5833 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Pierre Poilievre says is like it is.

 

https://twitter.com/...8138345474?s=20

 

The MP doesn't mince words, after being confronted by an NDP MP on the issue of housing costs and the free market. The NDP MP blames the housing crisis on the last 20 years of BC Liberal rule. Of course, he doesn't mention what happened in the 1990s under the NDPs decade of rule. When did the boom start? In the 90s, with the NDP firmly at the helm until 2001. Now they're back, and housing prices have skyrocketed at record-breaking levels.

[marks_28]

Ah, an actual good Globe & Mail article about housing.

 

Why are B.C. renters subsidizing B.C. homeowners? Answer: Politics

 

A federal-provincial panel on housing supply and affordability in British Columbia expected trouble last spring when it filed its final report. It proposed medicine for a market gone haywire, but predicted that some of its advice was nevertheless likely to be “met with resistance.”

 

Among the recommendations was the obvious – governments need to work to get more housing built. But the panel, a mix of public sector and corporate representatives, also unanimously called for the end of the B.C. homeowner grant. It’s an annual property tax subsidy, dating back to 1957, paid to almost all B.C. homeowners.

 

The money starts at $570 per homeowner per year, with more for rural properties and owners who are seniors. The grants are expected to cost the B.C. treasury $887-million in 2021-22. The subsidy is only for homeowners who live in their homes. Landlords are not eligible. Nor are renters.

 

And this isn’t a subsidy for low-income households. As property values in B.C. have soared, provincial governments, both left and right, have escalated the value of the exemption. Five years ago the subsidy went to homeowners whose home was worth $1.2-million or less. Last year it was $1.625-million. This year, after the market soared some more, the cap – like a magical mountain that grows taller by the day – was raised by another 22 per cent, to $1.975-million.

 

The rising peak means that more than nine out of 10 homeowners will be receiving a subsidy from taxpayers – even if they have high incomes, and even if their home’s price keeps rising. The province issued its latest annual BC Assessment data last week; it showed that, in Metro Vancouver, the value of detached properties increased by hundreds of thousands of dollars.

 

The expert panel looked at all of this and saw the obvious: The system is strikingly unfair. It’s a tax break that mostly benefits people of above-average incomes. In the City of Vancouver, for example, more than half of households rent, and they’re being squeezed by rising costs. Yet homeowners, whose asset values are rising, are getting a payment from other taxpayers. And the subsidy helps boost home prices.

 

The panel called for the nearly $1-billion giveaway to be ended, with the money instead devoted to social housing. The panel also proposed “more equitable treatment of renters and homeowners,” since renters “end up paying higher taxes to offset revenue losses from homeowner exemptions.”

 

https://www.theglobe...nswer-politics/

[Mike K.]

What’s about the property transfer tax, Marks? Should we make renters pay $20,000 every time they move, too?

[marks_28]

Rob Shaw with similar sentiment:

 

The BC government should scrap the Home Owner Grant and follow its expert advice to create a new fairer system of tax relief for both owners and renters. But it won’t. Because the political backlash would be immense.

 

https://twitter.com/...8704623618?s=20

[m3m]

Pierre Poilievre says is like it is.

 

https://twitter.com/...8138345474?s=20

 

The MP doesn't mince words, after being confronted by an NDP MP on the issue of housing costs and the free market. The NDP MP blames the housing crisis on the last 20 years of BC Liberal rule. Of course, he doesn't mention what happened in the 1990s under the NDPs decade of rule. When did the boom start? In the 90s, with the NDP firmly at the helm until 2001. Now they're back, and housing prices have skyrocketed at record-breaking levels.

 

I was kinda following along with Pierre until he said that Canada is lagging behind Ireland, Switzerland, and Singapore on affordability. 

[Mike K.]

He is referring to their higher wages, and how that relates to international competitiveness.

[marks_28]

What’s about the property transfer tax, Marks? Should we make renters pay $20,000 every time they move, too?

 

No, we shouldn't. The student who finishes their lease at the end of the semester and moves home to Vancouver now has a $20k tax bill?

[Mike K.]

Rob Shaw with similar sentiment:

The BC government should scrap the Home Owner Grant and follow its expert advice to create a new fairer system of tax relief for both owners and renters. But it won’t. Because the political backlash would be immense.

https://twitter.com/...8704623618?s=20

It won’t happen because homeowners pay PTT. It’s a great talking point and all when the grant rears its head after every assessment update but the PTT is a massive cash grab.

[Nparker]

I will give up my HOG when renters agree to give up rental freezes and maximum annual increases.

[rjag]

Its all semantics. The H.O.G. is applied to the vast majority of homes. Therefore its not really a grant but the actual baseline. Any commercial operation such as a rental property or a 2nd home is charged a premium. 

 

There, problem solved. Lets move on to actual problems that aren't manufactured divisive political theatre, such as how to create an affordable housing stock. 

 

FYI removing SFD Zoning is not going to make homes more affordable, just developers richer. You know fine well that the minute this looks like it would go through, you'll see a flurry of real estate activity on larger lots, corner lots etc and there will be bidding wars and the values will be driven even higher as Developers rush in to land bank as much as possible. 

 

Want to create more housing stock without divisive theatrics? Get rid of the power Community Associations have over councils. Yes I'm looking at NPNA, FGNA, JBNA etc just to name a few locally. They are the worst thing to happen to our communities as they are ideologically and power driven. 

[Nparker]

...Want to create more housing stock without divisive theatrics? Get rid of the power Community Associations have over councils. Yes I'm looking at NPNA, FGNA, JBNA etc just to name a few locally. They are the worst thing to happen to our communities as they are ideologically and power driven. 

Amen.

[spanky123]

What’s about the property transfer tax, Marks? Should we make renters pay $20,000 every time they move, too?

 

Last time I checked, renters didn't pay property tax so how are they subsidizing anyone? About the only thing you could argue is that people who don't qualify for the homeowners grant are subsidizing those who do.

Edited by spanky123, 10 January 2022 - 02:30 PM.

[Mike K.]

Want to create more housing stock without divisive theatrics? Get rid of the power Community Associations have over councils. Yes I'm looking at NPNA, FGNA, JBNA etc just to name a few locally. They are the worst thing to happen to our communities as they are ideologically and power driven.

It’s also an inter-municipal fight over density, but not just any density, density that comes with the most amenities.

It’s not worth it for Saanich to put up housing unless they can extract maximum amenities. It’s the same story for Victoria.

The way the system is structured is the munis know there’s no home building outside of the urban containment boundary so they can continue with the status quo.

Believe me, if the CRD allowed Shirley and Jordan River to grow to 50,000 people over 25 years you’d see the earth moved for more amenable development programs among legacy markets in the CRD.

[spanky123]

Want to create more housing stock without divisive theatrics? Get rid of the power Community Associations have over councils. Yes I'm looking at NPNA, FGNA, JBNA etc just to name a few locally. They are the worst thing to happen to our communities as they are ideologically and power driven. 

 

As opposed to developers who only have the good of the many at heart and should be allowed to build whatever they want wherever they want!

[Victoria Watcher]

Why are B.C. renters subsidizing B.C. homeowners? Answer: Politics

 

 

https://www.theglobe..._medium=twitter

 

 

A federal-provincial panel on housing supply and affordability in British Columbia expected trouble last spring when it filed its final report. It proposed medicine for a market gone haywire, but predicted that some of its advice was nevertheless likely to be “met with resistance.”

 

Among the recommendations was the obvious – governments need to work to get more housing built. But the panel, a mix of public sector and corporate representatives, also unanimously called for the end of the B.C. homeowner grant. It’s an annual property tax subsidy, dating back to 1957, paid to almost all B.C. homeowners.

 

The money starts at $570 per homeowner per year, with more for rural properties and owners who are seniors. The grants are expected to cost the B.C. treasury $887-million in 2021-22. The subsidy is only for homeowners who live in their homes. Landlords are not eligible. Nor are renters.

 

And this isn’t a subsidy for low-income households. As property values in B.C. have soared, provincial governments, both left and right, have escalated the value of the exemption. Five years ago the subsidy went to homeowners whose home was worth $1.2-million or less. Last year it was $1.625-million. This year, after the market soared some more, the cap – like a magical mountain that grows taller by the day – was raised by another 22 per cent, to $1.975-million.

 

The rising peak means that more than nine out of 10 homeowners will be receiving a subsidy from taxpayers – even if they have high incomes, and even if their home’s price keeps rising. The province issued its latest annual BC Assessment data last week; it showed that, in Metro Vancouver, the value of detached properties increased by hundreds of thousands of dollars.

 

____________________________

 

But there has to be a way to start whittling down the size of the grant. First, stop escalating the annual exemption level. Then a few years later, start ratcheting it down. If it must continue, only offer it to homeowners with low incomes. The nearly $1-billion a year this is costing B.C. could be far better invested in addressing the side-effects of Canada’s most inflated housing market, rather than further pumping it up.

 

But as the panel said, that would take something that’s always in short supply: Leadership.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 10 January 2022 - 03:10 PM.

[Nparker]

I am not sure this ridiculous story needed to be shared here again.

[Victoria Watcher]

Sorry, I did not see it.  I thought I was the only one here with a G&M subscription.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 10 January 2022 - 03:13 PM.

[Nparker]

Sorry, I did not see it.  I thought I was the only one here with a G&M subscription.

No worries. The article is just such a load of hogwash.

[Mike K.]

No, we shouldn't. The student who finishes their lease at the end of the semester and moves home to Vancouver now has a $20k tax bill?

You don’t have a problem with homeowners paying when they move.

Why shouldn’t renters pay a $20,000 tax bill, too, when they find a new apartment?

[rjag]

As opposed to developers who only have the good of the many at heart and should be allowed to build whatever they want wherever they want!

 

As noted in the sentence prior to my comment about the Community Associations

 

FYI removing SFD Zoning is not going to make homes more affordable, just developers richer. You know fine well that the minute this looks like it would go through, you'll see a flurry of real estate activity on larger lots, corner lots etc and there will be bidding wars and the values will be driven even higher as Developers rush in to land bank as much as possible