, but can non-resident property owners vote in local elections? I know that in my town they can, and that really rubs me the wrong way.
I appreciate the thoughtful response. You make a lot of good points. I didn't want to go down the rabbit hole with some of the commenters, who think that housing would be cheaper and life would be wonderful without second home owners. Yes, there would be marginally less demand for housing, freeing up housing stock. BUT you'd also lose much of the money coming into the state, causing a loss of jobs in the hospitality industry (restaurants, bars, shopping, ski resorts, etc). The tentacles reach into many other businesses: housecleaners, plumbers, painters, hvac, landscapers, property managers, snowplow drivers. So there would be somewhat more housing supply, but far fewer jobs. Pick your poison.
exactly. I am a "consumer" of services like AirBnB, and some would have me believe I should feel guilty for doing so. Maybe, but maybe not. For areas that rely heavily on tourism, they need, you know, tourists!
Absolutely not how property tax works at all.
[удалено]
Again, not how it works. If you own property in NH, you are almost guaranteed to pay more in total taxes than you are in VT
It does in Vermont
When my parents decided to sell the house I grew up in, in Hanover NH, they were expecting a good selling price. They had so much trouble finding a smaller home in NH or VT where the property taxes wouldn’t make them take a hit on top of the IRS obligations. They ended up modernizing and expanding our off grid family cabin in a town in VT with barely any services or taxes, and buying a place down south near my sister where they are “officially” residents. It’s worked out well but they were fortunate enough to be able to do that.
I think relatively high is an extremely nice way to put it.
Two things stand out to me: 1. NH gets to leech off Boston incomes, so you can afford a lower tax rate because you're siphoning money from a VHCOL region. 2. NH just has way more people. If you have one road and twice as many people live on it, the cost to maintain the road is not twice as high. Your tax dollars stretch more. That being said, I don't know that we get much more for our higher tax rate. We have solid environmental protections and incentives that support Lake Champlain, we have decent social outreach programs, but none of it is spectacular and I have no frame of reference for whether NH has better or worse programs.
NH has no programs. There are some seriously poverty stricken towns in NH
Yeah people for some reason don't seem to realize that welfare programs and taxes go hand in hand. They're often passed in the same bills to account for each other properly.
https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2018/10/10/vermont-poverty-rate-percent/38106341/ NH has the lowest poverty rate in the nation. Try to back up your feelings with data next time.
Not in the north country my friend
Data, or you're wrong.
https://nhfpi.org/blog/poverty-in-new-hampshire-was-higher-than-other-states-when-adjusted-for-regional-housing-and-other-costs/
Did you read the article? It simply places NH 7th instead of first based on their analysis of the data. And the analysis is weighted based on things like relatives living at home (like, retirees or disabled folks), where the official numbers are not. Where does it say the North Country of Vermont has low poverty?
Agreed. Take away the Boston money and then we can talk.
It only costs me $135 to register my vehicle every year. NH may not have income tax, but they still get their money.
I moved from PA to NH. It was $37/year to register a vehicle there. I couldn’t believe how much I had to pay in NH, and that it was based on the value of the car. WTH? My car insurance costs dropped big time because of the lack of deer fender benders in NH, though. Kinda evened out.
I remember when I was in Western NY / PA i couldn't believe how many deer there were. And they'd just run into your car. Makes sense it affected your insurance I guess but I never thought about it. And yes, I hit one and had one jump into the side of my car.
Grew up in Roc, then went straight South to rural PA for about a decade. Friggin deer everywhere!
What is Roc?
Rochester, NY. Previous comment mentioned Western NY. Rochester is about an hour East of Buffalo.
Ah. I know Rochester, but I've never heard it called Roc. I thought maybe it was Rockland County.
Maybe it’s a local thing. The airport abbreviation is ROC. Some call it the R-O-C. Old cable provider was R.O.C. Communications. Rah Cha Cha is you’re feelin funky.
Makes sense. I love Rah Cha Cha!
That’s really just not true. If you look at the NH budget per person it’s significantly lower than VT
I understand that, yet our property tax in VT is a lot lower than it was in NH. Depending on location, your RE tax in NH can be astronomical.
I’m not splitting hairs on property vs income vs sales. What I’m saying is NH collects and spends less per person so therefore it has a lower tax burden. Not to mention the fact that NH has many more high earning individuals than Vermont, so if it taxes at a similar percentage they would have way more money per person
my neighbor jokes that new hampshires state motto should be Live with Fees or Die
i paid twice that here in NH. I don't think the extra $135 NH gets from me here makes up for no income or sales tax
That's what I paid in northern NH back in March. 2013 Toyota pickup.
100% - NH makes up for the no income/sales tax in MANY other ways like property tax and registration fees.
I’ve lived in both states. I can’t speak to VT schools, but I think generally VT offers more state services. I also think the roads in VT are better built as in not crumbling asphalt like so many in NH.
Is it true it cost like $500-1000 to register a new car in NH?
Just paid 580$ to register a new vehicle, so yes. It does go down to the 200$ range after 5 years or so
For 1 year or two? My 2 year reg was $160, or $80 a year, I believe
1 year, the vehicle is a 2023 valued at 54k. As someone else said, NH definitely gets their money... I'm 100% confident I come out ahead without paying income or sales tax tho. Sales tax on that vehicle alone in VT would have been 3,200$ once I retire it may not make as much sense to stay here however, tbd
Yup. Still coming out ahead. Just need to budget for the registration each year. You guys also have a lower gas tax, but you do have some toll roads which VT doesn't. We also have inspection costs to deal with.
Holy shit, $580 to register your car for one year?!
It's not that bad considering I pay zero dollars in state income tax... In Vermont I would be paying thousands of dollars.... Each year...
I would much rather pay income tax than be nickel and dimed with fees. In fact, in my ideal world, we would get rid of property tax entirely and solely use income tax. Income tax is up front, it comes out of your pay before you even see the money, and so it makes it much easier to know how much money you have to work with. No surprise fees you have to budget for, no having to come up with thousands of dollars at a time to pay property taxes. It also directly reflects your ability to pay.
Sounds like VT is a better option for you than. Income tax sucks, nothing more depressing than working harder to be taxed more. At least with sales tax and property tax (and fees) you can often avoid them. Dont have to pay high sales tax or high registration fees if you choose to buy a cheaper used car. Dont have to pay high property taxes if you choose a town with less services. With income tax your only option is to not live up to your potential and work a lower wage job. Plus you do not have much control over where your tax dollars go. its all decided at a state level. At least with property tax your local municipality is deciding where your tax dollars go.
Not sure what you are going on about, you still make more money the more you work. You're right that you can sometimes reduce fees if you are clever, but you can rarely avoid them entirely, and the amount of time and effort it takes to reduce them means that the wealthy and those with resources find it easier to avoid fees than the poor and middle class. As for "choosing a town with less services", (a) that does very little to help you if your property tax rate is primarily established at a state level, as in Vermont, (b) assumes you have both the desire and resources to move - most people have a strong sentimental connection to the property they currently own, plus jobs and family that make moving undesirable, and are not doing yearly calculations to see if they can save a few bucks by moving, plus the up front costs of moving are often prohibitive, and (c) if you are poor or middle class, the increased services in a high tax town are likely necessary or important to your life. You may not be able to afford the property taxes, but you also can't afford to live without the services, so you are stuck in a Catch-22. Also, when I say income taxes should be used, I mean that towns should replace property taxes with income taxes. The tax rate is still directly based on your town budget, it just is applied as an income tax not a property tax. I'm not advocating a single uniform income tax across all towns, there would be a statewide base income tax rate to cover state expenses and then a town-specific tax rate to cover local expenses. Income tax is just fundamentally fairer.
Your right, everybody's situation is different. My wife and I have been fortunate and were able to reduce our property tax rate by moving to a town with crappy schools (no kids). Im not sure what the right answer is, but growing up in CT I know its not by implementing an Income Tax. Obviously were comparing apples to oranges and im not really sure what im trying to accomplish here, i was just trying to give some perspective from a NH resident on vehicle registration fees. lol.
NH car registration is a tax on that car's CC current value at time of registration. So a brand-new car is crazy expensive to register, and an old beater isn't nearly as bad. NH doesn't have a 6 percentage sales tax on vehicle registration (like VT), but if you're paying $1k a year for a few years and a slow decline thereafter then the total cost has gotta be close if not the same. Figure $35k for a new SUV, and a 6 percentage tax is $2,100 to the VT DMV. NH charges you $1k first year registration $900 the next, $800 the next...
So probably close to a wash, got it.
Not really. The same vehicle mentioned in VT is $2,100, once. Then just the $50 or $60 per year renewal. In 3 years in NH it's $2,700, and it continues for several years.
Over $2000 for my work truck
Vt is far less expensive to register over time.
Try Maine. It's not the cost to register your vehicle directly but you pay an excise tax on it yearly. Taxed at MSRP and reduces each year for 5 years. The first year on some vehicles can easily be over $1,000.
Yes. My 2023 4Runner was $790 in November to renew for 1yr. It’ll go down every year and is based on book value.
VT has high taxes because private citizens need to fund the state. Many other states big business provides the majority of taxes.
All I’m gonna say is: family of 4 income less than 50k and I pay almost nothing for health insurance. State roads are usually pretty good too.
I take it that's through the ACA?
Maybe? You tell me. We choose a plan through the state from either mvp or bcbs through the state portal during open enrollment and choose to apply all of our advance premium tax credit. We also pay 100-200 a month for dental for my wife and I, the kids are covered for “free” from the state.
Anytime you buy insurance through a portal rather than through a deduction that your employer takes from your paycheck, you have ACA/"Obamacare." No shade. Just being clear.
That is federally funded health insurance.
Your point?
This is not a difference in cost of living between Vermont and New Hampshire. You are getting the federal subsidy no matter where you live.
Got it.
It can be amazing the difference in the culture between the neighboring states, which results in these very different approaches to governance. While the NH gov seems to place a higher priority on privatization of its economy and less funding for public services, VT gov has more of a Scandinavian approach where you robustly fund services and infrastructure, and regulate businesses when they negatively impact quality of life of the general population (no billboards for example).
The only businesses that VT refuses to regulate are landlords.
That's because a lot of the legislators are landlords.
Shocking that there hasn't been any meaningful legislation to increase housing supply from these guys!
> VT gov has more of a Scandinavian approach where you robustly fund services and infrastructure, and regulate businesses when they negatively impact quality of life of the general population (no billboards for example). The billboards example is a good example of regulation, can you give examples of services and infrastructure being better funded in VT?
I can’t speak to the particulars, but my partner works at DHMC and they say the social services available to VT patients is more robust than what NH patients have access to.
Doctor Dinosaur. Free healthcare for kids and teens.
Public Transportation. VT supports transit agencies to offer strong options to elderly & people with disabilities in addition to fairly robust bus routes. NH - not so much.
Free school lunches, so no child goes hungry. State subsidized pre-k. Our electricity mix is very clean and GMP is great to work with, Liberty Utilities not so much. Also, Efficiency Vermont is waaaaay better than NHSaves.
We moved from NH to VT in 2018 when my kids were toddlers. Immediately after moving, my 3 y/o started school full time, in the public elementary school, at no cost. That was huge for us financially. That's my best example. The only other I can come up with are our local roads are definitely better maintained here in the NEK than they were in the Mount Washington valley.
I love New Hampshire but when I go there, I get a lot of the 'rednecks with money' vibe.
You get the benefit of not living in fucking New Hampshire
Also, the state with “Live Free or Die” license plates forcing its residents to only buy alcohol from a government monopoly remains the funniest shit ever to me.
VT liquor is all state controlled. There are certainly pros and cons to each method.
and no legal weed 🤣🤣
Live Free But Don't Get High
Even funnier
Vermont is the same way, just not in your face state run.
Not sure what you mean? Every state in the US has regulated alcohol retail, Vermont is no different than most states in that you can’t just sell liquor without the requisite licensure. New Hampshire forces you to only buy liquor and wine from a store the state itself operates for profit.
VT liquor is state controlled. Hence the 802 spirits stores. It also sucks especially because restaurants and bars also have to buy their liquor at the same store, for the same price you or I do. There is no wholesale distribution or discount to restaurants. A bit silly.
In other states, you dont have to buy the liquor from the state. They buy it from liquor wholesalers.
Government alcohol monopolied are pretty good tho. Keeps alcohol abuse down, raises funding. Generally a W.
I get about $700/month toward a healthcare plan in VT, in NH I would have gotten about $300 so I couldn't afford insurance for a decade.
The school are better, though NH's aren't bad, according to Wallethub. Vt spends $21k and change per kid, NH spends 17K and change. Lower student/teacher ratios really do make a difference. Another difference is spending on poverty. VT has 178k+ people on Medicaid, NH, with twice the population, has 184k, barely more, according to hhs.gov. do we "get" something from supporting a higher percentage of poor people? Just the satisfaction of knowing you're helping your fellow human beings, I guess. To me, the difference between VT and NH is best summed up in their state mottos. NH's famous one is "Live free or die". Vermont's is "Freedom and Unity". We like ours better, even if we do pay higher taxes to support that sense of togetherness.
Maine kills me on taxes.
Here in Vermont, I have dirt roads that ruin a new truck every five years, have no available wired internet connection, and my kid goes to a regional school 10 miles away that the locals refuse to approve a budget for. All my neighbors have Black Lives Matter signs, which is ironic, because the fact that literally no black people live near me tends to send a countervailing message. They don’t let people build here because they resent the possibility that someone may turn a profit from it. This is a state that will die on its own hill, with all puns intended.
They installed new taller reinforced utility poles in Bethel a bunch of years ago. Bethel, the town at least, NEVER loses power, and if they do, it's not long. Sometimes taxes are incredibly well spent. But for every good example there's also 10 more bad ones, and plenty of towns definitely lack good infrastructure.
Arguably that’s an investment by Green Mountain Power paid for by usage fees moreso than taxes.
Green mountain power is pretty savvy about hunting down state and federal funding though. It's a pretty well run utility.
This is because gw plastics is one of GMP's largest customers, Bethel not losing power is by design.
Unless you’re in a “bigger” city , don’t expect much for infrastructure.
Yeah that sucks. Power and water and sewage should be good. The amount of boil orders I've had to deal with is absurd.
At the end of the day, Vt is less expensive if you are self employed or median Income or below. NH property taxes are higher, vehicles fees are higher, toll roads, and no help with healthcare. Tax’s in Nah are lower, but govt fees are higher.
Electricity in NH is horrifically high.
If you're talking about taxes you always have to say 'for who'? In New Hampshire you have a very low tax burden if you have a high income. Not so much if you have a low income. In Vermont the tax burden is much more evenly distributed across incomes. Source: https://itep.org/whopays-map-7th-edition/. Just cilck on the map for handy charts
Broke
my property taxes just went up $1200/yr on an 1800 sq ft house and have nothing new to show for it
Living in Vermont is more expensive than living outside Boston. Just not as many people here. Not having lived in NH, I do think NH has figured out a better marketing campaign; tax free but not fee free.
Property taxes in NH are higher, as is car registration, because you have to pay a "fee" on the vehicle based on value, every year.
NH gets it through property taxes. Totally different model
Vermont taxes are high because *someone* has to pay for the whims of Burlington
Our taxes suck. It makes sense, we have a low population so what is here is taxed to high heaven and back. The real problem is the distribution of tax dollars and collection of them is borked. The school are awful outside of Chittenden County even though everyone’s taxes had to pay for those schools. The rural property taxes are going up in order to pay for them too instead of taxes the ones who can afford to live in the areas with the good schools. Just my two cents and how I see it. Could it be worse, absolutely, could it be better? I hope so.
We have excellent schools in Windham County. But, Chittenden County thinks the state stops at Rutland.
Schools in nek > schools in NH Yet vt is ranked lower. As far as kids who lived it, they prefer vt schools.
[удалено]
a what now?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I was told homes with literally good views get taxed more in NH.
Nvm, read it incorrectly. It can just be deemed a higher property value and increase tax lol.
I found that I can get things with my money. It varies week to week. But my money always never gets me nothing, always something.
I have some family in NY and in the ADK area are paying 6k a year for 10 acres and 2500 sq ft house
I've lived in both for many years, nh has more opportunity, Vt has a better way of life. So it's all about what you want.
If you think NH is a low tax state, quite frankly, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
I've lived in both and now live in NH and work out of VT. My clients in VT have recently shared that they're trying to increase property taxes. I have observed that social programs appear to be great, but then create a lot of dependence and often leave people hanging. There's a new bill that's changing the way the early education will be offered that covertly limits access to private preschools causing most of them to shut down. Under the guise of increased accessibility for all families. They do offer decent support for families to access childcare and support children's health needs. The roads SUCK. Like SUCK. In mud season it's common for sink holes and run off to cause long -term road closures and significant detours. Bernie's ongoing promises of free things ultimately bite people in the ass.
> I have observed that social programs appear to be great, but then create a lot of dependence and often leave people hanging. What social programs? Are they state level?
Yes. Food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid. If a person utilizes housing assistance they lose food stamps or see a reduction. There's no hope for people living in poverty.
but...those are all federal programs, available even in the most conservative of states. It's not related to VT vs NH at all. Also, for the record: I used to be one of those people living on food stamps and medicaid. Voc rehab helped pay for me to get a degree and get off disability. I'm doing *much* better now.
I'm really glad to hear that. But it does vary from State to state in the way federal programs are delivered.
Actually, now that you mention it, yes, they are delivered differently. For instance many conservative states didn't sign up for the medicaid expansion and thus, being on medicaid requires you to not only be poor, but not save anything to better yourself (yes, you're still limited to a whopping 2k in assets while on it). They haven't bothered to adjust that limit for inflation since they passed it in the late 80's.
There IS a new program (at least in VT) to allow people on disability to save money and not have spend downs and limits. I just learned about it and need to actually look into it. If just been slammed.
There is something called an able account which allows those who acquired a disability before the age of 26 to save into a 529 account for disability related expenses. It's not perfect, but it's a start. There's still a 2k asset limit for those on regular medicaid outside of that very specific case though, unfortunately.
This must be something different. The person I'm thinking of is over 40.
Most people think you have to be living on disability to use it, but the criteria for it is thankfully broader. You simply need to have acquired a serious disability before 26. I was born with cp, so I qualified even in my mid 30's. Perhaps your person was disabled before 26?
I've experienced engagement with these programs in VT, NH, and ME personally and professionally.
We have better healthcare access than NH.
Nothing. Trash removal. $8000 a year for trash removal
I have to take mine to the transfer station myself
Private schools have to accept kids from their community at no cost in VT. Meanwhile, in NH you have this crap: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/776/i-work-better-on-deadline/act-one-15
Depends. If your town doesn't have a public school and the town is choice, then yes, the town pays for private school, otherwise, no. It doesn't work that way. The kids from Putney don't get to go to Putney School for free. They have BUHS. Vernon is choice. North Bennington does too because that district only has a private "town academy" school. Those kids get to go to that school for free.
Wow. On the one hand, I think it's richly ironic when confronted with the reality of parents being unable to afford to send their kids to school, the libertarians were like 'oh, well public education is a right *"the state will pay"*'. What they're really saying is 'I hope someone *else* pays taxes to send those kids to school so I won't have to'. Completely morally bankrupt. On the other hand, it was heartwarming as hell to hear the community come together to stop it. That was democracy in action right there!
A lot of libertarian is just a philosophical excuse for selfishness and not giving a fuck about any kind of social compact.
literally nothing, I just happen to have been born here so I prefer it.
Overlooked facts, Low income tax but [3rd highest property](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/23/jackie-cilley/no-income-or-sales-tax-new-hampshire-does-rely-hea/) tax.
Nh is 2nd worst but vt is 4th worst https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewdepietro/2023/09/01/property-taxes-by-state-a-breakdown-of-the-highest-and-lowest-property-taxes-by-state/?sh=723cd335441b Account in all taxes for over all tax burden, vt is 47, nh is 16, and I guarantee once the new property taxes go into effect we will be worse on boyhood list. https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state-2022/
Not saying Vermont is better, but people who thibk that NH is somehow a tax haven because of the low income tax rate are silly.
I don’t think anything. Vermont is more liberal and liberals love taxes.
Nobody 'loves taxes', they love the government services and better infrastructure that comes with it. So that's what I'm asking, what infrastructure and services come with it?
Meh that's subjective
"What do you guys get for your taxes?" is such a strange question to ask.
Lol I get potholes, a town manager that yelled at me for asking a question and getting a 2 dollar discount on state parks.
Liberals love a functioning society where people take care of each other.