3494 replies to this topic

[sdwright.vic]

With plans to require people to live in that residence for a year, that could cause unintended consequences for regular folks caught between an agenda and the realities of life.

Really? If you are not or have no intentions to benefit from primary residence status then... plan and simple you should not get it. Close loopholes ya know.

[LJ]

Where the Government usually is if you take a risk and fail - you get the 'Trudeau salute' and off they go.

Well we could always refloat Trudeau the elder's finance minister's idea of taxing the equity you had in your home.

[davidN]

sorry no one is forcing you to live here.  If you can't afford to live in Victoria, they have nice houses in Winnipeg for 250k

 

you should get in now before that $1 million house is worth $2 million.  Victoria is a desirable place to live and the free market, not the government, is responsible for the increase in housing costs.  Maybe you should tell your employer its too expensive to live here and demand a raise

 

I agree with this entirely. We moved here knowing full well that housing costs are extremely high compared to where we have been living.  Our decision to move here was a lifestyle choice that we made and we are willing to pay a financial and career cost to do so. One cannot expect to live in arguably one of the most beautiful and  desirable areas in the world and not expect to pay a premium to do so. It is far cheaper to live elsewhere.

 

What happened to the days of sacrificing to achieve a goal? We were not lucky enough to be born here. We worked hard, made many sacrifices as a family both in lifestyle and financially all to have the opportunity to move to this wonderful area. Are you as a "native son or daughter " more entitled than us to be able to afford a home here? 

 

From what I have seen and heard many people here expect far more than what they can afford. Thats unfortunate but that is reality in todays world and you are not to going to change that. One should travel the world a bit and discover how many millions of people would just like a decent roof over their heads and not be concerned whether it has a view, has granite counter tops or is just minutes from work. 

 

I know this point of view will be seen by many as elitist but as tjv says - "no one is forcing you to live here" so complain less and sacrifice more. 

[FirstTimeHomeCrier]

 

I know this point of view will be seen by many as elitist but as tjv says - "no one is forcing you to live here" so complain less and sacrifice more. 

 

Okay, but why is it fine to ask me to "sacrifice" my living standards but it's not fine for you to sacrifice more taxes?

[VicHockeyFan]

Okay, but why is it fine to ask me to "sacrifice" my living standards but it's not fine for you to sacrifice more taxes?

 

Why should my taxes pay for your living space?  How about we each find that on our own, like food, vehicles, vacation, life insurance etc.  and just leave government to more essential stuff?

[Mike K.]

Okay, but why is it fine to ask me to "sacrifice" my living standards but it's not fine for you to sacrifice more taxes?

 

But here's the thing, though. Your sacrifice affects you. The sacrifice you're asking of others negatively affects them to benefit you. That's a big difference.

 

I'm using the plural you here, not directing my response directly at you, FTHC. If that makes sense

[Mike K.]

Btw, I'm not the only one here who thinks your input on this forum is pretty darned great, FTHC. We may not always see eye-to-eye, but dang, you know how to drive home a point and are not afraid to step into healthy debates.

 

That's A-OK in my book 

[FirstTimeHomeCrier]

Why should my taxes pay for your living space?  How about we each find that on our own, like food, vehicles, vacation, life insurance etc.  and just leave government to more essential stuff?

 

I'm not asking for your taxes to pay for my living space. I'm asking for profits made from speculating on the housing market to be subject to taxes the way other income is.

[Mike K.]

It already is subject to taxes, massive taxes, in fact.

 

Capital gains tax, depending on your tax bracket, works out to paying the government about $9,000 if your property sells for $50,000 more than what you paid for it. That's a huge tax, and it's a tax the government loves.

 

If the government truly had our best interest in mind it would employ a reverse capital gains tax that gives buyers a portion of their losses back in cash. Say if you lose $50,000 on your home sale, the government gives you $9,000. That's only fair, right?

 

But capital gains tax isn't the end of a seller's costs. There are legal fees, transaction fees, realtor fees and other costs associated with that home sale. Now what about improvements to a home, what about modifications? Taxes were also paid for that home purchase (if new) and to the municipality in the form of property tax. When you factor in closing costs, selling costs and capital gains the actual profit isn't as big as one would think.

[VicHockeyFan]

I'm not asking for your taxes to pay for my living space. I'm asking for profits made from speculating on the housing market to be subject to taxes the way other income is.

 

It already is.  Only your principle residence is exempt.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 21 September 2017 - 09:06 AM.

[FirstTimeHomeCrier]

It already is.  Only your principle residence is exempt.

 

The proposed policy is to phase-in the exemption for principle residences based on how long you've occupied the residence. I am sure that there are loopholes people are using to declare a home their principle residence when they are in fact "flipping" it.

[spanky123]

The point has been made before that people don't buy houses and then leave them empty hoping that prices will go up. If you want to speculate then speculate on stocks or precious metals, they don't cost you a whack of money to hold them. People buy houses, renovate them and sell them, or they buy houses and then have an external event happen (ie death in family or job loss) that forces them to sell. The narrative that somehow globs of people are just buying up housing inventory and letting it sit empty is one manufactured by politicians who just want to deflect blame. 

 

What we are seeing is the inevitable outcome of loose monetary policy. Money is cheap so people borrow more money and drive up prices. Prices go up so rents soon follow suit. In a normal economic cycle then interest rates would go up which would cool demand and keep prices moderated. The Federal and Provincial Governments and consumers have such massive debts that they cannot allow rates to adjust to normal levels without increasing deficits even faster.

 

Round and round we go.

Edited by spanky123, 21 September 2017 - 02:49 PM.

[FirstTimeHomeCrier]

I don't think people are leaving houses empty. But investors are definitely buying property, particularly downtown condos, to make a profit. They count on renting or operating an air bnb for a year or two, and then selling for twice what they paid for it. Theoretically, they are paying capital gains taxes on the sales, but it wouldn't surprise me if some of them found loopholes (like telling CRA the downtown condo is home, but actually living at their partner's place).

[VicHockeyFan]

Twice what they paid for it? Prices are not going up nearly that fast.

[spanky123]

Well all home sales are now reported as part of your income tax return so no way of faking residence. If someone buys a house/condo and rents it then that is not what people are commonly calling speculation.

[spanky123]

Twice what they paid for it? Prices are not going up nearly that fast.

 

By the time you pay property transfer taxes, legal fees and the Realtor's commission, you need to have a home appreciate quite a bit to make any money. If you are renovation or rezoning the property then that is different.

[rjag]

they can only sell it for twice what they paid if there is a buyer waiting in the wings willing to pay twice. And as Spanky123 wrote, there are significant fees involved to sell.

 

When borrowing costs start to normalise you will see a whole different market out there. I bet we will be in a buyers market in the next 12 months and it will last for a few years. Already seeing the signs, more price reductions happening, fewer listings and some are going over 45 days. Good homes in good areas will always sell, its the rest that will learn their true value.

[LJ]

I don't think people are leaving houses empty. But investors are definitely buying property, particularly downtown condos, to make a profit. They count on renting or operating an air bnb for a year or two, and then selling for twice what they paid for it. Theoretically, they are paying capital gains taxes on the sales, but it wouldn't surprise me if some of them found loopholes (like telling CRA the downtown condo is home, but actually living at their partner's place).

So when you sell your condo at a loss in the next recession you expect the government to pitch in and make you whole?

 

Or, as I suspect, you are hoping your condo will appreciate in value and you can sell it for a lot more than you paid for it and then you can move up the food chain with all your new equity.

[FirstTimeHomeCrier]

So when you sell your condo at a loss in the next recession you expect the government to pitch in and make you whole?

 

Or, as I suspect, you are hoping your condo will appreciate in value and you can sell it for a lot more than you paid for it and then you can move up the food chain with all your new equity.

 

No, I don't expect the government to help if I sell my condo at a loss, nor do I hope for my condo to appreciate in value beyond inflation and the actual costs of any repairs/renovations I make. Not sure why every conversation about policy alternatives turns into a cross-examination of my life.

[lanforod]

No, I don't expect the government to help if I sell my condo at a loss, nor do I hope for my condo to appreciate in value beyond inflation and the actual costs of any repairs/renovations I make. Not sure why every conversation about policy alternatives turns into a cross-examination of my life.

 

Does that statement apply to overall inflation or just inflation of housing costs locally...?