6 ms·

I believe this should be an "unoccupancy" tax instead, where owners are taxed if the home is unoccupied: * increases the supply of available housing * include

by oroup 10y ago

I believe this should be an "unoccupancy" tax instead, where owners are taxed if the home is unoccupied: * increases the supply of available housing * includes all the properties that have already been purchased for speculation and hits every year * substitutes an occupancy check (using data like utility utilization or direct observation) rather than a test of foreignness which is too easy to game. * doesn't dissuade foreign investors but facilitates the creation of safe rental infrastructure serving them.

mahyarm 10y ago
They are also adding that, but the city has to legislate it: "The B.C. Liberal government will also introduce legislation this week that will allow the City of Vancouver to impose a tax on vacant homes; and follow through on an earlier promise to end self-regulation of the real estate industry."
cperciva 10y ago
unoccupancy How do you propose to measure that? If someone commutes to a work camp outside Fort Mac and is only physically present in Vancouver for two weeks each month, do they pay the tax? What if someone spends 4 months every winter in Florida? How about someone who gets hit by a truck and spends six months in a hospital? Or an elderly couple who move into a care home because the husband has dementia, but want to keep the house they lived in for 50 years because the wife (who is still in good health) might move back there after the husband dies?
- mahyarm 10y ago
  I think it's to prevent the unoccupied house bank account. You could make an exemption for your official registered home address. That way if you own more than one house, the unoccupancy tax creates an incentive to put the locked up supply on the rental market, but would sidestep the complexity you just stated.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    You could make an exemption for your official registered home address. How does that work against foreign investors? How can you prevent them from having an official registered home address in both countries?
    - mahyarm 10y ago
      That is a residency problem that immigration and canadian income tax has systems to deal with that. And if they somehow get around all of those controls, it would only apply to one house, so it would limit the financial scope of it.
- rdmcfee 10y ago
  There is already some process available to measure this as Canada has tax deductions available specific to your "primary residence". CRA definitely has a way of auditing this. Sharing that information with a provincial level organization may not be possible, though.
- delazeur 10y ago
  I think "occupancy" is pretty much a solved problem for purposes of taxation. In the U.S., for example, there are settled rules about which state gets your income taxes if you live or work in multiple states. A simple solution to the problem at hand would be to let everyone designate any one residence as their primary residence taxed at a lower rate, with any additional property they own being taxed at a higher "secondary/unoccupied residence" rate unless they can prove it is being rented out.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    Residency is a solved problem for income taxes. But that's a completely different issue from occupying a particular residence; for example, an international student may for tax purposes be a resident of his country of nationality despite not setting foot in it all year.
- kazinator 10y ago
  Vancouver measures it somehow. There is the Home Owner Grant and the criteria are are laid out here: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/are-you-eligible.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/are-you-eligib...
bradleyjg 10y ago
What's wrong with just having a relatively high property tax and using the resulting revenue to provide city services? That should disincentivize warehousing empty residential units. There are some disadvantages versus an income tax -- the proverbial pensioners with a house whose value exploded under them but can't reasonably tap that value because of not much income to secure a mortgage against is one. But judiciously targeted tax rebates can help there.
- nixos 10y ago
  Because I can't pay taxes with my home "value". Income tax makes sense, when you've got fungible goods coming in, spend some as taxes. No income this year, fine, you're off the hook. Property, not being fungible and being mostly atomic, is a horrible thing to tax.
  - emptybits 10y ago
    > No income this year, fine, you're off the hook. Some locals are concerned that a disproportionate amount of the very highest value properties now being purchased are owned by those with no income. Poverty level. Asset rich, and rich in foreign cash. No income. When such owners (OR, often, their elderly and school-aged family) take up residence in Vancouver then the result is 1) a net loss in income tax to support social services (such as education and health care), plus 2) a net increase in the cost to deliver those services because of our new and impoverished residents. I'm not arguing for more property tax, but it's complex and very different than in the "good 'ole days". Not long ago, an asset-rich person could be assumed to have paid significant income tax into the public coffers during their life before they and their offspring drew down on public resources. Now, many do not. Food for thought?
    - nixos 10y ago
      So when they sell, they'll have to pay taxes. Sooner or later they'll have to sell (the point of investment properties is the ultimate profit), and that profit is taxable. And really, how much money does an empty house need from the city? Street cleaning? Street maintenance? Some paperwork overhead? Except for the last one, they benefit all who use the street (the public), not just the property owner. I think raising income tax is fairer than raising property taxes. Incidentally, I think income tax bracket should be calculated on a rolling average income, not a monthly income (to prevent unduly punishing people who make large sporadic income)
kazinator 10y ago
We have that in Vancouver, in a way. If you reside in a property, you get a discount from your property tax: the so-called "Home Owner Grant". Seniors get an additional discount. http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/home-owner-grant.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/home-owner-gra... For properties with an assessed value beyond a certain amount, it is not available.

by oroup 10y ago

mahyarm 10y ago

They are also adding that, but the city has to legislate it: "The B.C. Liberal government will also introduce legislation this week that will allow the City of Vancouver to impose a tax on vacant homes; and follow through on an earlier promise to end self-regulation of the real estate industry."

cperciva 10y ago

unoccupancy How do you propose to measure that? If someone commutes to a work camp outside Fort Mac and is only physically present in Vancouver for two weeks each month, do they pay the tax? What if someone spends 4 months every winter in Florida? How about someone who gets hit by a truck and spends six months in a hospital? Or an elderly couple who move into a care home because the husband has dementia, but want to keep the house they lived in for 50 years because the wife (who is still in good health) might move back there after the husband dies?

mahyarm 10y ago
I think it's to prevent the unoccupied house bank account. You could make an exemption for your official registered home address. That way if you own more than one house, the unoccupancy tax creates an incentive to put the locked up supply on the rental market, but would sidestep the complexity you just stated.
- icebraining 10y ago
  You could make an exemption for your official registered home address. How does that work against foreign investors? How can you prevent them from having an official registered home address in both countries?
  - mahyarm 10y ago
    That is a residency problem that immigration and canadian income tax has systems to deal with that. And if they somehow get around all of those controls, it would only apply to one house, so it would limit the financial scope of it.
rdmcfee 10y ago
There is already some process available to measure this as Canada has tax deductions available specific to your "primary residence". CRA definitely has a way of auditing this. Sharing that information with a provincial level organization may not be possible, though.
delazeur 10y ago
I think "occupancy" is pretty much a solved problem for purposes of taxation. In the U.S., for example, there are settled rules about which state gets your income taxes if you live or work in multiple states. A simple solution to the problem at hand would be to let everyone designate any one residence as their primary residence taxed at a lower rate, with any additional property they own being taxed at a higher "secondary/unoccupied residence" rate unless they can prove it is being rented out.
- cperciva 10y ago
  Residency is a solved problem for income taxes. But that's a completely different issue from occupying a particular residence; for example, an international student may for tax purposes be a resident of his country of nationality despite not setting foot in it all year.
kazinator 10y ago
Vancouver measures it somehow. There is the Home Owner Grant and the criteria are are laid out here: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/are-you-eligible.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/are-you-eligib...

bradleyjg 10y ago

What's wrong with just having a relatively high property tax and using the resulting revenue to provide city services? That should disincentivize warehousing empty residential units. There are some disadvantages versus an income tax -- the proverbial pensioners with a house whose value exploded under them but can't reasonably tap that value because of not much income to secure a mortgage against is one. But judiciously targeted tax rebates can help there.

nixos 10y ago
Because I can't pay taxes with my home "value". Income tax makes sense, when you've got fungible goods coming in, spend some as taxes. No income this year, fine, you're off the hook. Property, not being fungible and being mostly atomic, is a horrible thing to tax.
- emptybits 10y ago
  > No income this year, fine, you're off the hook. Some locals are concerned that a disproportionate amount of the very highest value properties now being purchased are owned by those with no income. Poverty level. Asset rich, and rich in foreign cash. No income. When such owners (OR, often, their elderly and school-aged family) take up residence in Vancouver then the result is 1) a net loss in income tax to support social services (such as education and health care), plus 2) a net increase in the cost to deliver those services because of our new and impoverished residents. I'm not arguing for more property tax, but it's complex and very different than in the "good 'ole days". Not long ago, an asset-rich person could be assumed to have paid significant income tax into the public coffers during their life before they and their offspring drew down on public resources. Now, many do not. Food for thought?
  - nixos 10y ago
    So when they sell, they'll have to pay taxes. Sooner or later they'll have to sell (the point of investment properties is the ultimate profit), and that profit is taxable. And really, how much money does an empty house need from the city? Street cleaning? Street maintenance? Some paperwork overhead? Except for the last one, they benefit all who use the street (the public), not just the property owner. I think raising income tax is fairer than raising property taxes. Incidentally, I think income tax bracket should be calculated on a rolling average income, not a monthly income (to prevent unduly punishing people who make large sporadic income)

kazinator 10y ago

We have that in Vancouver, in a way. If you reside in a property, you get a discount from your property tax: the so-called "Home Owner Grant". Seniors get an additional discount. http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/home-owner-grant.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/home-owner-gra... For properties with an assessed value beyond a certain amount, it is not available.