City
Councillor Walker Sticks Up For City Homeowners
As the City Council begins goes into its second day of meetings tomorrow, Councillor Michael Walker is introducing a motion to alter the city's 2009 property assessments.
He's calling on the city to do three things:
1) Delete 2009 property assessments that are based on January 1st, 2008 values
2)Reissue 2009 property assessments based on 2005 values, factoring in the current rate of inflation.
3) Review the Current Value Assessment system administered by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), with attention to fairness, transparency, accountability and predictability for property owners in Ontario as compared to other property assessment systems employed by domestic and international governments.
In Toronto (and Ontario as a whole), the government recently instituted a new system where property assessments are taken every four years, rather than every year. Typically, the greater the present value of your home, the more you pay in property taxes. But an increase in the value of a home doesn't necessarily mean the you will be forced to pay higher taxes. That happens when the market value of the property increased more than the average rate of increase in the municipality.
Now, the current assessments are based on the January 1st 2008 property values, coincidentally, right when the Toronto housing market was at its peak. Since then, the looming economic crisis has pushed home values down - pretty much across the board. But that won't matter for a number of homeowners, as their property taxes will continue to be based on peak home prices, meaning they'll be facing higher taxes over the next four years.
This predicament creates a double blow for homeowners: if they try and sell their home to avoid the property tax increase, they're not going to get the amount of money that the city says its worth. So, Walker thinks the city should scrap the last assessment and just factor in inflation, thereby, taking into account the sudden rise and pullback in home values.
As you can imagine, the new tax system doesn't sit well with everybody, The Coalition After Property Tax Reform (CAPTR) is calling on the government to place a limit on individual property value increases resulting from each new assessment. This limit or ceiling should be set in relation to historic increases in Ontario real estate value, which the group says are about double the rate of inflation (currently sitting at 1.2%).
Other critics argue that homeowners living in the city's more desirable neighbourhoods (most of which are in the downtown core) are being forced to shoulder more of Toronto's tax burden. Meanwhile, homeowners in neighbourhoods where prices are stagnant will actually be contributing less to the city's coffers.
Even if Walker's motion comes to nothing, it seems to me that the city's (and the province's) assessment system will continue to draw criticism. More importantly, I think this is a particularly relevant issue now that both the Canadian and international economy are in disarray. The government should be looking for ways to help homeowners out, not punish them for real estate bubble, especially if they've been living in the same home for a more than a couple of years.


Discussion
15 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
The reality is that no municipality has any control over property tax assessment. The most it can do is ask MPAC to do something about it, including scrapping a property tax assessment or doing a new assessment.
But, frankly, this assessment issue isn't a big deal. A few people are disproportionately affected by it but by and large, properties have kept their relative value (ie, popular neighbourhoods are still proportionately more valuable than places like northwest Etobicoke). So even if you reassess the values, people are still going to be paying the same amount since the assessment system is a zero sum game.
What matters here is what I'll call relative value. MPAC might say your home is worth $500,000. You might never get $500,000 for your house on the open market but as long as MPAC equally over values most or all properties, the system remains fair.
Anyways, point being: Brady got played for a fool by Michael Walker. The reality is, any time taxes are involved people are going to cry about it and say they should pay less than they do. There's no perfect system, certainly not this one (it rewards living in sprawl), but to claim it's more unfair now is dumb.
It's amazing how lack of basic math understanding continues to confuse people on property taxes. Michael Walker should know better and is just playing politics.
I'm not defending Walker, but I don't think he's alone on this issue.
Dan, you can value a property any way you like. The municipal tax (mill) rate will just be adjusted (as is the practice now) to draw the set amount of money Toronto's ciy council says it wants when it passes its budget. The only question settled by the assessment system is "who pays what?" among property owners.
As one group put it: "the four-year phase-in is nothing more than an instalment plan for paying higher taxes. By assessing every four years the government is increasing the exposure of property owners to volatile real estate markets and inexact assessment methodology."
Those homeowners who have lived in the same house for several years may end up paying more in taxes, simply because other buyers (possibly speculators) caused a run-up in home prices in their municipality. I know you don't like Walker ( I don't have an opinion about him either way), but he does have a point raising concerns over the current system.
How is it fair for assessments to be higher in the core, where it is far cheaper to provide services like water, sewage, garbage collection, snow ploughing, etc versus the boroughs where it is far more expensive to provide the same services? And what provisions are in place for large families living in a home and paying the same rate as a single occupant in an equally sized home who consumes a fraction of the services available to residents?
The current system is broken. Move to the California model where re-assessment only takes place at points of sale. Seniors on fixed incomes are being pushed out of the city - they cannot afford the tax increases when they paid $30,000 for a house in the heart of Toronto 40 years ago!
Thank God the residents of St. Paul's have an elected official that looks after their interests - it's no wonder he keeps getting re-elected with MASSIVE support!
My problem with Walker is that the guy is way past his best before date. He used to be a useful gadfly. Now he just whines and throws dozens of motions on the council agenda that do nothing. He doesn't build support around his motions, he doesn't work with people, he just puts ideas on paper and gets loud when no one listens to him. It's lazy.
http://files.newswire.ca/757/AssmntChange.pdf
And I agree with o_O, Dan, and James. And (s)he did sayeth: Let logic reign.
It is ture, but misleading, to say that it is cheaper to provide services to the core as opposed to the suburbs. It is true, but only for some services, and things like site services, are paid for by developers at the time of installation. Other than maintenance, they have little impact on property tax.
The truth of the matter is that density only effects small portions of the budget.
Here are Toronto's top 10 expenses, in order.
Police 24.4%
Debt Service charges 12.2%
Fire Services 10.4%
Social Services 7.9%
Shelter Support & Housing 8%
TTC 7.4%
Parks, Forest & Recreation 7%
Transportation Services 5.7%
Solid Waste Management 5.7%
Toronto Public Library 4.6%
That is 93% of the total operating budget.
Compare Toronto's expense to that of Mississauga as a lower tier municipality combined with Peel as the upper tier.
Toronto
Misssissauga
Peel
2006 budgets: Toronto Mississauga
examples,
Admin hours per resident: Toronto 3.208 Mississauga/Peel 3.23
Fire Dept. hours per resident: Toronto 2.59 Mississauga/Peel 2.08
Fire Dept. cost per res: Toronto $120 Mississauga $122
Police : Toronto 1 per 355 residents Mississauga/Peel 1 per 490 residents
Transportation : Toronto $108 per resident Mississauga $303 per resident
The two areas that will be affected most by density are transportation and solid waste management. Both of which are not very large expenses. I will concede that it is difficult to make like for like comparisons, the point I am making is that within reason, suburban areas can be as cost effective as large urban centres. Of course the need for public transportation increases with density and this is also with cost. Which for the TTC is $394 per resident, which omits fare recovery and capital expenditures.
The amount of taxes actually charged depends on the mill rate that the City sets which needs to be lower to reflect the higher assessments. Mr. Walker might want to champion a lower mill rate for 2009.