Add Row

Add Element

update

Kozi Checks & Balances
Media Site Home

update

Add Element

Categories

Add Row

Add Element

update

Kozi Checks & Balances TaxTactics News

update

January 15.2025

2 Minutes Read

Nebraska’s Property Tax Relief Under LB 34: Are We Making Progress?

Aerial view of Nebraska state capital at sunset, highlighting property tax aspects.

The Challenges of Property Taxes in Nebraska

Nebraska homeowners are grappling with escalating property tax bills, prompting a significant examination of state tax policies. Historically, property taxes represent the largest source of funding for essential local services, including schools, law enforcement, and community infrastructure. However, recent legislative attempts to mitigate the financial strain on residents have garnered both attention and criticism.

Understanding LB 34: A Legislative Response

In 2024, the Nebraska Unicameral enacted LB 34, a significant property tax measure aimed at addressing years of rising tax rates. This legislation introduced a true levy limit, a first for the state, but many argue that the implementation has flaws. Critics point out that while the bill establishes some level of constraint, these limits can be either too lenient at times or excessively tight in others, creating uncertainty for homeowners and municipalities alike.

The Bigger Picture: Trends in Property Values

A key factor in Nebraska's property tax dilemma is the rapid increase in home values. Since 2020, the average home price in Nebraska has surged by 23% in real terms, which is on par with national trends. This rise follows a historic period where property values grew at a slower pace compared to the rest of the country. Consequently, homeowners in the state are not only facing higher taxes but also finding it increasingly challenging to afford their housing, making the focus on property tax reform more critical than ever.

Future Implications for Tax Policy

As Nebraska continues to revise its framework for property taxes, the stakes are high. The recent legislative reforms must strike a balance between providing immediate relief for taxpayers and ensuring sustainable funding for crucial public services. Policymakers must consider potential unintended consequences, particularly in housing markets where strict tax caps could lead to declines in property values or hinder new developments. The ongoing dialogue surrounding these issues will shape the financial landscape for Nebraska residents in the years to come.

Tax Deduction Deep-Dives

Write A Comment

Related Posts All Posts

10.23.2025

How OBBBA Upheld the Progressive Tax System Amid Complexities

Update The Impact of OBBBA on the Progressive Tax System The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), enacted in 2025, has been a significant point of discussion regarding its influence on the federal tax system. Operating at a scale not seen since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017, the OBBBA is said to maintain the progressiveness of the federal income tax, bringing both benefits and drawbacks to various income groups. Understanding Tax Progressivity Tax progressivity means that tax rates increase as income rises, with the wealthy contributing a larger share of their income compared to lower-income individuals. The recent changes have reportedly upheld this structure, ensuring that taxation corresponds fairly to citizens’ ability to pay. However, some taxpayers in the top quintile of earners may not feel these benefits equally due to the introduction of new gross tax hikes affecting high-income earners. The Arithmetic of Redistribution: Examining After-Tax Income Figures The OBBBA proposes an average increase in after-tax incomes, with projections indicating an average rise of 2.9% in 2025 and 5.4% in 2026. The bottom quintile might see an increase of about 1.5% in 2025, possibly due to new limits on popular credits like the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. Complexity vs. Simplicity: A Double-Edged Sword While the OBBBA aims to simplify tax implications by making temporary TCJA provisions permanent, it paradoxically introduces complexities. New deductions for overtime income, tipped income, and senior citizens further entangle an already complicated tax system. Critics argue that these additions detract from the primary goal of a streamlined fiscal policy. Public Sentiment and Legislative Disconnect Public opinion surrounding the OBBBA remains divided; a significant proportion of respondents express concern that the tax cuts favor wealthy individuals over lower-income groups. Polls indicated that while financial repercussions could be significant, many citizens felt ill-equipped to assess the real implications of such expansive legislation. Future Considerations for Tax Policy Reform Looking forward, it is essential to scrutinize how each provision of the OBBBA will affect social welfare programs and the federal deficit. While the Act promises sleepless nights for policymakers seeking to confront long-term challenges in the tax code, it opens avenues for reevaluation as provisions begin to expire after 2028. Historical patterns suggest that bridging the gap between public opinion and legislative action will require increased transparency and public engagement. The continued progression of tax reform demands balancing effective policy incurred by societal needs and the pressing nature of public sentiment. The OBBBA may provide the necessary foundation for a more responsive fiscal approach that truly represents the diverse needs of all citizens.

10.07.2025

The Hidden Costs of Property Tax Repeal: Why Revenue Replacement Matters

Update Understanding the Complex Landscape of Property Tax RepealProperty taxes are the largest revenue source for local governments in the U.S., generating over 70 percent of local tax revenue, by some estimates. They primarily fund essential services like education, public safety, and infrastructure. However, dissatisfaction with property taxes prompts discussions about their elimination, leading to important questions: if property taxes are repealed, how will that lost revenue be replaced, and what are the implications for local communities?The Challenge of Revenue ReplacementReplacing property tax revenue is fraught with challenges. In various jurisdictions, local sales and income tax bases differ significantly, complicating any attempt to equalize funding. For example, an agricultural area may find itself with no viable sales tax base to harness, while urban regions might not have sufficient income tax revenue potential. As a result, any alternative tax replacements could exacerbate existing inequalities, pressing communities to grapple with deeper economic divides.Moreover, the push for local taxing authority can lead to diverse tax rates across regions. For example, Florida’s mixed local and state sales tax rates can reach as high as 15.34 percent in some counties, placing an enormous stress on local consumers. The variations don’t just threaten local economies; they also risk alienating residents from essential services that rely on tax funding.A Look at Previous Attempts and their Economic ConsequencesVarious proposals for property tax alternatives have arisen, including local income taxes and increased sales taxes. However, evidence suggests that income taxes tend to drive wealthier citizens to relocate to lower-tax regions, ultimately leading to decreased funding for local services in higher-tax areas. A study explored in the AIER highlights how recent reforms have failed to successfully replace property tax revenue without creating economic distortions. This trend can ripple out to affect businesses and residents alike, discouraging investment in crucial local services.What Lies Ahead: Future Predictions and ConsequencesDismissing property taxes can appear appealing, particularly due to their unpopularity among taxpayers. However, experts argue that any repeal must be approached with a detailed plan to replace the lost revenue. Without a systematic replacement strategy, communities risk losing funding essential for their operations.The Path Forward: Informed Decisions and Voter EngagementProponents of property tax repeal must engage in open discussions on replacement taxes, shedding light on the true cost of cancellation. Residents should have the opportunity to evaluate any new proposals thoroughly and take accountability for how funding will be structured in the future. Understanding these dynamics will empower voters to make more informed decisions that ensure sustainable community funding.The path to tax reform is challenging and riddled with complexities. But ignoring the consequences of property tax repeal could have lingering effects on community viability and growth. Engaging in this dialogue not only informs voters but also holds government accountable for the services and taxes they prioritize.

10.03.2025

How Limiting the Tax Exclusion for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Can Benefit Everyone

Update The Tax Exclusion for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance: An Overview The exclusion of employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI) premiums from federal income and payroll taxes has been a long-standing practice in the U.S., dating back to World War II. This exclusion currently costs the federal government an estimated $5.9 trillion over the next decade, as projected by the Treasury Department. It incentivizes employers to provide health insurance rather than boost taxable wages, effectively encouraging higher health care outlays. Future Predictions: Revenue Implications of Limiting ESI Exclusions Recent analyses indicate that reforming the tax exclusion could generate significant federal revenue—up to $389 billion over the next decade—mainly from high earners. By limiting ESI exclusions at the 80th or 90th percentiles of premiums, policymakers could reinvigorate federal finances while tackling the rising burden of healthcare costs, which are anticipated to increase over 9% in 2026. This reform would redistribute some financial responsibility from the taxpayers back to those benefitting from generous health plans. Understanding Healthcare Subsidies: Costs and Consequences Healthcare subsidies have historically aimed to make health insurance more affordable, but their unintended consequences can inflate overall costs by boosting demand without addressing supply. The shift towards untaxed ESI benefits contributes to escalating healthcare prices, resulting in a greater financial strain on the federal budget. To tackle this, any expansion of premium tax credits must be counterbalanced by adjustments elsewhere, particularly by reducing the ESI tax exclusion. Opportunity Trends: Potential for Reform Experts from organizations such as the Tax Policy Center suggest several reform routes: outright repeal of the ESI exclusion, limiting it above certain premium levels, or substituting it with a refundable tax credit. These approaches would not only modify income distribution impacts but also address the root causes of soaring healthcare expenses. Implementing these changes could promote a more equitable tax system while potentially decreasing premiums in the long run. Why This Matters: The Broader Implications The discussion surrounding ESI exclusion reform goes beyond mere tax policy. It reflects deeper questions about healthcare access, economic equity, and the future of employer-sponsored coverage. With a reform strategy that normalizes compensation packages and curtails excessive health care costs, society can move towards a more sustainable healthcare landscape, potentially benefiting consumers and taxpayers alike.

Nebraska’s Property Tax Relief Under LB 34: Are We Making Progress?

The Challenges of Property Taxes in Nebraska

Understanding LB 34: A Legislative Response

The Bigger Picture: Trends in Property Values

Future Implications for Tax Policy

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

Core Modal Title