ken ward
September 2nd 05, 04:49 AM
As some of you may recall, although my glider has been at Minden for
years (and I pay taxes there), a few months ago I got a tax bill from
Kern County (KC). The supposed aircraft location was the Cal City
airport. After a few phone calls I determined that the bill was based
on a casual conversation I had with the Douglas County (DC) Assessor
(Ann) last fall, indicating that I *might* use Cal City in the future.
The upshot was that she finked on me to KC, who dutifully issued me a
bill ($330/year in KC vs $78/year in DC). This was in spite of the fact
that the glider is not at Cal City, has never been at Cal City, much
less KC. No evidence existed to claim that my glider has ever been seen
at Cal City. DC is conservative enough to only issue bills based upon
actual sightings.
I've lost track of how many phone calls I've made to both Assessors,
trying to straighten this out. While DC was apologetic, KC was
downright snippy when I suggested that I didn't actually owe them any
money. Their argument was that since they'd *heard* that I was going to
base my glider at Cal City, then it was MY problem to convince them to
their satisfaction that I was paying taxes somewhere else.
That is, if I couldn't prove that I was paying taxes *somewhere*, then I
had to pay KC. They were unable to cite a statute in support of their
position, and were clearly irked when I asked for the relevant code.
Only a personal phone call from the DC Assessor to the KC Assessor
caused KC to drop their demand. The only reason I pursued it is because
I reasoned it would be less work to keep KC from putting a bogus lein on
my glider, than it would be to get a bogus lein (plus penalties) removed.
Grrrrrr.
Ken
years (and I pay taxes there), a few months ago I got a tax bill from
Kern County (KC). The supposed aircraft location was the Cal City
airport. After a few phone calls I determined that the bill was based
on a casual conversation I had with the Douglas County (DC) Assessor
(Ann) last fall, indicating that I *might* use Cal City in the future.
The upshot was that she finked on me to KC, who dutifully issued me a
bill ($330/year in KC vs $78/year in DC). This was in spite of the fact
that the glider is not at Cal City, has never been at Cal City, much
less KC. No evidence existed to claim that my glider has ever been seen
at Cal City. DC is conservative enough to only issue bills based upon
actual sightings.
I've lost track of how many phone calls I've made to both Assessors,
trying to straighten this out. While DC was apologetic, KC was
downright snippy when I suggested that I didn't actually owe them any
money. Their argument was that since they'd *heard* that I was going to
base my glider at Cal City, then it was MY problem to convince them to
their satisfaction that I was paying taxes somewhere else.
That is, if I couldn't prove that I was paying taxes *somewhere*, then I
had to pay KC. They were unable to cite a statute in support of their
position, and were clearly irked when I asked for the relevant code.
Only a personal phone call from the DC Assessor to the KC Assessor
caused KC to drop their demand. The only reason I pursued it is because
I reasoned it would be less work to keep KC from putting a bogus lein on
my glider, than it would be to get a bogus lein (plus penalties) removed.
Grrrrrr.
Ken