Brokerage firm buys building

October 24, 2007
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Pennsylvania Street BuildingA local brokerage firm that specializes in foreclosed properties is moving its headquarters from North Meridian to a 6,700-square-foot office building at 1236-1238 Pennsylvania St. Wynkoop Brokerage bought the building shown here (before a recent renovation) for about $500,000, said Scott Wynkoop. The company's old office, at 21st and Meridian streets, has been put under contract with a CPA firm. Brokers Rich Forslund and Matt Langfeldt of NAI Olympia Partners completed the deal. What's on your mind?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • who cares?
  • Let's have a property tax discussion/flame war. Who else is excited by the prospect of paying the highest sales tax in the US? Go Indiana!
  • Has anyone heard anymore about the City and the old Bush Stadium?
  • I think the NCAA College World Series talk is interesting. While people in Omaha would be freaked out, I always thought VF would be a perfect venue to hold the event. When the NCAA moved here--I actually thought they might do something before now. Rosenblatt holds 23,000 people (although rickity). VF cost 18M to build in 95-96. It will probably cost more than 18M to add seating. It now has 14+ thous permanent--with space for about 2500 in the lawned outfield. The NCAA will not relocate with a gross loss of 7-thousand+ seats.
  • I think it's pretty irresponsible for the Indy Star to have characterized the proposed 7% sales tax as the highest sales tax in the US. In reality, many states have 7% state sales tax, so Indiana is only matching them. And many states allow for individual cities to collect additional sales tax that pushes many city rates into the 9% range, some above 10%. Chicago is 9%; NYC is 8.375%; Montgomery, AL is a whopping 10%.

    It really makes no difference in the end. The government is going to tax people and they just move the numbers around to make things politically palatable. Property Taxes too high? Ok then...shuffle, shuffle, shuffle....carry the one...and -- BINGO! -- 7% sales tax.
  • CorrND,

    Maybe. The trick is in determining who is really being taxed and who is benefitting. One could argue that lowering property taxes and increasing sales taxes punish the poor.

    For instance, property taxes benefit the entire community in that they limit how much land people want to own. Essentially, property taxes prevent wasteful land use, sprawl and hording one's wealth. I'm all for that.

    Sales taxes, on the other hand, only hit the Consumer (very anti-American come to think of it), and one could argue that the poor are hit twice because they're paying more taxes but they're not receiving the benefit of lower property taxes because they typically rent, rather than own their dwellings. I doubt landlords will pass the savings to their renters.

    The Governor's tax plan does seem to favor the wealthy over the poor, in these respects.
  • I like the idea of increasing the sales tax as opposed to raising, for instance, income taxes. This allows for the collection of revenue from those folks, shall we say, outside the realm of us law-abiding citizens. Every time a crack dealer buys a new Benz he'll be paying a little extra for it.

    This will, in my opinion, probably help seniors and those on fixed incomesin the long run. Property tax increases really hit them hard, whereas a sales tax increase probably won't since your average retiree or other fixed income person doesn't have as much disposable income to spend on things that get taxed.
  • The other thing to watch regarding property taxes is whether homeowners or businesses are being discussed. A drop in property taxes should probably only apply to homeowners.

    Businesses can always raise their prices/rates to make up for higher taxes, but homeowners can't always get a raise from their employers, not to mention retirees or the diabled who are on fixed incomes.

    I remember Harrison Ullman, NUVO's original editor, warning us that this day would come.
  • ExIHPC: have to say your first comments are nuts!! Prevent sprawl (hasn't happened), prevent hording wealth/ limit people's land holdings (go to Russia, we're capitalists here in the USA!), Landlords pass on savings (why?? most mom and pop operations don't cash flow b/c of tax increases that CANT be passed on!!)

    I'm on the North Side of Indy (Boad Ripple/Wash Township). Our rate is damn near 4%. If you don't think that hurts the community you're smokin crack!!!

    Sales tax at 7% is on par with the rest of the country's metros. Tax consumption more and savings/investment less!!

    If you lefty's want to see everyone move to Carmel keep wining about lower property taxes!
  • ExIHPC,

    The notion that renters don't pay property taxes is absurd. Landlords have to cover their mortgage and taxes, and both are built into rent.

    The price of a rental dwelling is PITIM (principal, interest, taxes, insurance, maintenance/management) plus profit. If taxes go up, rent goes up. If taxes go down, rents eventually adjust downward in the marketplace as competing landlords cut rent to increase occupancy because they can afford to.

    Just because renters don't write a check to the Marion County Treasurer doesn't mean they aren't paying the taxes!
  • CorrND:

    Great comment on the true tax rate of US cities. Obviously, we're just shifting numbers because we still have to fund schools, roads, fire/police but...

    In too many areas of Indy the upper middle class and middle class are being driven out of the city. Why should I (or anyone else) stay in Indy when I can get so much value (tax savings) for moving to Carmel. Don't even get me started on crime and schools!!

    MY MAN MITCH is trying to make it possible for me and other Young Profs like myself to stay in Indy and I'm thrilled about it. Hudnut: We can't be a suburb of nowhere!
  • Even illegals have to pay sales taxes. So, that is what we should be looking toward as our source of income, not property taxes.
  • Just a few comments:
    1) Maybe you should listen to ExIHPC instead of calling them a commie b/c their comments about property taxes are true, in terms of policy standpoint and legal effect, just not in the absolute. They aren't mean't to end wealth hording, sprawl, etc., just control them.
    2) One problem with sales taxes is that since 1994 the ability of sales tax to actually tax consumption has diminished to around 40%
    3) One reason for not moving to the suburbs is that newer studies are showing that (In cities with better public transportation) moving to the burbs to save on home/land values and property taxes is non-existent b/c those saving are eclipsed by transportation expenses.
  • hoarding one's wealth?

    Sure, it can be staggering to see or imagine some people's accumulated wealth, but it's not anyone's business to punish them out of jealousy or indignation.
  • Steve, thanks for starting this discussion. Wednesday is our print deadline day, so I don't have a lot of time for the blog.
  • The sales tax is a bad tax to increase. If taxes are going to increase, there needs to be a much more progressive tax. A great example is the income tax. This is something that should be raised -- not the sales tax.

    I would gladly pay more income tax so I would receive Social Security, healthcare, and have improved public transit. There is something seriously wrong with the nation when it is the wealthiest but does not have adequate healthcare for everyone. The average life expectancy for an African-American male in Yonkers, NY is 35 years old. In Kerala, India -- one of the poorest states in the world -- the life expectancy for a male is 70 years old. This is not because of a lack of violence within Kerala but instead because Kerala provides its residents healthcare.
  • Anyone have opinions on the schools being paid for by the state? Will it have a beneficial side-effect on certain chronically underfunded/mismanaged school districts? Or will it simply cause there to be a LOT of underfunded schools as the healthy tax bases enjoyed by suburban school districts suddenly is replaced by a tight state budget? I think that could potentially have the biggest impact of any portion of the proposal.
  • First of all, a question - Has the Governor's blue ribbon commission made its reccomendations yet? I haven't heard anything about it... For the most part, I think the Governor's plan is pretty reasonable. It is interesting that the Republican leaders came out so strongly in support of it because parts of it are very similar to the Mayor's IndyWorks plan that Republican legislators voted against in the last few sessions...
  • I don't think the panel is supposed to give their opinion until 2008. I'm going to assume their recommendations will be framed within Mitch's plan. I think the panel was going to address how to make local government more efficient. Undoubtedly this will mean getting rid of township assessors, possibly more of township government.
  • I think this blog has been hijacked.
  • Sales tax hits the wealthy pretty hard too. 7% of a brand new luxury vehicle or expensive caviar brings in a lot more revenue to the state then 7% on a gallon of milk.

    There are two kids of poor people. One kind that complain about being poor and another kind that try to better themselves to get out of the situation.

    I think that when you tax people on a consumption basis it helps those who want to be helped. If someone gets a second job, they get hit by even more with an income tax. If someone stops buying unecessary goods, they will save money and pay less tax.

    I am a landlord. The prices or rent are already pretty competitive. Knowing that I'll be able to save more on my property tax and pass that onto my renters will help both me and my tenants.

    I was looking at rental units her in Indy. These places were on the run down side and the tenants were on the poor side of the spectrum. Walking through the units you saw brand new TV's, tons of cigarettes, cable, cell phones, etc... I would hope that with a higher sales tax rate, perhaps some of this behavior would be modified.
    I doubt it....unless the person didn't want to remain poor.
  • There's absolutely no question in my mind that our present 4% property tax makes housing less affordable, especially at the bottom end of the scale. When I studied economics that was the definition of a regressive tax.

    It's regressive on the middle class, and those on fixed incomes, too. For many people, the one big asset for retirement is their home equity. If we tax property at 4% of true market value every year, that takes away most or all of the annual capital gain (value increase) of the home. Worse, it taxes unrealized gains which we have to cover out of current income...we only see the actual increase in our home's value when we sell, but we have to pay the real estate taxes twice a year (or lose the house).
  • Evidently Mitch's staff has been reading here. :-)
  • Hey....Isn't that where the old Hoosier Ballroom was? That was the first place I
    ever saw a punk show.
  • What are they going to do with it? Maybe some high density development? :)
  • Hey Paul-I say a BIG NO to higher income taxes-I think a 65% increase is enough!. Sales tax is the way to collect money from the cash society (drug dealers, construction workers, cash labors, prostitutes and illegal aliens who pay NO taxes now. They skip out on income taxes and property taxes. Exempt the cars under $35,000 and let everybody pay their share.
  • Oh by the way Paul there won't be any social security left when you retire!

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

  2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

  3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

  4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

  5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

ADVERTISEMENT