We’ve all heard the maxim that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

State Sen. Dawn Keefer’s plan to wipe out school property taxes statewide fits squarely in that space, somewhere between promise and peril.

Senate Bill 962 calls for school property taxes to be eliminated to the tune of somewhere between $16 billion and $17 billion.

The hole that would leave in the state budget would be filled by proceeds from a hike in the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.95% and an increase in sales tax from 6% to 8%, plus a new, 2% tax on currently exempt items like clothing, candy and gum.

It’s a massive swap, with local property taxes out and statewide income and sales taxes in.

In our area, it seems like a pretty good deal for schools, and a modest win for most homeowners.

For renters, it’s a definite maybe.

For retirees, it depends.

And there’s probably no better place to explain those outcomes than in the Panther Valley School District.

The median household income locally is about $42,400 — about 59 cents on the dollar compared to the statewide average of $72,000.

Simply put, the local tax base generates less — not because the school tax rate is low, but because property values are low.

Because current funding depends on what the local tax base can generate, PV raises around $4,700 per student per year from property taxes. The statewide average is about $9,500, according to a state Department of Education estimate.

The shift in school funding sources could flip the per student rate if it were to be distributed evenly. In PV, that would mean it would total nearly $20 million, almost double the $9.8 million the district collects today.

If a weighted formula that accounts for income levels were used, the numbers could get better. The bill doesn’t yet spell out how funds would be disbursed.

That single detail will be the next hurdle in the funding battle as the state’s 500 districts jockey for cash. But under any formula, PV would probably come out ahead.

For certain, property owners get to stop writing the annual school tax check, and depending upon the math, they’d be ahead somewhere between $250 and $900 annually.

Renters might not be so lucky.

The new law requires landlords to pass along their property tax savings to tenants, but only for a year.

After that, all bets are off and rents could go back to current levels or even higher, while the income and sales taxes remain at the new levels. Renters, some estimate, could pay as much as $800 a year more by then.

Finally, we get to the retirees.

The folks living on Social Security and a pension — the ones who’ve paid off their homes and don’t have a paycheck — may be hit with higher income taxes.

Pennsylvania currently doesn’t tax retirement income at all. No tax on Social Security, pensions from the PSERS or SERS, 401(k) and IRA withdrawals, period.

Language in Keefer’s bill changes things, saying it’ll allow “taxation of certain retirement income (while protecting Social Security, military pensions, and previously taxed retirement income.”

What’s troubling is that “previously taxed retirement income” isn’t clear.

Does that mean retirees will be paying tax — in the case of a IRAs — on money that’s already been taxed?

Does it mean income taxes for a retiree who withdraws from one of those accounts.

If so, it looks like their taxes would rise by an estimated $495 a year for every $10,000 taken and work out to a wash — taxwise — for many seniors.

The employee contributions inside many retirement accounts may have already been taxed by the state, but the investment growth generally has not.

There’s been no plain language explanation about the issue.

Pennsylvania has been chasing property tax elimination for 20 years.

Every few years, lawmakers put forth a new plan, voters get excited and then — like Lucy yanking the football away from Charlie Brown — it collapses because of its own details.

This latest revival is still just in committee status. It has a long way to go before a vote, if it gets that far. A bucketful of details still need to be worked out.

The promise of eliminating school property tax is certainly powerful and we’ll all still be dealing with taxes at the county and municipal levels.

But until lawmakers answer the hard questions with clarity, honesty and in public, taxpayers should keep a tight grip on their wallets.

Sometimes, things really do sound too good to be true.

ED SOCHA | tneditor@tnonline.com

Ed Socha is a retired newspaper editor with more than 45 years’ experience in community journalism.

The foregoing opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or Times News LLC.