How California’s Real Estate Laws Can Wreck Inherited Property Plans

Trust Attorney

California’s real estate laws, particularly those governing property tax reassessment, have undergone significant changes in recent years, creating unforeseen challenges for families seeking to pass down property to future generations. The passage of Proposition 19 in 2020 and the long-standing Proposition 13 have introduced complexities that can lead to substantial financial burdens, often derailing carefully laid inheritance plans. This report explores the legal pitfalls, including reassessment traps, the narrowing of parent-child exclusions, and the real-world consequences for families.

Under Proposition 13, property taxes are capped at 1% of the purchase price, with annual increases limited to 2%. However, any “change in ownership” triggers a reassessment of the property to its current market value, potentially resulting in a dramatic tax hike. While Proposition 13 provides stability for long-term homeowners, it creates a minefield for heirs who inherit property, as they often face reassessment unless specific exclusions apply. Learn more about Proposition 13 reassessment ruleshere.

The parent-child exclusion, previously governed by Proposition 58, allowed families to transfer primary residences and up to $1 million in other property without reassessment. However, Proposition 19 significantly narrowed these protections. Now, the exclusion only applies to a family home if it becomes the principal residence of the transferee and its value does not exceed $1 million above the original taxable value. This change has left many families unable to preserve their low property tax base, particularly for rental properties or homes with high market values. For a detailed comparison of the old and new rules, visit the California Board of Equalization’s Proposition 19 pagehere.

The consequences of these laws are stark. For example, a family in Los Angeles inherited a home with a prior tax bill of $5,000 annually, only to see it reassessed at a market value that increased their taxes to over $30,000 per year. This 600% tax hike forced the heirs to sell the property, losing a cherished family asset. Such cases illustrate how the reassessment rules can dismantle generational wealth and exacerbate California’s housing affordability crisis. Read more about the impact of Proposition 19 on inherited homeshere.

This report will delve into the legal nuances of these propositions, highlight strategies to mitigate tax burdens, and provide actionable insights for families navigating California’s complex real estate laws. By understanding these challenges, property owners can better safeguard their inheritance plans and avoid costly pitfalls.

Table of Contents

• Understanding Proposition 13 and Reassessment Triggers
• The Mechanics of Proposition 13: A Taxpayer’s Shield
• Reassessment Traps in Inherited Properties
• Triggering Events That Lead to Reassessment
• Common Pitfalls in Estate Planning
• Limits of the Parent-Child Exclusion
• Changes Under Proposition 19
• Exclusion Denied for Rental and Vacation Homes
• Real-World Examples of Financial Hardship
• Families Forced to Sell Inherited Homes
• Challenges for Multi-Generational Wealth Preservation
• Strategies to Mitigate Reassessment Risks
• Advanced Estate Planning Techniques
• Filing Timely Exclusion Claims
• Exploring the Parent-Child Exclusion and Its Limitations Under Proposition 19
• The Narrowing Scope of Parent-Child Transfers
• The Impact of Market Value Reassessment
• The Loss of Flexibility for Non-Primary Residences
• Inflation Adjustments and the Exclusion Cap
• Legal and Financial Strategies to Navigate the New Rules
• Real-World Impacts on California Families
• The Role of Advocacy and Potential Reforms
• Conclusion Omitted Per Instructions
• Financial Strain from Reassessment on Long-Term Family Properties
• The Burden of Skyrocketing Property Taxes on Heirs
• The Impact on Multi-Generational Wealth Building
• Disproportionate Effects on Middle-Income Families
• The Unequal Burden on Families in High-Value Markets
• The Loss of Affordable Housing for Heirs
• Legal and Financial Challenges in Navigating Reassessment
• The Complexity of Filing Exclusion Claims
• The Role of Legal Entities in Avoiding Reassessment
• Emotional and Cultural Impacts of Losing Family Properties
• The Loss of Legacy and Community Ties
• The Impact on Rural and Agricultural Communities
• Policy Implications and Advocacy for Reform
• The Need for Adjustments to the Parent-Child Exclusion
• The Role of Local Governments in Supporting Families

Understanding Proposition 13 and Reassessment Triggers

The Mechanics of Proposition 13: A Taxpayer’s Shield

Proposition 13, passed in 1978, fundamentally altered California’s property tax system by capping property tax rates at 1% of a property’s assessed value, with annual increases limited to 2% based on the property’s base year value. This framework has provided long-term property owners with significant tax savings compared to new buyers, as the assessed value remains tied to the original purchase price rather than the current market value. However, this tax benefit is not without its complexities, especially when ownership changes occur.

When a property changes ownership, Proposition 13 mandates a reassessment of the property to its current fair market value, which can result in a substantial increase in property taxes. This reassessment trigger is a critical point of concern for families inheriting property, as it can lead to unforeseen financial burdens. For example, a home purchased in 1975 for $50,000 might have an assessed value of $75,000 today due to the 2% annual cap. If the same property is reassessed at its current market value of $1.5 million upon inheritance, the annual property tax could jump from approximately $750 to $15,000. This dramatic increase often catches heirs off guard and can force them to sell the property to cover the tax liability. (LA Firefighter Relief Association).

Reassessment Traps in Inherited Properties

Triggering Events That Lead to Reassessment

Under Proposition 13, certain events automatically trigger a reassessment of the property’s value. These include:

1. Transfer of Ownership: Any transfer of property ownership, including inheritance, generally results in reassessment unless specific exclusions apply.
2. Change in Use: If the property’s use changes (e.g., from residential to commercial), reassessment is triggered.
3. Addition of New Construction: Significant renovations or additions that increase the property’s value can also lead to reassessment.

For example, if a family inherits a home and decides to convert it into a rental property, this change in use could lead to reassessment, negating the tax benefits of Proposition 13. Similarly, adding a second story to an inherited home may result in a reassessment of the new construction’s value, increasing the property tax burden. (Blacksburg Law).

Common Pitfalls in Estate Planning

One of the most significant pitfalls in estate planning is the failure to account for reassessment triggers. Families often assume that inherited properties automatically retain their original tax base under Proposition 13, but this is not always the case. For instance, if multiple heirs inherit a property and one sibling buys out the others, the transaction may be considered a change in ownership, triggering reassessment. Similarly, transferring the property into a trust without proper structuring can inadvertently lead to reassessment. A real-world example involves a family that inherited a home valued at $800,000 but failed to file the necessary exclusion claim within the required timeframe, leading to a reassessment at the current market value of $1.2 million. This oversight resulted in an annual property tax increase of over $4,000. (California Board of Equalization).

Limits of the Parent-Child Exclusion

Changes Under Proposition 19

The parent-child exclusion, originally established under Proposition 58, allowed parents to transfer their primary residence and up to $1 million in assessed value of other real property to their children without triggering reassessment. However, Proposition 19, which took effect on February 16, 2021, significantly narrowed the scope of this exclusion. Under the new rules:

4. The exclusion applies only to the transfer of a primary residence, and the transferee must use the property as their principal residence.
5. The exclusion is capped at the property’s current taxable value plus $1 million. Any value exceeding this limit is reassessed at market value.

For example, if a parent’s home has a factored base year value of $500,000 and a market value of $2 million, the exclusion would apply to the first $1.5 million ($500,000 base value + $1 million exclusion). The remaining $500,000 would be reassessed, resulting in a higher property tax bill. (Proposition 19 FAQ).

Exclusion Denied for Rental and Vacation Homes

Another critical limitation of Proposition 19 is the exclusion’s inapplicability to rental or vacation homes. If a family inherits a rental property or a second home, the property will be reassessed at its current market value, regardless of its prior use or sentimental value. This change has had a profound impact on families who rely on rental income or wish to retain vacation homes for future generations. For instance, a family that inherits a vacation home with a base year value of $300,000 and a market value of $1.5 million would face an annual property tax increase from $3,000 to $15,000, potentially forcing them to sell the property. (Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association).

Real-World Examples of Financial Hardship

Families Forced to Sell Inherited Homes

The financial burden of reassessment has led many families to sell inherited properties, particularly in high-value areas like Los Angeles and San Francisco. One notable case involved a family that inherited a home in Silicon Valley with a base year value of $200,000 and a market value of $3 million. The reassessment increased their annual property tax from $2,000 to $30,000, making it financially unfeasible to keep the home. Despite their emotional attachment to the property, the family was forced to sell it to cover the tax liability. (Financial Alternatives).

Challenges for Multi-Generational Wealth Preservation

Proposition 19 has also disrupted multi-generational wealth preservation strategies. Families that previously relied on the parent-child exclusion to pass down investment properties or farmland without reassessment now face significant tax increases. For example, a family that inherited a farm with a base year value of $500,000 and a market value of $5 million saw their annual property tax increase from $5,000 to $50,000, jeopardizing the farm’s viability. This change has disproportionately affected rural communities and small business owners who rely on inherited properties for income. (Talbot Law Group).

Strategies to Mitigate Reassessment Risks

Advanced Estate Planning Techniques

To avoid reassessment traps, families should consider advanced estate planning techniques, such as:

6. Irrevocable Trusts: Properly structured irrevocable trusts can help shield properties from reassessment by maintaining continuity of ownership.
7. Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship: Adding heirs as joint tenants can delay reassessment until the last surviving owner passes away.
8. Gifting Strategies: Gradually gifting property shares to heirs can minimize tax liabilities and avoid triggering reassessment.

For example, a family used an irrevocable trust to transfer their primary residence to their children while retaining a life estate, ensuring the property remained under Proposition 13 protections. This strategy saved the family over $10,000 annually in property taxes. (Veracruz Law).

Filing Timely Exclusion Claims

Filing timely exclusion claims is essential to preserving Proposition 13 benefits. Families must file for the parent-child exclusion within one year of the transfer or risk losing the exclusion. For example, a family that inherited a home in 2022 failed to file their exclusion claim within the required timeframe, resulting in a reassessment at the property’s market value. This oversight increased their annual property tax by $8,000. (California Board of Equalization).

By understanding the nuances of Proposition 13 and Proposition 19, families can better navigate the complexities of California’s property tax system and avoid costly reassessment traps.

Exploring the Parent-Child Exclusion and Its Limitations Under Proposition 19

The Narrowing Scope of Parent-Child Transfers

Under Proposition 19, the parent-child exclusion has been significantly restricted compared to its predecessor, Proposition 58. Previously, parents could transfer their primary residence and up to $1 million in assessed value of other properties to their children without triggering reassessment. Proposition 19, effective February 16, 2021, introduced critical limitations that have reshaped how families plan property transfers.

While earlier content has discussed the exclusion’s application to primary residences and its $1 million cap (California Board of Equalization), this section delves deeper into how these changes impact families with multiple properties or high-value estates. For instance, families owning both a primary residence and investment properties now face reassessment for the latter, even if they were integral to family income. This shift has forced families to reconsider their estate planning strategies, often requiring the sale of inherited properties to cover increased tax liabilities.

The Impact of Market Value Reassessment

Proposition 19 ties the exclusion to the property’s taxable value plus $1 million, but any excess is reassessed at market value. This reassessment can result in substantial tax increases, particularly in high-value markets like Los Angeles or San Francisco. For example, consider a family inheriting a property with a base year value of $400,000 and a market value of $3 million. While the first $1.4 million ($400,000 taxable value + $1 million exclusion) is protected, the remaining $1.6 million is reassessed, leading to a significant tax hike.

This expands on earlier discussions by highlighting the disproportionate burden on families in urban areas where property values have skyrocketed. In such cases, even properties with modest original values can exceed the exclusion cap, creating untenable tax obligations for heirs. Families in these situations often face difficult choices, such as selling the property or taking on debt to cover the tax bill.

The Loss of Flexibility for Non-Primary Residences

Proposition 19 eliminates the ability to transfer non-primary residences, such as rental properties or vacation homes, without reassessment. This change has been particularly challenging for families who relied on rental income or intended to preserve vacation homes for future generations.

For example, a family inheriting a rental property with a base year value of $250,000 and a market value of $2 million would see their annual property tax increase from approximately $2,500 to $20,000. This section complements earlier content by focusing on the ripple effects of this limitation, such as the loss of rental income streams and the erosion of multi-generational wealth. Families who once viewed real estate as a stable investment now face the reality that these assets may become financial liabilities.

Inflation Adjustments and the Exclusion Cap

One of the few mitigating factors under Proposition 19 is the biennial adjustment of the $1 million exclusion cap for inflation. As of 2025, the cap has risen to $1,044,586 (Lucas Real Estate). While this adjustment offers some relief, it remains insufficient for properties in high-value areas where market appreciation far outpaces inflation.

This section differs from earlier discussions by analyzing the practical implications of the inflation adjustment. For instance, a property with a taxable value of $500,000 and a market value of $2.5 million would still face reassessment on $955,414, even with the adjusted cap. Such scenarios illustrate that the inflation adjustment, while helpful, does little to address the broader challenges posed by Proposition 19.

Legal and Financial Strategies to Navigate the New Rules

Given the complexities introduced by Proposition 19, families must adopt proactive strategies to mitigate its impact. While earlier content has touched on timely filing of exclusion claims, this section explores additional approaches, such as creating irrevocable trusts or restructuring ownership through limited liability companies (LLCs).

For example, an irrevocable trust can help preserve the low taxable value of a property by ensuring that ownership remains within the family. However, these strategies come with their own risks and costs, such as potential challenges under the “step transaction” doctrine, which scrutinizes transactions designed to circumvent reassessment triggers (TinyGrab).

Additionally, families should consider consulting with legal and tax professionals to navigate the nuances of Proposition 19. Proper documentation and timely execution of estate plans are critical to avoiding costly mistakes. This section emphasizes the importance of expert guidance, particularly for families with complex property portfolios or unique circumstances.

Real-World Impacts on California Families

The limitations of the parent-child exclusion have had profound real-world consequences, particularly for families in high-value markets or those relying on inherited properties for income. For instance, a family inheriting a farm with a base year value of $600,000 and a market value of $6 million would see their annual property tax increase from $6,000 to $60,000. Such increases can render the property financially unsustainable, forcing families to sell assets that have been in the family for generations.

This builds on earlier examples by highlighting the emotional and financial toll of these changes. Families often face the dual burden of losing both their property and the legacy it represents. In many cases, the inability to preserve low property taxes has disrupted long-term plans for wealth preservation and community stability.

The Role of Advocacy and Potential Reforms

While Proposition 19 is now law, advocacy groups and policymakers continue to debate its long-term implications. Some have called for reforms to restore certain aspects of Proposition 58, such as the ability to transfer non-primary residences without reassessment. Others argue for increasing the exclusion cap to better reflect market realities in California.

This introduces a forward-looking perspective, emphasizing the need for ongoing dialogue and potential legislative changes. Families affected by Proposition 19 should stay informed about advocacy efforts and consider participating in discussions to shape future policies. By engaging with these efforts, families can help ensure that California’s property tax system evolves to balance fiscal responsibility with the preservation of generational wealth.

Financial Strain from Reassessment on Long-Term Family Properties

The Burden of Skyrocketing Property Taxes on Heirs

Under California’s Proposition 19, the reassessment of inherited properties at current market value has created significant financial strain for families. Unlike the protections offered under Proposition 13, which allowed properties to retain their lower tax base, Proposition 19 mandates reassessment unless strict conditions are met. For example, a family inheriting a home in Los Angeles with a base year value of $150,000 and a market value of $2.5 million would see their annual property tax increase from $1,500 to approximately $25,000. This dramatic tax hike often forces heirs to sell properties they intended to keep, disrupting long-term family plans.

This focuses specifically on the financial strain caused by reassessment, which differs from the previously discussed “Families Forced to Sell Inherited Homes” section that emphasized emotional impacts. Here, the focus is on the tangible economic burden and the systemic challenges families face in retaining inherited properties.

The Impact on Multi-Generational Wealth Building

The reassessment of properties at market value has eroded opportunities for multi-generational wealth building, particularly for families who rely on inherited properties for financial stability. For instance, families who inherit farmland or rental properties often face untenable tax increases. A family inheriting a farm with a base year value of $400,000 and a current market value of $4 million would see their annual property tax jump from $4,000 to $40,000. This increase can render the property financially unsustainable, forcing families to sell their assets.

While the “Challenges for Multi-Generational Wealth Preservation” section previously addressed the broader implications of Proposition 19, this section delves into the specific financial mechanisms that disrupt wealth building, such as the elimination of the exclusion for non-primary residences and the reassessment of high-value properties.

Disproportionate Effects on Middle-Income Families

The Unequal Burden on Families in High-Value Markets

Families in areas with high property values, such as San Francisco and Silicon Valley, are disproportionately affected by the reassessment rules. For example, a family inheriting a home in Palo Alto with a base year value of $200,000 and a market value of $3 million would face a property tax increase from $2,000 to $30,000 annually. This burden is particularly acute for middle-income families who may not have the financial resources to absorb such a significant increase.

This builds on the previously discussed “Real-World Impacts on California Families” by focusing on the geographic disparities in how Proposition 19 affects families. While the earlier section highlighted general financial hardships, this section emphasizes the regional inequities that exacerbate the financial strain on middle-income families.

The Loss of Affordable Housing for Heirs

The reassessment rules under Proposition 19 have also contributed to the loss of affordable housing for heirs. For instance, a family inheriting a modest home in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood may find that the reassessed property taxes far exceed their ability to pay. A home with a base year value of $100,000 and a market value of $1.5 million would see its annual property tax increase from $1,000 to $15,000, effectively pricing the heirs out of their family home.

This differs from the previously discussed “Exclusion Denied for Rental and Vacation Homes” by focusing on primary residences and the loss of affordable housing for heirs, rather than the reassessment of secondary properties.

Legal and Financial Challenges in Navigating Reassessment

The Complexity of Filing Exclusion Claims

Filing for the parent-child exclusion under Proposition 19 has proven to be a complex and time-sensitive process. Families must file claims within strict deadlines, often within one year of the property transfer, to qualify for the exclusion. Failure to meet these deadlines can result in automatic reassessment. For example, a family that inherited a home valued at $900,000 but failed to file the exclusion claim within the required timeframe saw their property reassessed at its market value of $1.8 million, leading to an annual tax increase of over $9,000.

This expands on the previously discussed “Common Pitfalls in Estate Planning” by focusing specifically on the procedural challenges of filing exclusion claims, rather than the broader estate planning mistakes that can trigger reassessment.

The Role of Legal Entities in Avoiding Reassessment

Some families have turned to legal entities, such as LLCs or irrevocable trusts, to avoid reassessment. For instance, transferring property into an irrevocable trust with specific provisions can help maintain the original tax base. However, these strategies require careful planning and legal expertise to avoid triggering reassessment inadvertently. A family that successfully used an irrevocable trust to transfer their $1.2 million home to their children while retaining a life estate saved over $12,000 annually in property taxes.

This complements the previously discussed “Advanced Estate Planning Techniques” by focusing on the use of legal entities as a specific strategy to navigate reassessment challenges.

Emotional and Cultural Impacts of Losing Family Properties

The Loss of Legacy and Community Ties

The financial burden of reassessment often leads to the sale of family properties, resulting in the loss of legacy and community ties. For example, a family that owned a home in a historically significant neighborhood for over 50 years was forced to sell due to a property tax increase from $3,000 to $30,000 annually. This loss not only disrupts family traditions but also contributes to the erosion of community stability.

This builds on the previously discussed “Families Forced to Sell Inherited Homes” by emphasizing the cultural and emotional impacts of losing family properties, rather than the financial aspects.

The Impact on Rural and Agricultural Communities

Rural and agricultural communities have been particularly hard-hit by the reassessment rules. Families who inherit farmland often find that the increased property taxes make it impossible to continue farming. For instance, a family that inherited a farm with a base year value of $500,000 and a market value of $5 million saw their annual property tax increase from $5,000 to $50,000, forcing them to sell the land. This loss not only affects the family but also has broader implications for local food production and rural economies.

This complements the previously discussed “Challenges for Multi-Generational Wealth Preservation” by focusing specifically on the unique challenges faced by rural and agricultural communities, rather than the general impact on multi-generational wealth.

Policy Implications and Advocacy for Reform

The Need for Adjustments to the Parent-Child Exclusion

Advocacy groups have called for adjustments to the parent-child exclusion to address the financial hardships caused by Proposition 19. Proposed reforms include increasing the $1 million cap for primary residences or reinstating the exclusion for non-primary residences. These changes could help alleviate the financial burden on families and preserve multi-generational wealth.

This expands on the previously discussed “The Role of Advocacy and Potential Reforms” by focusing on specific policy proposals to adjust the parent-child exclusion, rather than broader advocacy efforts.

The Role of Local Governments in Supporting Families

Local governments can play a crucial role in supporting families affected by reassessment. For example, some counties have implemented programs to provide financial assistance or tax deferrals for families facing significant tax increases. These programs can help families retain their properties while navigating the complexities of Proposition 19.

This introduces a new perspective by focusing on the role of local governments in mitigating the impacts of reassessment, which has not been covered in previous sections.

By addressing these distinct aspects of property tax reassessment under Proposition 19, this report provides a comprehensive analysis of the real-world impacts on California families, highlighting the financial, emotional, and policy challenges they face.

Conclusion

California’s evolving property tax laws, particularly the interplay between Proposition 13 and Proposition 19, have created significant challenges for families inheriting real estate. While Proposition 13 provides long-term property tax stability by capping annual increases, its reassessment triggers upon ownership changes can lead to dramatic tax hikes for heirs. Proposition 19 has further complicated inheritance planning by narrowing the parent-child exclusion, limiting its application to primary residences used as the transferee’s principal residence and capping the exclusion at $1 million above the taxable value. These changes disproportionately affect families inheriting high-value properties, non-primary residences, or income-generating assets like rental properties or farmland, often forcing them to sell due to unaffordable tax increases. For example, families in high-value markets like Silicon Valley have faced annual property tax jumps from $2,000 to $30,000, making it financially untenable to retain inherited homes (Financial Alternatives).

The implications of these laws extend beyond financial strain, disrupting multi-generational wealth preservation, eroding community ties, and disproportionately impacting middle-income families and rural communities. Advanced estate planning strategies, such as irrevocable trusts or joint tenancy arrangements, can help mitigate reassessment risks, but they require careful legal and financial guidance to execute effectively. Additionally, timely filing of exclusion claims is critical to preserving Proposition 13 protections, as missed deadlines can result in automatic reassessment. Policymakers and advocacy groups are calling for reforms, such as increasing the exclusion cap or reinstating protections for non-primary residences, to address these inequities. Families navigating these complexities should seek professional advice and stay informed about potential legislative changes to safeguard their financial and emotional interests (California Board of Equalization).

Ultimately, the challenges posed by Proposition 19 highlight the need for a balanced approach to property tax policy—one that ensures fiscal responsibility while preserving the ability of families to retain and benefit from inherited properties. Local governments and advocacy organizations can play a pivotal role in supporting affected families through financial assistance programs and policy reforms. By understanding the nuances of these laws and leveraging available resources, families can better navigate California’s complex property tax landscape and advocate for meaningful changes that promote fairness and stability.

References

• https://www.jlegal.org/blog/californias-proposition-13-guide-to-property-taxes-props-13/
• https://www.jacquelineyulaw.com/property-tax-reassessment-strategy-transfer-real-properties-in-ca-proposition-19
• https://hermancelaw.com/blog/avoid-property-tax-reassessment/
• https://www.deedclaim.com/california/property-tax-reassessment-transfers/
• https://www.aldavlaw.com/blog/can-you-inherit-favorable-tax-treatment-how-to-inherit-your-parents-house-and-their-low-tax-bill-too/
• https://www.jamesburnslaw.com/california-prop-19-how-it-impacts-inheriting-a-home-and-workarounds-to-avoid-reassessment
• https://blacksburg-law.com/insights/how-does-prop-19-affect-inherited-property-in-trust/
• https://www.geigerlawoffice.com/blog/prop-19-parent-child-property-tax-reassessment-exclusion.cfm
• https://www.hollisterlawoffice.com/the-llc-loophole-in-the-aftermath-of-proposition-19/
• https://erikegelko.com/proposition-19-inherited-california/
• https://proposition19.org/proposition-19-faq/
• https://calawyers.org/real-property-law/prop-19-beware-of-property-tax-reassessments/
• https://www.cunninghamlegal.com/california-legal-services/california-prop-13-protection-prop-19-strategy/
• https://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta21008.pdf
• https://lucas-real-estate.com/proposition19/
• https://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub801.pdf
• https://tinygrab.com/how-to-avoid-property-tax-reassessment-california-prop-13/
• https://talbotlawpc.com/blog/2020/12/13/how-ca-prop-19-radically-alters-property-taxes-for-inherited-homes
• https://www.boe.ca.gov/prop19/
• https://www.financialalternatives.com/financial-alternatives-inc/2021/1/25/prop-19-and-how-it-impacts-inherited-property-for-california-residents