1896 replies to this topic

[Barrrister]

The renter is not liable for the property taxes, only the owner of the building. But it might be a good idea that renters are actually responsible for their share of the property taxes directly,  So if the city boasts property taxes four or six percent the renter would be paying the increase. 

 

One needs to really start to reconsider whether owning a rental building or having tenants in a secondary suite is such a good idea in BC.

[Victoria Watcher]

The landlord can not increase rents fast enough to keep up with property tax increases. She is forbidden by law.

[Tom Braybrook]

triple net lease could be applied to residential units - that way renter would be paying for all costs associated with their shelter

[Mike K.]

Yes, that’s something to consider. At least allow it to be an option.

[sdwright.vic]

You guys can't have it both ways.

You can't say that my income is still tax dollars... and not something I earned and therefor cleansed of that distinction and claim that a portion of rent is not made up of a portion of the property taxes on a rental property.

Edited by sdwright.vic, 04 February 2022 - 05:11 PM.

[Victoria Watcher]

What?

[sdwright.vic]

What?

You weren't around yet for those conversations I believe

[Barrrister]

sdwright: It is not a matter of having it both ways. If this year property taxes go up ten per cent you are not on the hook to pay the increase. You position is like saying that if you buy something on Amazon you are also paying the corporate tax for Amazon since a portion of the items cost reflects tax. 

 

What it comes down to is that you as a renter have no legal liability for the property tax. If the landlord fails to pay the tax the city has no legal grounds to come after you, But perhaps you are right and we should change the law so the renter is responsible for the property taxes directly and not the landlord. Then you would clearly be paying the property tax. 

Edited by Barrrister, 04 February 2022 - 05:31 PM.

[Mike K.]

You guys can't have it both ways.

You can't say that my income is still tax dollars... and not something I earned and therefor cleansed of that distinction and claim that a portion of rent is not made up of a portion of the property taxes on a rental property.

I think you’re saying we should provide tax write offs if you split rents out?

[sdwright.vic]

No I am not. I am saying that a portion of a tenants rent goes toward paying a portion of the property taxes on said property. Thus the pay property taxes indirectly.

Plan and simple, straight forward, and no need to look for subtext in between the lines.

Edited by sdwright.vic, 04 February 2022 - 06:10 PM.

[Mike K.]

Right, that’s what rent covers.

Would you like to see rents split into a rent portion, and a tax portion, and a maintenance portion like NNN leases?

[sdwright.vic]

I think there may be a cost savings to some degree. I definitely believe renters would have a better understanding of what their rent covers if it did. To many don't think they pay property tax, which makes them think they are unaffected by increases. They are affected, and need to learn to take more of an interest in the process.

[On the Level]

sdwright: It is not a matter of having it both ways. If this year property taxes go up ten per cent you are not on the hook to pay the increase. You position is like saying that if you buy something on Amazon you are also paying the corporate tax for Amazon since a portion of the items cost reflects tax. 

 

What it comes down to is that you as a renter have no legal liability for the property tax. If the landlord fails to pay the tax the city has no legal grounds to come after you, But perhaps you are right and we should change the law so the renter is responsible for the property taxes directly and not the landlord. Then you would clearly be paying the property tax. 

 

I think we are talking semantics. Renters will be paying the property tax although indirectly.  

 

Renters commonly do not understand what is making their rent so high whereas landlords have to calculate that income as part of their income during tax time.  Mortgage, taxes, utilities, etc all must come from rent.  Perhaps exposing some of this will help drive down rent costs.

 

What was the program we had back in the 60s and 70s which created a huge surplus of rental apartments?  Perhaps we could bring that program back.

[Nparker]

...Renters commonly do not understand what is making their rent so high...

I think this is true for a lot of renters - certainly not all - who believe high rents are simply a product of greedy landlords.

[James Bay walker]

The landlord can not increase rents fast enough to keep up with property tax increases. She is forbidden by law.

Not even by doubling the rents in between tenants?

 

jbw

[sdwright.vic]

sdwright: It is not a matter of having it both ways. If this year property taxes go up ten per cent you are not on the hook to pay the increase. You position is like saying that if you buy something on Amazon you are also paying the corporate tax for Amazon since a portion of the items cost reflects tax.

What it comes down to is that you as a renter have no legal liability for the property tax. If the landlord fails to pay the tax the city has no legal grounds to come after you, But perhaps you are right and we should change the law so the renter is responsible for the property taxes directly and not the landlord. Then you would clearly be paying the property tax.

I am somehow supposed to feel sorry for your blight when you get of to jet off to the Mayo Clinic?

Yes the customer does pay the corporate tax for Amazon. Without the customers there would be no Amazon and no Billionaire named Jeff Bezos. The customers make the company (or the stock holders dependent on the type of business) and ultimately pay the bills

Edited by sdwright.vic, 06 February 2022 - 06:26 PM.

[lanforod]

The biggest benefit of showing renters what they are paying in property tax (either by having them do it directly, or by showing how much of their rent is property tax paid by their landlord) would be that those people would be more likely to engage with their municipality on the issue of spending.

 

Why not just peg property taxes for rental properties to the rent, must be shown to renters but still ultimately paid for by landlords, and allow that portion of the rent to always reflect the actual property tax cost to the unit. This way we don't have an issue with making tenants pay property tax going forward and total rents not dropping to cover the immediate gap.

Edited by lanforod, 06 February 2022 - 08:35 PM.

[Barrrister]

Sidewright: When did I ever suggest that you should feel sorry for my blight? Naturally, when your argument is failing making a personal attack is the last resort of the uninformed.

 

By the way, just to be clear I do not own any rental units or have any interest in the rental industry. My point is that unbalanced rental policies are actually to the detriment of the rental market and ultimately to renters themselves as well as to landlords. The problem with your position is that it masks the economic reality and that never makes for good decisions.

 

Have a cheery day. 

[sdwright.vic]

^ actually no, it doesn't mask the economic realities. If anything, if more tenant where aware of what makes up their rents, they may be a little more concerned with property tax increases.

Exactly where did I support "unbalanced rental policies".

The innuendo of casting shade onto another is also one of the last resorts of the uninformed.

Have a sunny day!

[Mike K.]

I agree. There’s no reason why a break-down cannot be provided.

We have the same thing with gasoline prices. Consumers have no idea how much taxation each litre of gas generates for governments.