Can I get my sister to file a quit claim deed to release her interest in the property that I paid her half off in our inheritance without increasing my property taxes that I inherited under prop 13 in California.
State/Country relating to question: California
I have talked to a lawyer about it but he thinks it can't be done. I wonder if there is some type of way to do this using my kids as a transfer to them and then back to me for example.
I understand; you want to know whether you can take over the property without increasing the base value (as happens when property changes ownership).
That's a great question.
The key is to make it seem like you are not taking over new ownership, but rather that you go from a joint owner to a sole owner.
To do that, you will make it seem like you are owning more rather than taking on new ownership.
"have to make it seem..."
To have your children act as "strawmen" will not resolve this situation, I'm afraid.
With the deed transfer, you own the property in fee simple without owning it jointly. However, you owned it in part before.
The key is to co-sign an acknowledgement at transfer that this does not create new ownership, but only enlarges your ownership.
Is that your worry, or did I misunderstand your question?
I would love to provide answers to any further questions that linger.
It is only a CIO requiring property tax increases if there's a change of MORE than 50% ownership.
Hence, if you own 0% have her transfer 50% to you and 50% to someone else.
Then, have the other person transfer the 50% back to you.
If you own 50%, you do not need to do a CIO to change that to 100%.
What do you mean by enlarging ownership. I just want to have my name alone on the deed after my sister releases her interest in the property when we file a quit claim deed with the county. I want to avoid paying more property taxes every year by still retaining my parents property tax base that came with the house in the parent to child transfer in the living trust that had been created. I do not like the way I was led into a montly payment program after I only wanted to pay a one time fee for this one question. It makes this whole thing seem like a scam to get people to sign up for more than they bargained for.
Please do not rate me yet.
I wasn't done.
If you own half, you do not have increased property taxes because that is not considered a change in ownership.
Did you see what I just typed?
I hope that clears it up.
You only have to do a CIO and get a reassessment (increasing taxes), if the change in ownership is more than 50%.
If it is exactly 50%, you do not have to do a CIO, and you therefore will not have increased taxes.
Does that make sense?
Please tell what you still need answered, so I can be of utmost utility to you.
Are you there?
I want to know what you still need to know, so I can provide you the fullest answer possible.
If I have given you the answer you needed, please give me a higher rating than your premature one.
I'm hopeful that you will respond, so that we can discuss what more you still wanted to know.
Otherwise, I will be forced to assume that you have a false motive.
... i.e. to not have to pay for my hard work.
I understand that my name and her name is XX XXX title now. My concern is that by filing a quit claim deed it will raise a flag for a reassessment with the county by taking my sisters name off the deed and them thinking that I should pay the extra taxes on $500,000 on a $1,000,000 home as an example. If in fact that you are correct if ownership is split 50/50, which it is, you are saying I will not be reassessed for a higher tax rate, and can retain my parents tax base on the property even though I bought her half of the house out. Is there a way I can check this with the county to verify if they would be in agreement with this approach?
A CIO only applies for reassessment when more than 50% is transferred. Otherwise, there is no change in ownership. That's the law.
That law applies throughout California, it is not county specific.
If you are reassessed, you can argue it is improper as there was no change in ownership, as more than 50% did not transfer.
/50% did not transfer.
If this is what you wanted to know, please provide me with a good rating for my work.
If not, ask me what more you still need to know.
This is a great article for you to read: http://www.realestateinvestorlaw.com/Articles/Using-Exclusions-To-Avoid-Reassessment.shtml
It will explain the law further.
...so that you will understand why you should not be re-assessed when no more than 50% is transferred.
Is it clear now, or is there more you wish to know? If there is, what questions linger?
If not, please provide me with a rating that indicates I have answered your question.
...as I believe I have. Until you explain what more you need to know, I cannot think otherwise.
Once you do, I will answer whatever remains unclear.
I want you to know that I am quite sincere about this issue and I am perfectly willing to pay for your advice. I just want to make sure that my options are clear and intelligently put forth so I can convey what is being done here to the people that will ultimately decide on this matter. You have given me renewed hope where I did not have as much before we opened this matter. Please respond if you get this message and add anything more that you feel is pertinent. Thank you for sending me the web article.
You are most welcome.
I appreciate your comments, and I too feel I answered your question. I'm glad I could help, and thank you for your kind words.
Please click the happy face if you gave me excellent service, so I will be paid. Thank you.
I am responsive, respectful, and relentless.
I talked to my lawyer who consulted with a legal expert in the field of real estate law who has written a three volume book on the subject and he said there is absolutely no way that I can transfer her half of the value of the house without triggering a tax increase for that half of the value of the house. If need be I can give you my lawywers phone number and he can better explain the situation for you.
It's only reassessed as far as CIO goes if more than 50% is transferred. That was your question, and my answer. There are additional consequences, and I'm aware of that - as there are anytime property is transferred.
I went down to the county assessors office on Monday the 16th of June
and the lady at the desk listened to me when I told her what you told me
about the 50% or less transfer for the change in ownership not triggering a re-assessment of the property. She told me if I proceed with my sister giving me her half interest in said property that I will be assessed for half the value of what the property is worth, just what I was trying to avoid. I called my lwayer afterwards and told him what had happened and he was in agreement because he already told me the 50% or less CIO would not fly. I do not know where you came up with your information even though you said this applies through out California and is not county specific. Like I said before, my lawyer contacted an expert in the field of real estate law and he never heard of this claim either. Let me know if I can find this out in writing somewhere so I can go back to the assessor's office and make a good argument for myself so my taxes will not increase. Otherwise what we have talked about won't mean or do any good in my present situation
Look at the Board of Equalization's designations with respect to exceptions to a "change in ownership": www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/ptrules462040.pdfIn this work, the property is not transferred as change of ownership for tax purposes, when a transferor is also a transferee and no more than 50% is transferred. Just read the exceptions. All the best.
I hope you can find what I am looking for so I will not be assessed for half the value of my home. Good luck.
The law is explained right here: www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/ptrules462040.pdf
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).