Jump to content

      













Photo

Victoria (Capital Region) Property Tax Assessments


  • Please log in to reply
118 replies to this topic

#101 JohnN

JohnN
  • Member
  • 1,959 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 01:31 PM

Link to just-released 57-page presentation-report from City of Victoria, "Distribution of Property Taxes Among Property Tax Classes":
http://www.victoria.ca/assets/Departments/Finance/Documents/Distribution%20of%20Property%20Taxes%20-%20%20March%2027.pdf
:)

#102 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 30 March 2012 - 01:45 PM

Link to just-released 57-page presentation-report from City of Victoria, "Distribution of Property Taxes Among Property Tax Classes":
http://www.victoria.ca/assets/Departments/Finance/Documents/Distribution%20of%20Property%20Taxes%20-%20%20March%2027.pdf


Very interesting reading.....

#103 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,372 posts

Posted 02 January 2013 - 02:05 PM

Here are the assessment changes throughout the CRD for 2013:

Central Saanich - RES: -2.04% BUSINESS/OTHER: 2.91%

Colwood - RES: -2.31% BUSINSESS/OTHER: -8.22%

Esquimalt - RES: 2.60% BUSINESS/OTHER: 0.38%

Highlands (SD61) - RES: -3.62% BUSINESS/OTHER: -4.60%

Highlands (SD62) - RES: -3.03% BUSINESS/OTHER: -9.60%

Highlands (SD63) - RES: -3.36% BUSINESS/OTHER: 0.00%

Langford - RES: 0.47% BUSINESS/OTHER: 4.19%

Metchosin - RES: -1.70% BUSINESS/OTHER: 6.25%

North Saanich - RES: -3.65% BUSINESS/OTHER: 10.85%

Oak Bay - RES: 0.78% BUSINESS/OTHER: 10.31%

Saanich (SD61) - RES: -2.63% BUSINESS/OTHER: 5.37%

Saanich (SD62) - RES: 0.00% BUSINESS/OTHER: 0.00%

Saanich (SD63) - RES: -2.15% BUSINESS/OTHER: 3.87%

Sidney - RES: -5.64% BUSINESS/OTHER: 2.35%

Sooke - RES: -1.94% BUSINESS/OTHER: 0.51%

Victoria - RES: -2.05% BUSINESS/OTHER: 2.62%

View Royal (SD61) - RES: -0.75% BUSINESS/OTHER: 4.35%

View Royal (SD62) - RES: -1.03% BUSINESS/OTHER: 0.00%

Look at the growth in value for commercial properties relative to residential properties. It looks like Sidney residential properties lost the most value while Oak Bay (gaining the most) and Langford were the only two municipalities to show positive residential property value growth.

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


#104 inhalien

inhalien
  • Member
  • 11 posts

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:32 PM

That would be a relief as I live in SD 61. I bought my house in 1999 and each and every year my property tax has risen. I appealed last year as at one point my house was assessed that second highest tax on my street for what I believe to be the smallest yard. As Bernard has kindly pointed out, many factors do go in to the assessment and the one item they concentrated on for my assessment was the finished basement. I have a fully finished basement with a legal 1-bedroom suite so that is one of the factors of course - any upgrades to your house/condo via permits.

#105 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:16 AM

So the next HUGE story, I presume, is going to be when the tax bills come out and everyone can't understand why their property tax would not be LOWER to match their lower assessment. Just watch. It's going to show how ignorant even homeowners (who you think would have some financial knowledge) are.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#106 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,909 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 03 January 2013 - 08:51 AM

^ Not being a homeowner and never having had to pay property tax directly I'd be curious why the property tax would not come down. Does it not go up when the assessments go up?

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#107 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,486 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:29 AM

^ Not being a homeowner and never having had to pay property tax directly I'd be curious why the property tax would not come down. Does it not go up when the assessments go up?


The municipality as a whole prepares a budget. The BC Assessment Authority establishes the value of each property so that collectively the budget will get paid by all of the property owners.

Here is where it gets tricky. Your assessed value is really for the purpose of comparing your value with the rest of the properties so it can be calculated as to what your share of the tax bill is.

Property values can increase, but your tax bill can decrease if the budget is lower than last year. (this rarely happens)

Property values can decrease and your tax bill can still increase if the budget is higher than last year.

Hence the assessed value really has no bearing on your tax bill. It's just a tool to calculate what your portion or share of the total tax bill will be.

#108 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 18,277 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:37 AM

Sparky's back!

And good explanation of the property taxes.

Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#109 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:52 AM

What matters is how your value did compared to the average - if it is below average your tax increase will be smaller or even go down. In our case or change in value was below the average - we lost even more value than most. Me estimate is that we will actually see a small net drop in property tax this year.

Complications that come into this are that the total assessed value of the properties changes as you add more units. 2% more housing units means that without any changes to past rates the municipality will collect more in property taxes.

The way a municipality decides the property tax rate is by setting a budget then figuring out what non property tax revenues it has. The remainder is then raised through property taxes. The municipality will have the total value of all the properties in all the classes. With a bit of math the staff then figure out how much property tax they need to charge per $1000 value of a property to achieve their fiscal needs.

#110 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 11,482 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:20 PM

I think the real issue here is that again we are seeing more of a shift of the tax liability to businesses (since commercial values are up in general relative to residential values). With the economic picture as bleak as it is for many local retailers this certainly won't help and may force more out of business.

#111 Danma

Danma
  • Member
  • 449 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 02:07 PM

Ugh. My property value dropped hugely - my Langford townhouse is down by about 8%.

Although it's good I wasn't planning on selling this place any time soon, since my drop is a bigger drop than the average, that may suggest that my tax burden in 2013 may be less relative to some of my neighbours. Yay...?

#112 phx

phx
  • Member
  • 1,427 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:13 PM

I think the real issue here is that again we are seeing more of a shift of the tax liability to businesses (since commercial values are up in general relative to residential values). With the economic picture as bleak as it is for many local retailers this certainly won't help and may force more out of business.


The municipal tax revenue targets are broken down by different property types. The relative values between residential and commercial properties doesn't affect the tax rates.

eg: The municipality wants $X million from commercial properties and sets the commercial tax rate as necessary to achieve that.

#113 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:30 PM

The municipal tax revenue targets are broken down by different property types. The relative values between residential and commercial properties doesn't affect the tax rates.

eg: The municipality wants $X million from commercial properties and sets the commercial tax rate as necessary to achieve that.


I don't think so. Municipalities are measured by the mill rate they set for each class, and organizations like CFIB watch very closely, and some municipalities like Victoria are trying to reduce the ratio between residential and other classes. So if Victoria is trying for 3.25 to 1 or whatever, they are going to stick to that, and if non-res properties are going up in assessment, it's gonna pinch them.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#114 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:43 PM

I suppose this thread is somewhat related to the "bubble thread" or the "will housing prices rise or fall thread", but the chatter over there has somewhat died down.

What is the poll saying, and if you had to vote today, would would you vote the same?

#115 phx

phx
  • Member
  • 1,427 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:02 PM

I don't think so. Municipalities are measured by the mill rate they set for each class, and organizations like CFIB watch very closely, and some municipalities like Victoria are trying to reduce the ratio between residential and other classes. So if Victoria is trying for 3.25 to 1 or whatever, they are going to stick to that, and if non-res properties are going up in assessment, it's gonna pinch them.


Hmm, yes, some municipalities could use that strategy.

#116 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:05 PM

Hmm, yes, some municipalities could use that strategy.


I don't totally discount your way, but I know munis are under the gun on the ratios lately.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#117 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:23 PM

While most residential property owners in Greater Victoria saw their homes slip in value this past year, owners of more expensive pieces of commercial real estate got better news from assessments released this week.

B.C. Assessment data shows the region’s most expensive buildings are increasing in value.

The assessments show all but three of the 10 most valuable commercial properties have increased in value compared with last year.

The list was topped once again by Uptown. The massive shopping centre in Saanich was assessed at $282 million, up from $239 million the year before, setting it well ahead of its closest rival.

Mayfair Shopping Centre was a distant second at $185 million, up from $179 million the previous year.

Shopping centres again made up most of the top 10 with Hillside Centre assessed at $135 million, up from $127 million, and Tillicum Centre at $102.8 million, up from $97 million.

The top five on the list was rounded out by the Fairmont Empress Hotel, which was assessed at $90.5 million, down from $106 million last year.


http://www.timescolo...highest-1.39523

...they missed the Bay Centre, I looked it up and it was $97M.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#118 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 04 January 2013 - 12:32 PM

I don't know if you can compare projects, but Uptown has a huge land value, lots of concrete and steel, mechanicals such as elevators, escalators, plumbing and wiring, clock tower and so on. This shopping centre topped the list at $282 million.

Then you have the new Johnson Street Bridge at $92.8 million, or one third of the cost.

Which project has the best bang for the buck?

#119 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 30 October 2014 - 06:04 AM

The Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation is ringing alarm bells that the lion’s share of municipal tax hikes are spent on labour, but critics say the figures should be interpreted with caution. The B.C. branch of the federation released a list of the “Worst 13” tax-and-spend-on-labour municipalities, based on the proportion of new tax revenue spent on labour between 2009 and 2013. Among the offenders listed was Victoria, which spent 71 per cent of new tax revenue during that period on labour.
“A lot of people are under the impression that when they pay their taxes, it’s going to sewer lines or water lines or parks or something tangible, whereas more and more of this money is going out the door in higher managers’ salaries, executive salaries and union contracts,” said Jordan Bateman, director of the B.C. branch. - See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.Bs2UDX7S.dpuf

 

 

 



 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users