Jump to content

      



























Photo

Victoria's residential rental market


  • Please log in to reply
1445 replies to this topic

#401 Casual Kev

Casual Kev
  • Member
  • 794 posts

Posted 24 September 2018 - 05:34 PM

Imagine property taxes limited to inflation?

California actually has something even more demented in practice through Proposition 13 (1978), which rolled back properties to their 1976 assessed value, capped property taxes at 1% of their assessed value and the assessed value growth at 2%. On top of that, it requires any municipal or state tax increases to be voted by a 2/3 majority. End result is that a. huge housing crisis in their major cities as everyone knows while incumbent homeowners pay close to nothing in property tax b. Municipalities literally can't keep up with service provision, so HOA growth has exploded since and voters often look to the state to provide services (basically the opposite of what Mike Harris did in Ontario) and c. Because it's hard to raise revenue at the state level despite the population being politically favorable towards government services, California is always broke. 

 

And yet no one has seriously taken on repealing Prop 13 because the benefits are so concentrated for a powerful class of citizens, but the drawbacks are diffused throughout the population and not easily traced back to the legislation. 

 

Be on guard in case someone suggests something similarly idiotic up here.


Edited by Casual Kev, 24 September 2018 - 05:35 PM.

  • rjag and lanforod like this

#402 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 24 September 2018 - 06:40 PM

Imagine property taxes limited to inflation?

What annoys me about property taxes is you can have two identical houses, one well maintained and one let go and the one that is not maintained pays less in property tax

 

Frankly I don't think property taxes should be based on the value of the house as the house resident uses the same amount of services.  Why should one resident pay say $2000 a year while another house pays $10,000?  Is the more expensive house using city services 5x as much?  Nope



#403 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 12,702 posts

Posted 24 September 2018 - 07:16 PM

If the government "allows landlords to increase the rent to cover the costs of any increases they have" you could well wind up with a much bigger than 2% increase. I would be putting a new roof on, getting a new boiler, replace all the carpets, etc. then raise the rent 20% to cover my costs. As the lady they interviewed on TV said "it's a no brainer" cutting the 2%. 

Unfortunately it will be more like the guy they interviewed said " they have to have more below market rentals from the government" IOW he wants me to pay part of his rent.


Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#404 29er Radio

29er Radio
  • Member
  • 671 posts

Posted 25 September 2018 - 09:37 AM

Government subsidizes so many aspects of our lives in both the public and private sectors. The swamp has many residents and some do well and others don't. Almost all of us are in it and most enjoy the odd side of subsidy with their medium rare tax bill. If I live in sidney and only ever travel up island via the brentwood ferry, should I have to contribute to the cost of the admirals and helmcken interchanges? I have never been to jail, nor needed to have someone go there because of their interactions with me, so should I pay for jails?  


Eric Bramble - http://www.29erradio.com
The Growler Hour
Lisa, Gene & Eric Show

#405 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 25 September 2018 - 01:21 PM

The jail keeps you sleeping soundly at night and the interchange keeps people from causing five hour line ups at your ferry terminal.
  • tjv likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#406 grantpalin

grantpalin
  • Member
  • 804 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 01:24 PM

That was fast: the province has announced that it is dropping the rent increase formula, and the increase will be indexed to inflation, 2.5%.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/n...inson-1.4839156

 

Existing regulations allow landlords to raise rents by the cost of inflation plus two per cent, but earlier this week a task force recommended eliminating the two per cent add-on.

 

That recommendation, plus a second recommendation tabled by the task force allowing landlords to apply for additional rent increases to cover maintenance and repair costs was also accepted by cabinet today.

 

"We want to make sure that we're taking every step we can to reduce costs for people," said Premier John Horgan.

 



#407 Mattjvd

Mattjvd
  • Member
  • 1,046 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 01:56 PM

Deleated

Edited by Mattjvd, 26 September 2018 - 01:56 PM.


#408 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,241 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 26 September 2018 - 02:11 PM

FFS. I'm gonna re-consider selling my condo.



#409 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,410 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 02:20 PM

 

"We want to make sure that we're taking every step we can to reduce costs for people," said Premier John Horgan.

Of course this just means that when tenants vacate a rental unit the new residents will be making up the difference that landlords can't get through annual increases. Costs may be delayed, but they won't be reduced.



#410 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 02:28 PM

Expect new rental construction to die off quickly.  This just killed my plans to build a 4 storey rental building.



#411 shoeflack

shoeflack
  • Member
  • 2,861 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 02:44 PM

Good economy = higher interest rates = higher mortgage costs = higher CPI increase = lower rental increase allowed...Wait a second, one of these things is not like the other...

 

When Horgan said his mandate was to make life more affordable for British Columbians, I didn't see the fine print that said *only those that rent.


  • Nparker likes this

#412 Bob Fugger

Bob Fugger

    Chief Factor

  • Member
  • 3,190 posts
  • LocationSouth Central CSV

Posted 26 September 2018 - 03:21 PM

Of course this just means that when tenants vacate a rental unit the new residents will be making up the difference that landlords can't get through annual increases. Costs may be delayed, but they won't be reduced.

 

I have a recently renovated, one bedroom apartment coming up in a purpose-build multi-family building.  Mark my words, I will be shooting the moon on the rent.  And if I don't get it, I'm going to furnish it and rent it out for more as a furnished short term rental.  **** you, socialists.



#413 Casual Kev

Casual Kev
  • Member
  • 794 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 03:29 PM

"but it's not supply, it's just greedy developers", the usual crowd will say when old rentals start getting demolished en masse for upscale condos.

#414 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 5,444 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 03:34 PM

"but it's not supply, it's just greedy developers", the usual crowd will say when old rentals start getting demolished en masse for upscale condos.

Issit has plans to make that against bylaws



#415 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 26 September 2018 - 03:36 PM

Isn't there a plan to keep landlords from increasing rents between tenants above some sort of government-stipulated maximum?


  • Mystic-Pizza likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#416 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 27 September 2018 - 07:23 AM

Issit has plans to make that against bylaws

 

Well the NDP gave us rental-only zoning so this goes far beyond Issit. Basically everyone will be requiring a minimum 1:1 replacement ratio if there's rezoning involved.



#417 Mystic-Pizza

Mystic-Pizza
  • Member
  • 623 posts

Posted 27 September 2018 - 03:38 PM

I am all for dropping the 2% bonus for landlords. Rental rates are unreal and out of control in Victoria.

 

Luckily I have been in my place for several years before the rental rates skyrocketed, but it's bothers to think that the person in the exact same identical apartment above me is paying $250 dollars more per month then I am, and my rent is already too high as is. A person's monthly rent  should never exceed 1/4 of their total monthly income. Yet that's almost impossible in Victoria because hardly anyone makes enough money to support the rental rates, unless they get 4 or 5 roomates.



#418 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 27 September 2018 - 05:22 PM

I am all for dropping the 2% bonus for landlords. Rental rates are unreal and out of control in Victoria.

 

Luckily I have been in my place for several years before the rental rates skyrocketed, but it's bothers to think that the person in the exact same identical apartment above me is paying $250 dollars more per month then I am, and my rent is already too high as is. A person's monthly rent  should never exceed 1/4 of their total monthly income. Yet that's almost impossible in Victoria because hardly anyone makes enough money to support the rental rates, unless they get 4 or 5 roomates.

Flip it around from the landlords perspective

 

Is there a law that says he has to build apartment buildings with his 100% own money?  No, he can put the money into private investment.

 

The price of his rental apartment building has increased substantially in value, lets say 35-40%.  Now if he was investing in stocks for example, he would get a ROI of 10% on the lower value before the stock went up, he would demand 10% on the higher value as well.  ROI's for apartment buildings are running around 3% right now

 

By the same reasoning there should be a law introduced that any mortgage payment will not increase any more than 2.5% per year!  In the 15 or so months since I sign my last mortgage and if I was to renew today my payments would increase 13.8% and by the end of next year it will be another 13.8% based on forecasts.  Consider yourself lucky rates were lowered from 4.5% to 2.5%



#419 Mystic-Pizza

Mystic-Pizza
  • Member
  • 623 posts

Posted 27 September 2018 - 06:00 PM

Flip it around from the landlords perspective

 

Is there a law that says he has to build apartment buildings with his 100% own money?  No, he can put the money into private investment.

 

The price of his rental apartment building has increased substantially in value, lets say 35-40%.  Now if he was investing in stocks for example, he would get a ROI of 10% on the lower value before the stock went up, he would demand 10% on the higher value as well.  ROI's for apartment buildings are running around 3% right now

 

By the same reasoning there should be a law introduced that any mortgage payment will not increase any more than 2.5% per year!  In the 15 or so months since I sign my last mortgage and if I was to renew today my payments would increase 13.8% and by the end of next year it will be another 13.8% based on forecasts.  Consider yourself lucky rates were lowered from 4.5% to 2.5%

 

The way I look at it, as well as pretty much everyone I know that rents is that the higher the value of the property increases, the less need the landlord has to increase your rent  The lower the value of the property drops, the more justification the landlord has to increase the rent.  Rent increases are only one part of the problematic rental market we have in Victoria, the other of course is over-inflated rental rates property owners are charging to people to live on their property. 

 

I get it that those who own rental properties want to be rich and make as much MONEY off their property as they can, but when a landlord is legally permitted to  charge a person 3/4 of their entire monthly income (if not more) just to have a roof over their head, then that creates a HUGE social  problem and contributes to homelessness, poverty, and eventually leads people to crime.  I hope that the NDP will legislate maximum amounts a person can rent their property for, and that we do get the 2% dropped off the annual rent increase.



#420 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,241 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 27 September 2018 - 06:57 PM

Maximum rent cap at 1/4 of monthly income? Assuming you mean gross and not net, if gross average monthly income is 4k, that's a rent cap of 1k. I presume you mean for a 1 bedroom.

Pretty much every single rental would go for sale if that happened. 

 

If you mean net take home, it'd be even worse.

 

The only way it would be fair to do this is if they also legislated equivalent capped real estate prices, and compensated everyone who owns at current real estate prices. It just doesn't work in a capitalist society. Seems to me you need to move to a communist country.



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1)