Mortgage Research Network Podcast

Welcome to the Mortgage Research Network Podcast. We bring you the latest mortgage and real estate news 3 times a week. The audio is AI generated, but content is fact-checked by me, Tim Lucas, editor of MortgageResearch.com and a former mortgage professional. And with me is Craig Berry, a mortgage originator with 25 years experience. Craig, here’s a wild number for you—$24 billion. That’s how much property taxes generate for local governments in Ohio every year. And now, there’s a real chance that number could drop to zero if voters decide to abolish property taxes altogether.

That’s a staggering amount of money to just… disappear. And it’s not like that $24 billion is sitting in a vault somewhere—it’s funding schools, police, fire departments, and other services people rely on every day. So, what’s the plan if property taxes go away?

Well, that’s the big question, isn’t it? Right now, Ohioans are looking at two competing proposals. One is a citizen-led effort to abolish property taxes entirely, and the other is a legislative push to replace them with a land value tax. Both ideas are bold, but they come with some serious trade-offs.

And it’s not like property taxes are just a theoretical issue. In Mahoning County, for example, the tax delinquency rate hit 18% last year. That’s nearly one in five property owners falling behind. And in Cuyahoga County, reassessments caused property values to jump 32%, which led to a $60 million increase in unpaid taxes. Those numbers are hard to ignore.

They really are. And it’s not just Ohio. Across the country, property taxes are a hot topic. The median property tax bill in the U.S. last year was $3,500, and that number isn’t going down anytime soon. For a lot of people, it feels like the system is stacked against them. But at the same time, those taxes pay for services that everyone depends on.

Right, and that’s where the land value tax comes in. Ohio State Senator Bill Blessing is the one championing this idea. Instead of taxing the value of both the land and the buildings on it, you’d only tax the value of the land itself. Blessing argues that this approach would encourage development because it doesn’t penalize people for improving their property.

That’s an interesting angle. Under the current system, if you build a new house or renovate an old one, your property taxes go up. A land value tax would eliminate that disincentive, which could lead to more development. And more development means more housing, which could help with affordability. At least, that’s the theory.

But here’s the thing—Blessing himself has admitted that a land value tax wouldn’t necessarily reduce Ohioans’ overall tax burden, although it might actually bring in more money overall. The idea is that it would spread the burden differently, potentially lowering individual tax bills while increasing the total revenue.

And that’s where it gets tricky. Because even if the total tax burden stays the same—or even goes up—people are going to feel it differently. Some might see their taxes go down, while others see them go up. And that’s a tough sell politically.

It is. And then there’s the practical challenge of getting it passed. Blessing’s proposal would need a supermajority in both chambers of the General Assembly before it could even go to voters. That’s a high bar, especially for something as complex and controversial as a land value tax.

Meanwhile, you’ve got the citizen-led effort to abolish property taxes altogether. On the surface, that sounds appealing—who wouldn’t want to get rid of a tax? But the consequences would be severe. If you eliminate property taxes, you either have to slash services or find another way to raise $24 billion a year.

And that’s not an easy task. You’d probably have to double the state’s income and sales tax rates to make up the difference. And even then, it’s not clear that you’d be able to fully replace the revenue. Plus, higher income and sales taxes come with their own set of problems.

It’s a classic case of “pick your poison.” No one likes paying taxes, but we all rely on the services they fund. And as Benjamin Franklin famously said, “In this world, nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

It’s true. Taxes are a necessary evil. The real debate is about how we structure them. Some states have low property taxes but high income and sales taxes. Others do the opposite. There’s no one-size-fits-all solution, but the choice has to reflect the priorities of the people.

And that’s what makes this upcoming vote in Ohio so interesting. It’s not just about property taxes—it’s about the kind of communities people want to live in. Do they value the services funded by those taxes enough to keep paying them? Or are they willing to take a gamble on a new system?

It’s a tough call. And it’s not just an Ohio issue. Other states are watching closely to see how this plays out. If Ohio moves to a land value tax or abolishes property taxes altogether, it could set a precedent for the rest of the country.

It’s a fascinating moment. And it’s a reminder that these big, abstract debates about taxes and budgets have very real consequences for people’s lives. Whether it’s funding for schools, emergency services, or infrastructure, these decisions matter.

They do. And they’re not easy decisions to make. But at the end of the day, it comes down to what people are willing to pay for—and what they’re willing to give up.

Well, I think that’s a good place to leave it for now. We’ll be keeping an eye on Ohio as this story unfolds. It’s a complex issue, but one that’s worth paying attention to. That's about all the time we have for this topic, but we go into even more detail on the site. For more, search "land value tax" at Mortgage research.com. We'll see you next time on the Mortgage Research Network Podcast.