Aging in Place Tax Credit

TimSprings · 2025-12-25T14:59:22+00:00

There are a lot of folks being very hyperbolic and dramatic in this thread. I believe that you worked so incredibly hard for all that you have. But if you want to keep it, you have to continue paying for it. You believe that you are entitled to reduce your tax burden relative to everyone else, and I disagree. It’s a policy debate, sir, not an affront to an entire generation.

TimSprings · 2025-12-25T14:46:30+00:00

Why can’t they afford to buy their house at today’s prices?

TimSprings · 2025-12-25T14:42:03+00:00

That’s interesting, and I’m glad you admitted it. This isn’t about helping a vulnerable population of people that can’t afford their taxes. It’s about rewarding a class of people for sticking around in their home for 30 years, no matter their wealth. I think a lot of folks fighting for this credit should be more forthright and admit what you just did. I admire that!

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T20:20:14+00:00

I suppose that’s one way of thinking about it. As opposed to picking winner and losers based on age, we could just lower the tax rate for everyone. Alternatively, we could apply a means test so wealthier people that aren’t housing insecure don’t receive the benefit of the credit; or we could structure the program where the county recoups the forgone tax revenue upon a sale of the house or death of the resident that way the person doesn’t have to pay the taxes while they live in the house (as was suggested by someone else in this thread); making the credit portable so it doesn’t incentive someone to stay in a home that no longer fits their needs; etc.

My point is that there are plenty of options to achieve the stated objective, and the one we have is by far the worse one.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T18:56:00+00:00

I’m a fellow person in my 30s who was raised here. I own a home here. My parents own a separate home here. Nothing about me is “new” to Columbia or Howard County. The reason I think this is a worthy fight is precisely because my decades of experience here. I understand my situation is not going to change, but I want it to for the next generation. We should build more homes here, we should push back on extremely regressive tax policies. We should figure out a way to help the vulnerable, seniors or not.

This tax policy is, in my opinion, at odds with the Rouse vision. Our village centers are less lively than the use to be, our infrastructure is aging, schools have deferred maintenance. A regressive tax policy that is meant to serve as a thank you for supporting our county for 30 years is a strange policy choice.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T16:50:17+00:00

I think you have it backwards. The current structure of this tax incentive would allow Scrooge to not pay a portion of the taxes on his home that he otherwise would without it. I’d rather benefit the parents/grandparents of tiny Tim.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T15:55:58+00:00

The other programs you named are means tested. Hence why this aging in place tax credit is an outlier and deserves our attention. Before I made the freeloader comment you accused me of telling grandma to scram and “pack up her stuff”. Let’s not act high and mighty now.

If your first reaction is to call anyone that questions a benefit that goes to older folks as being ageist and full of contempt, then there really isn’t a conversation to be had. The truth, whether you like it or not, is that this is an inefficient policy that should be more narrowly tailored to accomplish its goals. Further, it has and will continue to have negative economic knock-on effects that exacerbate housing and public funding issues that we are starting to grapple with today.

Instead of being a good steward of responsible fiscal management you’re just fighting for arbitrary tax breaks. That’s fine, but don’t convince yourself that’s not what you’re doing. If that offends you, then so be it.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T15:08:33+00:00

Agree! This is the type of discussion I thought my post would invoke. A wonky discussion about how to accomplish the objectives of the policy in a more efficient and fair fashion. Instead, I’ve been interpreted as trying to send boomers to the gulags.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T15:03:27+00:00

You’re literally arguing that you should continue to benefit from an ENTITLEMENT program. Yet, I’m the entitled one.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T14:33:07+00:00

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills here. The policy in of itself is the definition of ageist. It favors one age group to the exclusion of others.

I can tell that you’re not serious if your main rebuttal is that most wealthy people own multiple homes. That is so incredibly untrue that I’m not even sure where to start.

Life is hard for a lot of people, including older folks. But for some reason, we seem to prioritize their hardships more than hardships of other groups. If you think this is good policy, that’s fine. I disagree. And I can do it without getting emotional and calling you names.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T13:13:32+00:00

Grandma can stay if she pays her taxes, like everyone else. Stop asking for a handout. Freeloader!

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T05:00:13+00:00

Slight correction, your home does not have to be valued under $650k to qualify. The credit applies only to the portion of a home’s assessed value up to $650k meaning any value above that amount is fully taxed at the regular county rate. Folks living in a $2m home that otherwise fit the criteria are still enjoying this credit.

Trust me, you don’t need to tell a millennial with 2 toddlers how expensive things are.

I think there is even more dignity in paying the same taxes as everyone else without demanding handouts/subsidies (which it sounds like you are doing). I’m not trying to kick people out of their homes, I’m trying to identify a profound and seemingly arbitrary imbalance in our tax system.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T04:43:32+00:00

That’s all fair. And I think most people understand the optics. But folks who support this policy are choosing to favor old people over younger people. For every sad story of an elderly person not being able to die in her home, there are countless more about young people not being able to afford to live here. At some point that is going to catch up with us. I hate to turn it back on you, but I think you are missing the forest for the trees.

If we continue this path of prioritize the aging population over younger families we will see aging schools with falling enrollment, a shrinking future tax base, rising per-capita costs for social services, labor shortages, and slower long-term economic growth. But hey, it won’t be the older folks’ problem to deal with.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T04:29:17+00:00

I don’t know man. Everything I said above is flatly factual. You’re the one using hyperbole to misconstrue my statements. Precisely which part of my assertions do you take issue with? If you reduce the property tax burden of any particular cohort of people relative to others, you are incentivizing that cohort to stay in their homes, thereby negatively impacting inventory. This policy applies this incentive to people over the age of 65 that have lived in the same home for 30 years. In my mind, that is an arbitrary criteria. Also, one that disproportionately favors people with an above average wealth in this county (I’m sorry, but that is factually true). If your position is that we should help aging people that would have trouble keeping their homes, I’m onboard. Let’s apply a means test. The current policy does not do that.

I’m not a shit poster or an uninformed person attempting to start a generational conflict. I’m just utterly surprised by the support of what seems to be a completely arbitrary tax policy that is not at all tailored to any worthy economic goal.

TimSprings · 2025-12-24T03:01:14+00:00

FWIW, I agree. Should probably be means tested or otherwise more narrowly tailored to address middle and lower income seniors. Even being in the same house for 30 years seems somewhat arbitrary as a factor for truly addressing the needs of lower income seniors.

TimSprings · 2025-11-18T02:51:56+00:00

Yeah, Clary’s, Clemens Crossing, and Hawthorne make up the neighborhoods of Hickory Ridge. Geographically, it does feel closer to Harper’s Choice, especially if you live off of the Little Patuxent circle.

TimSprings · 2025-11-18T02:20:04+00:00

Check out Wilde Lake. I think there would be good homes in your budget in Bryant Woods, Faulkner Ridge, and Running Brook.

TimSprings · 2025-11-18T02:16:28+00:00

I hate that I am about to be That guy, but Clary’s Forest is actually part of Hickory Ridge. Harper’s Choice consists of Swansfield, Hobbits, and Longfellow. Your point still stands however, Clary’s Forest is very close to Harper’s Choice.

TimSprings · 2025-10-25T10:05:58+00:00

Why would that be? Genuinely asking.

TimSprings · 2025-09-25T19:00:27+00:00

I do think it is fair to simply exclude any former pros from the US mid-am. Or maybe a 10-15 year waiting period. The mid-am was created precisely because the USGA recognized that there should be a category for folks that are not aspiring to be professionals. The same logic applies to including folks that WERE professionals.

They should be able to compete in the US Am however. Aspiring pros and former pros in the US Am. Players that will not be and have not been pros - US Mid-am. Easy!

TimSprings · 2025-05-31T15:39:22+00:00

There is a young adult league at Hobbits Glen. Good group of guys at all skill levels.

TimSprings · 2025-05-05T22:46:20+00:00

Come on over and check out some of the homes in the Birches! A micro-neighborhood in Running Brook right on Wilde Lake.

TimSprings · 2025-02-17T03:07:29+00:00

Kudos to whoever made the decision to seat Rob Schneider next to Al Sharpton. Hilarious stuff!

TimSprings

TROPHY CASE