• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Ski Magazine 2017-18 Eastern Resort Rankings

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
5,521
Points
113
Location
NJ
Not really. Very slightly. That's where 'effective tax rate' comes into play, and Vermont's is one of the worst in the nation. Better than NJ, but still pretty bad.
Let's use a real example. My 2 BR Condo in VT runs me about $2200 in taxes. A similarly sized 2BR condo in my town in NJ would run about $5800 in taxes. The assessed value of the example condo in NJ is a bit less than twice the assessed value of the VT condo, yet taxes are about 2.5 times higher.

I'm not sure what you're referring to by "effective" tax rate. Bottom line the taxes on the condo in VT are substantially less in terms of real dollars than the similar one in NJ would be. The VT tax rate comes out to around 2% while the NJ one is about 2.5%. Those real values are pretty close to the "effective" values listed on the site you mentioned, so I'm not following how they are adjusting to account for property values being different in different states.

You sure? That's DEFINITELY something I'd think about. Taxes, price appreciation of asset, etc... all of that. Cost would be a huge factor in my decision. For some people who are buying solely for every weekend trips, well then sure, because they cant fly every week. But if you're only making it on say 3 ski trips a year, that CO home you mention sounds pretty nice.
Cost is a factor, yes. Tax rate is not. I pointed out in my example above that the taxes for a similar property are cheaper in VT vs NJ due to property values being lower even though rates are not terribly different. That's what I'm looking at to determine my perception of value and whether they are "expensive" or not.

If you're buying a second home to use it for 3 ski trips a year, then you have other issues to begin with. I can't believe that is the normal target audience for a second home. So again, saying taxes are much cheaper in a state like CO is irrelevant because there are other factors that play a much bigger role in the decision than taxes alone. You buy a second home typically because it is in a location that you want to visit (usually often), not because of tax rates. If I wanted a place down the Jersey Shore (which I don't...but just an example as there are many people that do), I'm not going to buy a place in South Carolina instead just because they have lower property taxes.

I'm not saying taxes don't matter, I'm just saying especially when it comes to second homes they are much less a factor compared to other things.
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
18,481
Points
113
Location
Brooklyn, CT
While the tax rates may be high in Vermont (as is most of the northeast pretty much), real estate values in VT are lower than NJ, so ultimately you're still paying less taxes for a comparable home. Also for someone purchasing a second home, I don't see tax rates playing a big role in the decision. If you decide you want a vacation home in VT, you're not going to look at the rates and say "screw that, Colorado is much lower, I'll buy one there instead". Overall cost is a factor, sure, but most people would sooner look for a slightly less expensive house before they decide to buy a second home in a completely different state just to save on taxes.

Agree 100%!

The choice to buy a 2nd home is way, way, way more often about doing something to augment your enjoyment of life and getting to spend time with family and/or loved ones and friends. It rarely makes brilliant financial sense if one is honest. You often don't lament too much about the taxes because those are secondary compared to your enjoyment that you get from the 2nd home (at least as long as you and your family are regularly using it).

As for this list, or any ski area ranking lists, my guess is that you could survey 100 people and get 100 different lists.....
 

Jully

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
2,487
Points
38
Location
Boston, MA
I would consider the total cost (including taxes) if I'm looking for a second home. The primary driver would of course be what I want to do and where (I.e. if I live in NJ amd want a weekend beach house I won't buy a place in SC because of lower taxes). However, if there were comparable options in different states and the drive time and such did not vary significantly, then tax rate would absolutely matter.

For instance, I'm in Boston, I'm lucky enough to have three different states with wonderful ski Resorts and towns within a reasonable drive distance. I would look seriously at places in Maine, North Conway New Hampshire, and something like Waitsfield Vermont. All have similar drive times, what I consider to be large top-tier resorts nearby, and so taxes and overall cost of real estate would absolutely play a big role in my final decision.

That said, $2200 on a 2BR condo is not atrocious by any means IMO.
 

benski

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
1,113
Points
0
Location
Binghamton NY
I took it to mean that's where they now ski, but obviously if someone sells a Stowe 2nd home and then immediately buys a Waitsfield 2nd home taxes werent the key driver as they're not saving all that much.

You thought they were evading Vermont real estate taxes by moving to Sugarbush. Stop kidding yourself.
 

x10003q

Active member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
850
Points
28
Location
Bergen County, NJ
Another popularity contest. Holiday should never be in the top 20 just based on terrain alone and Wachusett is just a 110 acre day area. The idea that Gore is once again missing from the top 20 while these 2 are in the top 20 indicates the silliness of this list.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
5,521
Points
113
Location
NJ
I'm referring to it because it's very important when comparing such things.

I didn't say "why", I said "what", as in please explain how they are calculating the "effective" rate to account for differences in real estate values for comparable properties in different states.
 

Plowboy

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
183
Points
16
Location
Behind plow
It varies year to year and town to town. In Warren and Waitsfield, the non-resident rate this year is slightly less than the resident rate (and in Warren has been this way for a couple years now if I remember correctly from my tax bill).

Yes, the non-res. rate is lower in Fayston also, but residents can get a break based on income.
 

gnardawg

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
119
Points
16
I'm always surprised at how low Killington ends up on these lists. What is it that drives them low? They have the longest season, great nightlife, good snow making very varied terrain.

1. Smugglers Notch
2. Sugarbush
3. Mount Snow
4. Tremblant
5. Jay Peak
6. Mad River Glen
7. Sugarloaf
8. Stowe
9. Okemo
10. Loon

11. Bretton Woods
12. Killington
13. Whiteface
14. Sunday River
15. Stratton
16. Holiday Valley
17. Waterville Valley
18. Cannon
19. Wildcat
20. Wachusett


Many surprises this year - let the annual debate begin.
 

Smellytele

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
9,160
Points
113
Location
Right where I want to be
I'm always surprised at how low Killington ends up on these lists. What is it that drives them low? They have the longest season, great nightlife, good snow making very varied terrain.

I think some think that it is not very family friendly and just a party mountain with a bunch of hardos. Not saying I think that but have had others mention that they didn't like the clientele.
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
11,438
Points
83
Location
PRNJ
I didn't say "why", I said "what", as in please explain how they are calculating the "effective" rate to account for differences in real estate values for comparable properties in different states.

That's what Effective property tax is.

It's a way to compare apples-to-apples in different areas (not just states) by dividing the property's value by the property tax paid on it. A big number is bad, it means you're paying a big chunk of your homes value each year in taxes, and thus getting less (or even LOSING) money on your real estate investment. In a state like New Jersey or Connecticut or New Hampshire, if you're home isn't appreciating at least 2% per year, your ROI is underwater just based on taxes alone, not even including other home costs, etc....

I think some think that it is not very family friendly and just a party mountain with a bunch of hardos. Not saying I think that but have had others mention that they didn't like the clientele.

I agree that that's got to be a big chunk of it, all the Joey Juice's that descend on the place, and probably the perceived crowding in general.
 

urungus

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
1,234
Points
83
Location
Western Mass
I think some think that it is not very family friendly and just a party mountain with a bunch of hardos. Not saying I think that but have had others mention that they didn't like the clientele.

What is a “hardo” ? Is it someone who thinks they are / brags about being hardcore but are actually a relative noob? How do hardos differ from gapers?
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
5,521
Points
113
Location
NJ
That's what Effective property tax is.

It's a way to compare apples-to-apples in different areas (not just states) by dividing the property's value by the property tax paid on it. A big number is bad, it means you're paying a big chunk of your homes value each year in taxes, and thus getting less (or even LOSING) money on your real estate investment. In a state like New Jersey or Connecticut or New Hampshire, if you're home isn't appreciating at least 2% per year, your ROI is underwater just based on taxes alone, not even including other home costs, etc....

Are we talking assessed value? If so, I still don't see how this results in comparing apples to apples. How is this going to result in a different tax rate than what is listed on your local property tax bill? If we're not talking the assessed value, then how are they coming up with the value?

Feel free to provide real examples to help illustrate.

If a 2BR condo in town A in NJ has an assessed value of $200K and the town has a property tax rate of 2.5%, your taxes are 5K.
If a similar 2BR condo in town B in VT has an assessed value of $100K and the town has a property tax rate of 2%, your taxes are 2K.

How would the effective tax rate of either of these properties be different than the "real" tax rate?
 

Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
1,766
Points
83
Location
Mad River Valley / MA
This real-estate conversation is making my head spin. What, do you guys work in that industry or what? Geese! All I know is I have a second home in Warren and compared to my local friends, I am getting crucified. I pay for schools and other things I don't even use. It is total taxation without representation. I feel like grabbing some maple syrup and throwing it in the mad river dressed as an Indian. LOL
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
11,438
Points
83
Location
PRNJ
Are we talking assessed value? If so, I still don't see how this results in comparing apples to apples. How is this going to result in a different tax rate than what is listed on your local property tax bill? If we're not talking the assessed value, then how are they coming up with the value?

What you're talking about (it seems I think) is nominal tax value based on assessed value. An effective tax rate considers market value, which is more useful and far more realistic depending on where you live. In some areas, the assessed versus market value will be trivial, in other areas it can be gigantic. It's the percentage of actual home value (that could realistically be garnered on the open market) that you're paying in taxes each year. If this doesn't explain it, I'm not sure how else I can take a crack at it. Perhaps Google it. :dontknow:
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
5,521
Points
113
Location
NJ
This real-estate conversation is making my head spin. What, do you guys work in that industry or what? Geese! All I know is I have a second home in Warren and compared to my local friends, I am getting crucified. I pay for schools and other things I don't even use. It is total taxation without representation. I feel like grabbing some maple syrup and throwing it in the mad river dressed as an Indian. LOL

On a percentage basis, you should be paying less than your local friends (a whopping 0.0179 % less). This year's VT education tax rate in Warren is 1.5737 for residents vs 1.5558 for non-residents. The municipal rate portion is the same for both (0.51). Yes, we're paying money for schools we don't use, but that's not surprising and happens in many/most places with 2nd home owners.

As to BG's latest response, I see what he's saying, but I still don't think he understood my original point then. If market values in 2 places are drastically different (i.e. a 2BR condo in town B costs twice what it does in town A), then unless there's also a very significant difference in tax rates between those two towns, your taxes are lower in town A even with similar tax rates simply by virtue of the property value being lower. "Effective" tax rate doesn't change that. That was my original point on why VT (compared to NJ at least) is not exactly what I would consider ridiculously high in terms of property taxes. And thus why tax rate alone is not a reason to decide to buy a second home in a location other than VT. For me, if I want a 2nd home near a major ski area in the northeast, I'm looking at NY, VT, NH, and ME. ME is out right away as it is too far for me (although taxes there are indeed lower than the other 3). The other 3 all have property tax rates a bit over or around 2% on average, so there's no major difference between them for taxes unless there's a difference in market values of the properties you are considering.
 

Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
1,766
Points
83
Location
Mad River Valley / MA
I am looking at my 2016 bill and we have a Muni rate of .46 and a non-residention Edu rate of 1.53 so that shows how much it went up this year. But something seems wrong. Are you sure the residents Edu rates are higher? That was not what I was lead to believe.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
5,521
Points
113
Location
NJ
I am looking at my 2016 bill and we have a Muni rate of .46 and a non-residention Edu rate of 1.53 so that shows how much it went up this year. But something seems wrong. Are you sure the residents Edu rates are higher? That was not what I was lead to believe.

It varies year to year (and town to town in VT). When I first bought my condo back in 2011, non-residential rates in Warren were higher than resident rates. The past 2 or 3 years it has changed and now we pay less. Current rates (as well as links to rates for the past 6 years for every town in VT) are all available here: http://tax.vermont.gov/property-owners/understanding-property-taxes/education-tax-rates.

And yes, the rates went up, but my taxes actually went down on the 2017 bill (they lowered the assessed value of my condo earlier this year based on comparable sales or something like that).
 

Glenn

Active member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,691
Points
38
Location
CT & VT
This real-estate conversation is making my head spin. What, do you guys work in that industry or what? Geese! All I know is I have a second home in Warren and compared to my local friends, I am getting crucified. I pay for schools and other things I don't even use. It is total taxation without representation. I feel like grabbing some maple syrup and throwing it in the mad river dressed as an Indian. LOL

I can relate. It's tough when you shell out a bunch of money, but have no voice as to how that money is spent.
 
Top