![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools
![]() |
Display Modes
![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 546
Thanks: 49
Thanked 100 Times in 75 Posts
|
![]()
https://greatnorthernink.wordpress.c...ce=chatgpt.com
Also, " ... allowing negative local tax rates under the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT)—which effectively resulted in unincorporated places paying nothing—was unconstitutional. The Court declared that policy violates Part II, Article 5 of the New Hampshire Constitution, because it undermines the requirements of “equal valuation and uniform rate throughout the State” " ... found that the practice of setting "negative tax rates" for the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) in unincorporated towns without school districts is unconstitutional. These negative rates allowed such towns to offset their SWEPT tax, effectively raising no revenue for education, which the court deemed a violation of the state constitution’s requirement for uniform taxation under Part II, Article 5. "What this means Short term: Unincorporated places that currently have negative SWEPT rates remain in limbo. They’re still effectively exempt from paying, until lawmakers step in. Next steps: The legislature and governor are tasked with crafting reforms to ensure all properties are taxed fairly in accordance with constitutional standards. Broader implications: The decision does not impact the larger Rand case challenging the adequacy of New Hampshire’s school funding formula—such matters are still working through the courts and are expected to influence future funding policy Bottom line: Negative tax rates under the SWEPT scheme are now ruled unconstitutional. The state has until the legislative process plays out to fix the law and ensure consistent, uniform taxation statewide." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|