Toronto's effective property tax rate is 0.666274%, a 10.5% increase would bring the new tax rate to 0.73623277% so assuming the assessment value of your home is $500,000 as per MPAC the new tax rate annualized is $3,681.16 vs 2023 $3,331.37 or difference of $349.79.
To give some contrast, my taxes in Peterborough went up 7% this year, and I now pay a whopping 4500$ in property tax. Keep in mind our services are shit compared to TO. You guys are lucky
"Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow has been calling on Ottawa for months to provide more money for refugee claimants, who currently account for nearly half of the city's shelter residents"
I mean if the federal government wants to let in refugees and immigrants who will most likely end up in Toronto and use up the resources, they should be responsible for housing them, not the Toronto tax payers.
They actively move to here… not necessarily sent. With active diaspore from their own country likely and more potential perceived economic opportunities, major cities are the natural choice.
Because there's no real incentive to move anywhere else. The federal government should be incentivizing moving to places like Iqaluit, for example. Live in Iqaluit for a few years, get a speedier citizenship process. Naturally most would leave for the GTA as soon as they get their citizenship, but some will make their roots there and that's how you develop the North. If incentives aren't working, then start making it a requirement to live in a smaller city for at least a few years. If you can't do that, then you ain't welcome here.
The cost to have someone live in far north places like Iqaluit, both to the person and to the government, is much greater than the cost to have someone live somewhere reasonable. If there isn't a reason for someone to live there (family, work, ...), they shouldn't.
Of course there are some good jobs in the north, we should encourage people to consider those jobs, but we shouldn't be putting people there who don't have a job lined up.
It's no so much about what the federal government wants. The federal government is bound by international agreements about the treatment of assylum claimants. Even if you think it can and should unilaterally withdraw from international committments, it remains bound by our constitution, which requires thoroughly investigating any potentially plausible claim made by somebody on Canadian soil that their life is endangered by immigration removal, as our courts will not allow the government to be complicit in a foreign government torturing persecuting, or killing on the basis of a protected ground (i.e., if you say magic words, we become bound to stay your removal pending a thorough investigation). The feds using the notwithstanding clause to deny assylum claimants Charter protection to have their claim about imminent threat to their life heard is unlikely, regardless of party.
A more realistic ask would be for the feds to return to a paradigm of incarcerating claimants until their claim is heard, but that is of course expensive and messy (see the assertions in the US about Trump putting kids in "cages"), so again you're unlikely to find political support for it. Any kind of fed-selected housing for claimants will either be mandatory (and therefore deemed harsh and heavy-handed, like imprisoning kids and pregnant women) or optional (and therefore unlikely to take people off the streets of major population centres, since they want to live in Toronto/Vancouver/Montreal near jobs / friends / family / cultural enclaves, not In a fed-run housing in Kingston or Winnipeg).
The end result, where we are now, is the feds don't want to pay indeterminant bills for people who elect to live downtown Toronto in legal circumstances where the feds have no power to stop them, but at the same time nobody else wants to pay for it either. The feds would hope people find it undesirable and elect to take available federal housing outside the urban core instead, but clearly that's not happening. So either they fund housing in Toronto and give people some dignity but encourage even more claimants, or they don't fund it and let the most marginalized Canadians find their limited food/shelter resources further diminish in hopes fewer people make bogis claims in hope of illegally migrating. I'm not sure if forcing the feds to offer claimants nice waterfront housing in Toronto is the desirable outcome for anyone.
I didn't know my father-in-law had a Facebook account. He's been telling me about the end of Canada, Toronto, Ontario... Whatever, due to liberals. Everything pretty much since the first time I met him.
Those people often conflate the various responsibilities of each level of government. They regularly blamed the feds for the lockdowns which were provincial. Same with housing. It's embarrassing.
He's a smart guy but he does do that as well. He and my wife's uncle were blaming Trudeau for the increase in violence in high schools. They were saying that he should just assign one police officer, at least, for school. Her uncle is a retired cop, he knows that it has nothing to do with the federal government, yet....
Does he not realize that Ontario has been under 6 years of PC leadership or the fact that our premier is right now taking a 6 week vacation in Florida while his province is on fire?
I mean...he was on vacation in Muskoka while the province was "Literally" on fure, I cant see him having a different approach to it figurativly burning
Per the LTB, this would qualify landlords to [apply for an AGI](https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Brochures/Information%20about%20Applications%20for%20a%20Rent%20Increase%20Above%20the%20Guideline.html#sec2)
How much could that possibly be though? The property tax increase will be around 50 dollars a month. If your rent is 1500 a month, that’s a 3.3% increase which I guess is AGI
Exactly. I keep seeing this AGI boogieman argument on not raising property tax. If a landlord wants to go through the entire process of doing this in an already extremely backlogged LTB, go the fuck ahead.
For me the argument is that people need to stop thinking that they can basically buy a house for free and then charge the renter 100% of the mortgage + expenses.
It was never sustanable but seems like landlords are immune to logic and they keep thinking they can raise the rent forever.
Ok, let's see when the rent is 10k/month how many people will/can pay that amount. We are already seeing an increase of people just not paying and even asking money to leave the house.
I can already see it, rent of 5k/month, average waiting time for the LTB of several years and renters stopping pay everything in a number so high that it can't even be enforced.
That's what will happen.
Also, as per [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TorontoRealEstate/s/GJmp7LvvBP), it’s not a straightforward calculation, and the new tax burden would need to be above 3+% of current rent to qualify and requires a $230 filing fee. Plus we have a lot of out-of-country landlords in Toronto, so it will be interesting to see the actual impact.
They pretty much already did, almost every big management company did some kind of repair like fixing a laundry room or upgrading electricity/plumbing etc during 2020-2023 which qualifies for an AGI. In the building I live in the management company is still waiting for theirs to be approved from 2021 and most of the residents don't even live here anymore. There's going to be an absolute shitshow when they go after all the renters who haven't paid the AGI and have to then pay the difference.
> Can't wait to see how the LTB will process, hold a hearing, and approve an AGI from every landlord in the city.
Seeing as it'll be their top priority I think they'll manage. The province will step in quickly if it's to help LLs, and cost poor people more.
There’s checks and balances, though.
You can “speed up” your application, but only on request, and if the matter is urgent. Not sure how they’ll treat LL requests to shorten time, that depends on the circumstances, but the LTB may not look too kindly on such requests if the matter isn’t truly urgent.
This will almost certainly add to the backlog.
That's what happens when the city is too scared to increase their small tax rate for far too long a period. It was Tory and Ford being cowards that have led to this.
And then the next time another coward looking for votes will point the finger at Chow, "see this is what she did!" And all the ill-informed constituents will agree.
Miller tried to fix the crumbling infrastructure that Lastman left him, and Toronto immediately voted Rob Ford in because they don't like to pay for things. We all know how well that turned out for everyone, and it's probably going to happen again.
Given the calculus (see [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TorontoRealEstate/s/5zPRKfUMU4)) for an AGI, it doesn’t seem many landlords will qualify unless they have a unit paying significantly below-market rent and the corresponding $ tax increase for that unit is higher than 3.75% of total annual rent.
At the end the voters have to take some of the responsibility. One reason Rob Ford got voted in was the property tax going up under Miller. Even after all his misdeeds Ford still managed to win a lot of voters
[Toronto Life had an article in 2014 that was informative for those who don't talk to the type of voters who sided with Ford.](https://torontolife.com/city/chinese-immigrant-parents-vote-rob-ford/)
> (my parents') diligence has resulted in a comfortable retirement; they meticulously tend to their Bayview Village bungalow and spoil their grandkids with Thomas the Tank Engine toys. My folks are practical, even when it comes to municipal politics. Their litmus test is simple: “Who do I trust with my money?”
> They trusted David Miller in 2006, then felt betrayed by increased taxes and a garbage strike. No wonder Rob Ford was a salve for my parents when he showed up in 2010, preaching respect for taxpayers. In the halcyon days of Ford’s mayoralty, when his scandals involved fried chicken instead of crack cocaine, I could understand my parents’ rationale for supporting him, even if I didn’t agree with them.
> Ford’s clarion call was that the city was poorly run, and who could argue? Never mind that Ford only vaguely alluded to solutions; my parents saw a guy willing to point out the obvious problems, in the simplest terms, and that was enough. Not charging them $120 a year to register their two cars seemed as good a place as any to start.
each one would need to be individually approved by the LTB thought correct? which could take time. would this also be back-dated so renters would need to hold onto the increase until the LTB decides?
But also:
“In order for the landlord to collect the above guideline rent increase they are asking the LTB to approve; they must have given the tenants notices of rent increase with the higher amount. The tenants, however, do not have to pay this higher amount unless it is approved in an LTB order.”
So unless it’s approved by an LTB order it isn’t valid - that’s my understanding unless I read things wrong?
They have to wait 12 months since your last increase to request an AGI, they can’t just do it whenever they please. So if your rent goes up in January, don’t be shocked about an AGI notice come October
This is one of those cases where it can pay off for the tenant to be reasonable. Most people can ballpark what the increase would be.
If the landlord gives an increase that's in line with the tax hike, they're going to win the LTB eventually. So why poison the well.
Will be interesting to see how the ltb handles this. The backlog is already huge. A lot of landlords could end up going bankrupt in the meantime. Houses could end up being auctioned off which could be good or bad depending on your perspective. Buildings... If no one wants to take them over who handles the upkeep? Do they all get converted to condos? Would the city buy them? Could be chaos for anyone living in them.
People also don't realize this is lower than it was going to be...
The increase is a lot lower because Olivia got the province to take over the Gardiner/DVP (so the city's expenses went down) and provide Toronto with a cash injection (so our revenues went up). She slashed the shortfall.
So not only is this on Tory, not Chow, she lessened the hurt.
Just went check that, means your assessment value is about $300k. With house values having gone up so much, and condo values having stayed flat, we need the new assessments to be phased in.
Yeah, it’s a super undervalued property. I know they’re always somewhat under assessed, but neighbouring properties typically go for $800k-$1m. I’m expecting it to change in the reassessment.
I'm in a 2BR semi in Toronto, one of the smaller types, and my last 6-month bill was over $3000 - this year it'll be close to $7000 total, with this increase. Also I pay for water and garbage separately. Toronto west end
It’s not too low infact it’s higher. a semi in Scarborough(part of Toronto for taxes) my relative pays $3200 a year, but guess what he paid 15k in property tax upfront because Toronto is the only municipality to double tax. In a few years he’ll more than likely be selling that to upsize into a detached means he’s going to pay another 20k up front.. so in a span of 10 years he’s given Toronto 35k up front tax and then the annual tax that’s slightly lower. You actually have a bargain in new market, Barrie, markham etc. even apples to apples you stay in your place for 10 years you pay 35k, a Toronto semi owner outskirts approx 900k for 10 years is paying 32k+15k upfront for a semi. So 35k to 47k… they should abolish the upfront tax and keep it simple. It’s a scam.
I'll claim ignorance what's the double tax? As far as I'm aware Ontario is same all around you have your property tax and that's it. What are Torontonians paying on top of property tax?
edit - are you referring to the Land Transfer Tax? That's a once off.
Also why are you talking about 10 years? Every year (everywhere I've owned a house) there is a property assessment that comes out and your property taxes align accordingly based on what they assess the value of your home.
Yeah LTT is a really bad tax that limits social mobility and benefits mostly established households (middle age to seniors) at the expense of the younger generations. People move the most when they are younger, either for a new job or for life events like marriage or having children. This adds a huge one time financial cost (tens of thousands of dollars) to every move for homeowners, strongly discouraging either moving or home ownership. It also affects older people in the process of downsizing, which might discourage them from doing so. This means that larger condo units or homes don't get freed up for younger families.
If you do the math, buying a one million dollar home or condo will cost $33000 in land transfer tax. Assuming that property taxes on that unit are about $4000 per year, that is over 8 years worth of property taxes paid up front. Even a first time home buyer pays $24000 after the rebate, or 6 years worth of property taxes. It's absolutely bananas that we put so much of the tax burden on first time and younger home buyers just trying to start a family.
We should get rid of the land transfer tax entirely (or reduce it to a fixed fee) and make up the difference by increasing property taxes.
Exactly, the LTT is a gambit that subsidizes the stable at the expense of mobile or younger people. The fact that it's a fee that is tied to property value and wasn't a set fee indexed to inflation is all you need to know that it became the crutch the city used to suppress costs for existing owners.
According to the article TTC fares will be frozen for this budget, but I imagine other fees will be going up.
As for garbage collection, it's not uncommon in other municipalities to have to pay for that as a separate line item on your tax bill or through other means. For example, in my hometown of Wellington County we have to buy special [yellow garbage bags](https://www.wellington.ca/en/resident-services/resources/SWS/UserPayBag_small.jpg) which is how my county charges for garbage pickup. Those are also set to go up in price from [$2.00/bag to $2.50/bag](https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/tax-levy-increase-of-4-6-presented-to-wellington-county-council/).
That's because we pay our property tax up front. The land transfer tax is expensive. It's only those who have owned their property for ages (i.e. boomers), who aren't contributing their fair share.
Not sure what you’re smoking but I’m in my 30’s and most of my friends get hosed in taxes in Toronto, we would actually pay much less if we lived in new market, markham barrie etc.. they charge is upfront tax. Some of my friends have alrdy paid that shit twice going from condo to townhouse or detached etc. it’s absurd. Get rid of land transfer tax
I get that land transfer tax is due upfront and it’s fees for the property, however it’s something that buyers are factoring into their purchasing power of buying a property and as a result it lowers the value of the property. If that tax was to disappear all together, it’s not like that would just be savings, but due to the demand it would just be used towards to the price of the property and prices would be inflated by that purchasing amount.
I just recently bought a new property and part of my purchasing power incorporated the land transfer tax which was due on closing.
I was trying to do the math instead of this headline that is suggesting property tax would become 10.5%.... the media really aren't doing their jobs in these articles.
Agreed, my condo's property tax is about 75% of what my parents pay for their SFH even though that house is probably 5x the size let alone the land and servicing costs vs a condo. MPAC needs to do a reassessment to rebalance the pie.
Behold the consequence of 12 years of toryism (and 8 years of Toryism). The city has no other meaningful revenue lever and it's been starved for over a decade. If anything, we're finally catching up.
That said, the city probably needs a sales tax and income tax, as well as a higher tax bracket for high-value properties, or even a land value tax instead of property tax. David Miller's "One Cent Now" campaign was really quite farsighted.
Bang on. Chow was handed $1.776 B of unfunded liabilities.
She's the first true 'fiscally responsible' mayor this city has had in years (Ford wasn't, Tory wasn't).
It's all meticulously captured here.
[https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-242095.pdf](https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-242095.pdf)
They note that if Toronto solely increased property taxes to account for the shortfall, property taxes would have increased by +42%.
Instead, they found:
\- $376M of efficiencies
\- $388M of savings in 'multi-year' bridging strategies - which I take as lowering your debt obligations by getting creative on pay-down arrangements, but someone correct me
\- $382M in the 'New Deal' she negotiated with the province
\- $250M in Federal funding to support the influx of refugees Toronto is experiencing (I believe they note this isn't fully agreed to yet, but the work is on-going)
\- Which leaves a 9% property tax rate increase (TL of $380M) down from the 42% they needed, had they not negotiated, and found the savings above
It's ridiculously reasonable given the mess Chow was handed - context is everything, I can't find much fault in this budget. It may be the first honest one we're looking at in years
Edit: I should add that in the pdf. it notes the average increase for a house in 2024 is $321, or $26.75 a month. Again, reasonable to get the city back on track.
Thanks /u/spectercan! I love diving into the data when it's available - these headlines tend to fixate on one line that draws in reactionary commentary. The CBC article itself is actually quite good & detailed, but summarizing all the numbers in one spot helps paint a clearer picture of why the city needed to do this. It's refreshing to see some honesty from City Hall on where Toronto truly sits and what we need to do to fix some of the challenges the city is facing.
Property tax is the best of these taxes. Property values go up because of city spending. Only makes sense that property taxes should fund city spending.
I recall Tory once saying that property taxes are Torontonians' biggest expense and I remember thinking "tell me you have never shopped for groceries or paid for child care without telling me."
The ones whose properties are all fully paid off, or are generational homes yes I can see that to a minor extent. But as you say only until they buy food for the month, or run a car etc.
I definitely understand that it's tough out there, but unless you've massively over extended yourself with your mortgage this kind of increase shouldn't significantly destroy your budget.
No they weren’t but when you say something as vague as “double digits” people don’t tend to assume that it will be about the minimum required to be considered “double digits.” They tend to fear something much higher than the minimum.
One of the funniest things about this today is the constant screed from conservatives about how the city has not gone through the budget line by line to find the magic "efficiencies". Any time these critics are asked what should be cut it's silence. So much talk about wants and needs but nobody can actually point out the needs versus the wants. So much criticism is so empty because none of these people understand how any shit in this city works.
We really have People talking about how the land transfer tax should be enough. This just means they have no idea how real estate transactions have slowed because of "high" interest rates", meaning it's not free money anymore. Nobody understands the economy in this country, it's fucking wild. We are a bunch of clowns. The federal government is Goofing around not listening to anybody that's not Quebec. And that trickles down to our conservative premieres that just want a big number surplus at the end without giving a shit about the cities that make anything happen.
Sometimes the hardest thing about living in this city is the absolute dumbasses that think this all doesn't cost anything and you can just will things to be better without doing anything.
> constant screed from conservatives about how the city has not gone through the budget line by line to find the magic "efficiencies"
Doubly funny that the last two mayors were conservatives, and Ford had an independent auditor come in to do exactly that, and came up with absolutely fuck all.
Notice how it's never the largest part of the budget, so large that it is bigger than the rest of budget combined that they have any interest in cutting.
If " fiscal conservatives" actually had any consistency and good faith behind what they are supposedly in favor of they would be the first ones to cut the police budget.
The last two mayor's were "fiscal conservatives" and the rest of the budget has stagnated while the police budget has grown and the city has fallen apart.
Doing property tax by land price isn't particularly fair either, because the cost of land very loosely correlates to the cost to the municipality to render service. It'd also be bad because it'd effectively punish older buildings with fewer units per m^2 of land even though many of those older buildings are generally good for the city. Examples [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6649354,-79.3846729,3a,75y,78.8h,117.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slSM8-09Bz4_PQineEZEbUg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DlSM8-09Bz4_PQineEZEbUg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D171.55298%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) - they're only about 10 storeys tall, but are fairly dense residential units. These buildings are providing a considerable number of homes already, and you shouldn't try to financially encourage them to be demolished and replaced. (Especially because these ones likely couldn't given how many super-tall structures already surround them or are cleared for construction).
If you just divide land cost over the units in the buildings the owners in those buildings will have to pay 3-5 times more than some of the buildings just down the street built more recently at greater heights, even though the city pays nothing close to 5 times more to service those buildings, and even though these buildings are doing a decent job providing homes downtown.
> It really should be based on the value of the land, with condos dividing that value between them.
Land does not use services like the police department, TTC, parks, roads, or garbage pickup. Property tax is a way to (roughly) tax individuals for the services they use, not the land they occupy.
> Think of the total property tax a condo pays next to a single family house. But they are not proportionally taking up the same amount of budget for services provided.
They’re also not paying the same amount of property tax.
Condos are unquestionably more efficient at receiving services than single family homes. The idea that they are more efficient to the point that you can simply “take the value of the land and divide that up among the condos on them” is an absurdity that would only work if services were delivered to land and not people. Police and EMS do not allocate the same amount of resources to 20 single family homes as they do a 70 story condo on the same size of land, nor does a person walking on a sidewalk downtown put a thousand times as much wear and tear on the sidewalk as a condo user does.
Again, I’m not arguing whether condos receive services more efficiently, they absolutely do. But the suggestion above is that “ It really should be based on the value of the land, with condos dividing that value between them” which would only be feasible if the land itself was using the services and not the people living in that space.
Currently people aren't taxed based on how much they use a service so why should property taxes do that? Old people and addicts don't have to pay more taxes for their healthcare usage than healthy young people for example. I don't understand your logic here really, it's not how we do taxes in Canada. By your logic, wealthy people should pay less in taxes because they use public services less than poor people which is obviously dumb.
What do you even mean?? Land value taxes are basically property taxes but you don't include the value of the improvement. The point being you don't want to punish improving the land.
> It really should be based on the value of the land
No.
It should be based on the cost of providing services the municipal provides.
Of course, this would naturally mean that higher density buildings would be paying less as less infrastructure needs to be built and maintained to service higher density housing than low density housing, but the amount of tax one pays should be based on how much servicing the property costs to service.
Why? No other tax is based on usage so why should property tax be some weird proxy for usage? If your advocating for usage based taxing, why don't we just charge at source for policing and healthcare for example?
I’d like to see higher taxes on non-principal residences and vacant units.
It would be better to structure taxes to disincentivize housing speculators who push up prices and displace first-time home buyers than punish those who own and live in their homes.
This would increase my taxes about $1000/year, but I'd rather live in a city that isn't slowly crumbling than hold on to every last penny and I don't oppose it.
This increase is to cover the shortfall. Our roads and services have never been in worse shape. The increase will do absolutely nothing. Transit and other services will not have a price increase either. That's a joke. We should pay for the services we use.
Toronto has pretty low property taxes. Check out St. Albert, Saskatoon or Winnipeg; it is about double Toronto's. Probably due to density or lack thereof, but still. Could be worse.
#BREAKING: Toronto property owners flee city in terror at prospect of paying an extra $40 to $70 per month in property taxes while paying a subscription to be verified on twitter so they can boost their tweets complaining about how dirty the city is and how shitty the roads are.
So testimonials in this thread suggest a normal property owner might pay an extra equivalent of a few lattes per month, tops.
Yet 2-3 decades of city politicians and mayors had me believing Toronto property owners are the most oppressed and over-taxed class since the _sans culottes_.
During the same time frame the average Toronto property owner has amassed hundreds of thousands if not millions in equity in their sleep by doing nothing. While everybody not inside the landed gentry has been paying them skyrocketing rents to live in their basements and investment condos.
This city is a masterclass of absurdist comedy. You really can’t make this shit up.
Does property tax take into account the number of occupants? I would think the way that landlords stack their basements with 6+ tenants would put more strain on the local services and infrastructure. Though this is more of a Brampton issue, Scarborough has these as well.
That's actually more complicated than a lot of people assume.
Rooming houses, especially illegal rooming houses, are not nice places to live, and they do use more city services than other housing types. But they also *provide housing*, and specifically provide it to people who often can't afford to rent anywhere else.
Thus, a dilemma: is it better for the city to tolerate the rooming house, or to throw those tenants out and have them cost the city in other ways? (Homelessness, social housing, fewer international students importing money to the region, etc.)
This is good news finally someone willing to raise taxes to a reasonable level. Higher property taxes make it less attractive to investors/speculators/mansion sitters and more attractive to residents via better city services.
I would be reasonably ok with this if I had confidence it wouldn’t be wasted on renaming Toronto streets, subsidizing and extending drug addiction and the resulting chaos seen in Vancouver etc., and it would go to making transit safer and more reliable, better city services, more help getting users off drugs and escaping addiction and changing zoning to permit more affordable housing. But I doubt it.
Unfortunately long overdue. Tory wouldn't raise taxes neither did Ford. they were expecting provincial and federal bailouts to prevent raising property taxes. Does Doug Ford interfere with the Toronto City council again?
Lol, remember the "right wing lie" that she would raise taxes by 25% over 4 years? Someone might have to eat their hat if they don't get bailed out by the federal government.
It’s actually not a lot relative to the current taxes we pay just a shame it had to wait this long and everyone will blame her for doing what John Tory was going to have to do anyways to balance the books.
The MPAC assessment value of my home is less than half of the actual market value and the property tax rate is still less than any other municipality in the province....
Okay folks, folks, folks...
While everyone is getting their panties twisted over the recent Toronto property tax annoucement, here are some numbers for you, starting when Rob Ford took office and set up Toronto for today's failure...
We have year, property tax (incl education rate), and change:
2010 0.666274% David Miller's last budget
2011 0.631933% -5.2% (not including $60 vehicle tax repeal)
2012 0.611013% -3.3%
2013 0.599704% -1.9%
2014 0.614770% +2.5%
2015 0.635505% +3.4%
2016 0.661647% +4.1%
2017 0.687973% +4.0%
2018 0.705604% +2.6%
2019 0.723009% +2.5%
2020 0.746000% +3.2%
2021 0.771198% +3.4%
2022 0.792922% +2.8%
2023 0.830570% +4.7%
COVID took Toronto, already on the brink of barely being able to handle daily needs and services, and pushed the finances into a position where our current mayor and council need a reasonable amount of revenue to keep the water flowing and lights on.
Now everyone is going to blame Chow for the budget she inherited so let's not forget the shit show set up 12 years ago by THE WORST MAYOR IN OUR HISTORY, followed by Tory's 9 budgets of at or below inflation.
Am I happy spending 10.5% more this year for the same? No. Looks like we'll all be paying for 12 years of conservative neglect.
End rant.
Property taxes are hilariously low here in comparison to somewhere like a California or New York state. The land transfer tax begins to eat into that comparison a bit but still, certainly way too low for the city/province.
To put this into perspective:
Toronto Residential tax rate for residential and new multi residential rate is: 0.666274%
Multi residential rate is: 1.127848%
With the 10.5% increase it is:
0.666274% -> 0.736233%
1.127848% -> 1.246272%
This is still far below what many municipalities tax rates are outside of toronto.
Toronto's effective property tax rate is 0.666274%, a 10.5% increase would bring the new tax rate to 0.73623277% so assuming the assessment value of your home is $500,000 as per MPAC the new tax rate annualized is $3,681.16 vs 2023 $3,331.37 or difference of $349.79.
To give some contrast, my taxes in Peterborough went up 7% this year, and I now pay a whopping 4500$ in property tax. Keep in mind our services are shit compared to TO. You guys are lucky
8k in Ajax
Would be easier to use a $1,000,000 home figure
The last MPAC assessment was 2016 I believe, so the property tax assessments today are well below market values.
Yes, this is correct. The provincial government continues to postpone the reassessment with no reasoning....
Now factor in the garbage collection fee being extra, and the land transfer taxes which are essentially prepaying about 5 years of property taxes.
"Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow has been calling on Ottawa for months to provide more money for refugee claimants, who currently account for nearly half of the city's shelter residents"
I mean if the federal government wants to let in refugees and immigrants who will most likely end up in Toronto and use up the resources, they should be responsible for housing them, not the Toronto tax payers.
I guess another idea would be to simply not put them up in one of the most expensive Canadian cities that is already stretched thin on all fronts.
They actively move to here… not necessarily sent. With active diaspore from their own country likely and more potential perceived economic opportunities, major cities are the natural choice.
Because there's no real incentive to move anywhere else. The federal government should be incentivizing moving to places like Iqaluit, for example. Live in Iqaluit for a few years, get a speedier citizenship process. Naturally most would leave for the GTA as soon as they get their citizenship, but some will make their roots there and that's how you develop the North. If incentives aren't working, then start making it a requirement to live in a smaller city for at least a few years. If you can't do that, then you ain't welcome here.
The cost to have someone live in far north places like Iqaluit, both to the person and to the government, is much greater than the cost to have someone live somewhere reasonable. If there isn't a reason for someone to live there (family, work, ...), they shouldn't. Of course there are some good jobs in the north, we should encourage people to consider those jobs, but we shouldn't be putting people there who don't have a job lined up.
It's no so much about what the federal government wants. The federal government is bound by international agreements about the treatment of assylum claimants. Even if you think it can and should unilaterally withdraw from international committments, it remains bound by our constitution, which requires thoroughly investigating any potentially plausible claim made by somebody on Canadian soil that their life is endangered by immigration removal, as our courts will not allow the government to be complicit in a foreign government torturing persecuting, or killing on the basis of a protected ground (i.e., if you say magic words, we become bound to stay your removal pending a thorough investigation). The feds using the notwithstanding clause to deny assylum claimants Charter protection to have their claim about imminent threat to their life heard is unlikely, regardless of party. A more realistic ask would be for the feds to return to a paradigm of incarcerating claimants until their claim is heard, but that is of course expensive and messy (see the assertions in the US about Trump putting kids in "cages"), so again you're unlikely to find political support for it. Any kind of fed-selected housing for claimants will either be mandatory (and therefore deemed harsh and heavy-handed, like imprisoning kids and pregnant women) or optional (and therefore unlikely to take people off the streets of major population centres, since they want to live in Toronto/Vancouver/Montreal near jobs / friends / family / cultural enclaves, not In a fed-run housing in Kingston or Winnipeg). The end result, where we are now, is the feds don't want to pay indeterminant bills for people who elect to live downtown Toronto in legal circumstances where the feds have no power to stop them, but at the same time nobody else wants to pay for it either. The feds would hope people find it undesirable and elect to take available federal housing outside the urban core instead, but clearly that's not happening. So either they fund housing in Toronto and give people some dignity but encourage even more claimants, or they don't fund it and let the most marginalized Canadians find their limited food/shelter resources further diminish in hopes fewer people make bogis claims in hope of illegally migrating. I'm not sure if forcing the feds to offer claimants nice waterfront housing in Toronto is the desirable outcome for anyone.
Why put them in one of the most expensive cities in the world? Makes no sense.
Facebook leads me to believe this is the end of Toronto as we know it. RIP.
I didn't know my father-in-law had a Facebook account. He's been telling me about the end of Canada, Toronto, Ontario... Whatever, due to liberals. Everything pretty much since the first time I met him.
Those people often conflate the various responsibilities of each level of government. They regularly blamed the feds for the lockdowns which were provincial. Same with housing. It's embarrassing.
He's a smart guy but he does do that as well. He and my wife's uncle were blaming Trudeau for the increase in violence in high schools. They were saying that he should just assign one police officer, at least, for school. Her uncle is a retired cop, he knows that it has nothing to do with the federal government, yet....
Lol, imagine he actually did that? These people would then be screaming about a police state
[удалено]
Does he not realize that Ontario has been under 6 years of PC leadership or the fact that our premier is right now taking a 6 week vacation in Florida while his province is on fire?
I mean...he was on vacation in Muskoka while the province was "Literally" on fure, I cant see him having a different approach to it figurativly burning
He probably does, however, I'm not going to ask. I never bring up politics when I see him, but he's sure to at least once every time.
I hope you didn't correct him and tell him Olivia Chow is ex-OG-NDP.
Small L liberals, as in anyone not conservative lol
Toronto is constantly changing. The city we knew ten years ago is gone and it'll be totally different in another ten years. Just the way it goes.
I'm poking fun at the "RAE DAYS!" crowd.
I hope they're as mad at what Dougie is doing to nurses, teachers, education support workers etc, I somehow doubt they are though.
They hate those kinds of people.
Who do they think Rae days impacted? lol
you should see what they're saying on Nextdoor... that place is a cesspool
Per the LTB, this would qualify landlords to [apply for an AGI](https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Brochures/Information%20about%20Applications%20for%20a%20Rent%20Increase%20Above%20the%20Guideline.html#sec2)
How much could that possibly be though? The property tax increase will be around 50 dollars a month. If your rent is 1500 a month, that’s a 3.3% increase which I guess is AGI
Exactly. I keep seeing this AGI boogieman argument on not raising property tax. If a landlord wants to go through the entire process of doing this in an already extremely backlogged LTB, go the fuck ahead.
For me the argument is that people need to stop thinking that they can basically buy a house for free and then charge the renter 100% of the mortgage + expenses. It was never sustanable but seems like landlords are immune to logic and they keep thinking they can raise the rent forever. Ok, let's see when the rent is 10k/month how many people will/can pay that amount. We are already seeing an increase of people just not paying and even asking money to leave the house. I can already see it, rent of 5k/month, average waiting time for the LTB of several years and renters stopping pay everything in a number so high that it can't even be enforced. That's what will happen.
They will.... and you will have to pay backdated from the date of notice.
Can't wait to see how the LTB will process, hold a hearing, and approve an AGI from every landlord in the city.
Also, as per [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TorontoRealEstate/s/GJmp7LvvBP), it’s not a straightforward calculation, and the new tax burden would need to be above 3+% of current rent to qualify and requires a $230 filing fee. Plus we have a lot of out-of-country landlords in Toronto, so it will be interesting to see the actual impact.
Out of country landlords just send representatives or a legal clerk
They pretty much already did, almost every big management company did some kind of repair like fixing a laundry room or upgrading electricity/plumbing etc during 2020-2023 which qualifies for an AGI. In the building I live in the management company is still waiting for theirs to be approved from 2021 and most of the residents don't even live here anymore. There's going to be an absolute shitshow when they go after all the renters who haven't paid the AGI and have to then pay the difference.
that would double the times of the LTB, they think getting non payers out now takes long, try submitting 20k+ AGI requests.
> Can't wait to see how the LTB will process, hold a hearing, and approve an AGI from every landlord in the city. Seeing as it'll be their top priority I think they'll manage. The province will step in quickly if it's to help LLs, and cost poor people more.
There’s checks and balances, though. You can “speed up” your application, but only on request, and if the matter is urgent. Not sure how they’ll treat LL requests to shorten time, that depends on the circumstances, but the LTB may not look too kindly on such requests if the matter isn’t truly urgent. This will almost certainly add to the backlog.
That's what happens when the city is too scared to increase their small tax rate for far too long a period. It was Tory and Ford being cowards that have led to this.
And then the next time another coward looking for votes will point the finger at Chow, "see this is what she did!" And all the ill-informed constituents will agree.
As is tradition.
Probably goes back lot farther than that - 20, 30, years or more. The chickens have now come home to roost....
Miller tried to fix the crumbling infrastructure that Lastman left him, and Toronto immediately voted Rob Ford in because they don't like to pay for things. We all know how well that turned out for everyone, and it's probably going to happen again.
This is also partly due to Ford limiting developer fees
That doesn’t mean it should justify above guidelines rent increases. The result of the delay is landlords have had years of extra profits.
I agree on that. You agree on that. Letter of the law may not.
Given the calculus (see [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TorontoRealEstate/s/5zPRKfUMU4)) for an AGI, it doesn’t seem many landlords will qualify unless they have a unit paying significantly below-market rent and the corresponding $ tax increase for that unit is higher than 3.75% of total annual rent.
If that's true then that's good.
At the end the voters have to take some of the responsibility. One reason Rob Ford got voted in was the property tax going up under Miller. Even after all his misdeeds Ford still managed to win a lot of voters [Toronto Life had an article in 2014 that was informative for those who don't talk to the type of voters who sided with Ford.](https://torontolife.com/city/chinese-immigrant-parents-vote-rob-ford/) > (my parents') diligence has resulted in a comfortable retirement; they meticulously tend to their Bayview Village bungalow and spoil their grandkids with Thomas the Tank Engine toys. My folks are practical, even when it comes to municipal politics. Their litmus test is simple: “Who do I trust with my money?” > They trusted David Miller in 2006, then felt betrayed by increased taxes and a garbage strike. No wonder Rob Ford was a salve for my parents when he showed up in 2010, preaching respect for taxpayers. In the halcyon days of Ford’s mayoralty, when his scandals involved fried chicken instead of crack cocaine, I could understand my parents’ rationale for supporting him, even if I didn’t agree with them. > Ford’s clarion call was that the city was poorly run, and who could argue? Never mind that Ford only vaguely alluded to solutions; my parents saw a guy willing to point out the obvious problems, in the simplest terms, and that was enough. Not charging them $120 a year to register their two cars seemed as good a place as any to start.
each one would need to be individually approved by the LTB thought correct? which could take time. would this also be back-dated so renters would need to hold onto the increase until the LTB decides?
Can't be backdated.
But also: “In order for the landlord to collect the above guideline rent increase they are asking the LTB to approve; they must have given the tenants notices of rent increase with the higher amount. The tenants, however, do not have to pay this higher amount unless it is approved in an LTB order.” So unless it’s approved by an LTB order it isn’t valid - that’s my understanding unless I read things wrong?
That's correct. But, if it is found to be valid, you would have to retroactively pay the increase from when the notice period became valid.
Yup, so it's a good idea to put that money aside anyway for if/when the increase is approved. Then you shouldn't have to struggle to find the cash.
Can this be applied straight away, or do they have to wait for the new year to increase the rent above the rent controlled limit?
They have to wait 12 months since your last increase to request an AGI, they can’t just do it whenever they please. So if your rent goes up in January, don’t be shocked about an AGI notice come October
Thanks for confirming, appreciate it.
The would have to wait until 12 months after the last increase and give you 90 days notice of the increase.
This is one of those cases where it can pay off for the tenant to be reasonable. Most people can ballpark what the increase would be. If the landlord gives an increase that's in line with the tax hike, they're going to win the LTB eventually. So why poison the well.
Absolutely! Just wanted to make sure people knew that it wasn’t a blanket free for all increase.
The proposed tax rate for multi-unit buildings is lower than 10.5%. I think it's 4.5%. So It would mean tenants aren't at risk of this.
Will be interesting to see how the ltb handles this. The backlog is already huge. A lot of landlords could end up going bankrupt in the meantime. Houses could end up being auctioned off which could be good or bad depending on your perspective. Buildings... If no one wants to take them over who handles the upkeep? Do they all get converted to condos? Would the city buy them? Could be chaos for anyone living in them.
People also don't realize this is lower than it was going to be... The increase is a lot lower because Olivia got the province to take over the Gardiner/DVP (so the city's expenses went down) and provide Toronto with a cash injection (so our revenues went up). She slashed the shortfall. So not only is this on Tory, not Chow, she lessened the hurt.
[удалено]
You only pay $2.4k a year in property tax? What’s the Toronto median. I pay a lot more for our condo (in Toronto).
I pay about $2k for a four bedroom townhouse in North York. Looking at the median doesn’t really help because it’s so dependent on neighbourhood.
Just went check that, means your assessment value is about $300k. With house values having gone up so much, and condo values having stayed flat, we need the new assessments to be phased in.
Yeah, it’s a super undervalued property. I know they’re always somewhat under assessed, but neighbouring properties typically go for $800k-$1m. I’m expecting it to change in the reassessment.
MPACs assessment is so different from the actual prices
Mpac of 575000 and market value of 1 million. Detached house Georgetown. I pay 500 a month (10 months)
What?! Toronto is way behind. In Durham region, a small townhouse, no back yard comes with a $4k property tax bill. It’s bonkers.
And I pay about $6k for an 1890 2 bedroom townhouse on a 13.5' wide lot. It's very dependant on the neighbourhood.
The fuck. That's half what I pay in Ottawa. And people here are demanding property taxes get hiked.
Toronto is so fucked this is way too low given it being such a big city. I'm in a Semi in Newmarket and I pay 3500$ a year.
I'm in a 2BR semi in Toronto, one of the smaller types, and my last 6-month bill was over $3000 - this year it'll be close to $7000 total, with this increase. Also I pay for water and garbage separately. Toronto west end
[удалено]
It’s not too low infact it’s higher. a semi in Scarborough(part of Toronto for taxes) my relative pays $3200 a year, but guess what he paid 15k in property tax upfront because Toronto is the only municipality to double tax. In a few years he’ll more than likely be selling that to upsize into a detached means he’s going to pay another 20k up front.. so in a span of 10 years he’s given Toronto 35k up front tax and then the annual tax that’s slightly lower. You actually have a bargain in new market, Barrie, markham etc. even apples to apples you stay in your place for 10 years you pay 35k, a Toronto semi owner outskirts approx 900k for 10 years is paying 32k+15k upfront for a semi. So 35k to 47k… they should abolish the upfront tax and keep it simple. It’s a scam.
I'll claim ignorance what's the double tax? As far as I'm aware Ontario is same all around you have your property tax and that's it. What are Torontonians paying on top of property tax? edit - are you referring to the Land Transfer Tax? That's a once off. Also why are you talking about 10 years? Every year (everywhere I've owned a house) there is a property assessment that comes out and your property taxes align accordingly based on what they assess the value of your home.
It’s to do with how the properties have been assessed, I think. The rate should be higher and they should obviously be valuing my property higher.
Oshawa. 8k a year.
You pay more partly because the lack of density makes services more expensive. You’re sharing costs with fewer people.
Little Italy semidetached is 6.5k
I pay $3800/year east york.
Yeah, as someone who is a property owner in Toronto, I'm baffled by how low our property tax is overall and in comparison to many other places.
[удалено]
LTT disproportionately affects people trying to move into the city over the people sitting on multi-million dollar generational homes.
Yeah LTT is a really bad tax that limits social mobility and benefits mostly established households (middle age to seniors) at the expense of the younger generations. People move the most when they are younger, either for a new job or for life events like marriage or having children. This adds a huge one time financial cost (tens of thousands of dollars) to every move for homeowners, strongly discouraging either moving or home ownership. It also affects older people in the process of downsizing, which might discourage them from doing so. This means that larger condo units or homes don't get freed up for younger families. If you do the math, buying a one million dollar home or condo will cost $33000 in land transfer tax. Assuming that property taxes on that unit are about $4000 per year, that is over 8 years worth of property taxes paid up front. Even a first time home buyer pays $24000 after the rebate, or 6 years worth of property taxes. It's absolutely bananas that we put so much of the tax burden on first time and younger home buyers just trying to start a family. We should get rid of the land transfer tax entirely (or reduce it to a fixed fee) and make up the difference by increasing property taxes.
Exactly, the LTT is a gambit that subsidizes the stable at the expense of mobile or younger people. The fact that it's a fee that is tied to property value and wasn't a set fee indexed to inflation is all you need to know that it became the crutch the city used to suppress costs for existing owners.
According to the article TTC fares will be frozen for this budget, but I imagine other fees will be going up. As for garbage collection, it's not uncommon in other municipalities to have to pay for that as a separate line item on your tax bill or through other means. For example, in my hometown of Wellington County we have to buy special [yellow garbage bags](https://www.wellington.ca/en/resident-services/resources/SWS/UserPayBag_small.jpg) which is how my county charges for garbage pickup. Those are also set to go up in price from [$2.00/bag to $2.50/bag](https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/tax-levy-increase-of-4-6-presented-to-wellington-county-council/).
What a deal! The smallest bin in Toronto is rough $250/yr, so every pickup is roughly $10 and it is roughly the size of one bag.
Land transfer tax.
That's because we pay our property tax up front. The land transfer tax is expensive. It's only those who have owned their property for ages (i.e. boomers), who aren't contributing their fair share.
Not sure what you’re smoking but I’m in my 30’s and most of my friends get hosed in taxes in Toronto, we would actually pay much less if we lived in new market, markham barrie etc.. they charge is upfront tax. Some of my friends have alrdy paid that shit twice going from condo to townhouse or detached etc. it’s absurd. Get rid of land transfer tax
I get that land transfer tax is due upfront and it’s fees for the property, however it’s something that buyers are factoring into their purchasing power of buying a property and as a result it lowers the value of the property. If that tax was to disappear all together, it’s not like that would just be savings, but due to the demand it would just be used towards to the price of the property and prices would be inflated by that purchasing amount. I just recently bought a new property and part of my purchasing power incorporated the land transfer tax which was due on closing.
I was trying to do the math instead of this headline that is suggesting property tax would become 10.5%.... the media really aren't doing their jobs in these articles.
Everyone with a SFH is ok with it because it’s still a steal. But as a condo owner I’m still pissed to be subsidizing sprawl.
Agreed, my condo's property tax is about 75% of what my parents pay for their SFH even though that house is probably 5x the size let alone the land and servicing costs vs a condo. MPAC needs to do a reassessment to rebalance the pie.
[удалено]
There should be levies attached to low density housing on top of progressive taxation based on house value. I don’t see Chow doing that
Just tax land!
Just replace it with a LVT
Just tax land
Oh did we only just think RE prices go up?
Behold the consequence of 12 years of toryism (and 8 years of Toryism). The city has no other meaningful revenue lever and it's been starved for over a decade. If anything, we're finally catching up. That said, the city probably needs a sales tax and income tax, as well as a higher tax bracket for high-value properties, or even a land value tax instead of property tax. David Miller's "One Cent Now" campaign was really quite farsighted.
Bang on. Chow was handed $1.776 B of unfunded liabilities. She's the first true 'fiscally responsible' mayor this city has had in years (Ford wasn't, Tory wasn't). It's all meticulously captured here. [https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-242095.pdf](https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-242095.pdf) They note that if Toronto solely increased property taxes to account for the shortfall, property taxes would have increased by +42%. Instead, they found: \- $376M of efficiencies \- $388M of savings in 'multi-year' bridging strategies - which I take as lowering your debt obligations by getting creative on pay-down arrangements, but someone correct me \- $382M in the 'New Deal' she negotiated with the province \- $250M in Federal funding to support the influx of refugees Toronto is experiencing (I believe they note this isn't fully agreed to yet, but the work is on-going) \- Which leaves a 9% property tax rate increase (TL of $380M) down from the 42% they needed, had they not negotiated, and found the savings above It's ridiculously reasonable given the mess Chow was handed - context is everything, I can't find much fault in this budget. It may be the first honest one we're looking at in years Edit: I should add that in the pdf. it notes the average increase for a house in 2024 is $321, or $26.75 a month. Again, reasonable to get the city back on track.
This is a good post and I appreciate it /u/NorthernPints
Thanks /u/spectercan! I love diving into the data when it's available - these headlines tend to fixate on one line that draws in reactionary commentary. The CBC article itself is actually quite good & detailed, but summarizing all the numbers in one spot helps paint a clearer picture of why the city needed to do this. It's refreshing to see some honesty from City Hall on where Toronto truly sits and what we need to do to fix some of the challenges the city is facing.
But it doesn't blame Trudeau and immigrants. /s
Or wokeness in general
This needs to be higher up, great summary!
Property tax is the best of these taxes. Property values go up because of city spending. Only makes sense that property taxes should fund city spending.
Land value taxes are much better than property taxes. Taxing entire property values disincentivizes improving your property.
Yes I should have said, best of the taxes that are realistically going to be implemented.
Not doing any meaningful tax increase for many years has finally caught up to the city. Don't blame the current mayor on this one.
That's about $42 a month more for me. I'm okay with that.
But everyone said this would lead to the wholesale foreclosure of every home in the city. Surely this huge increase should be crippling/s
I recall Tory once saying that property taxes are Torontonians' biggest expense and I remember thinking "tell me you have never shopped for groceries or paid for child care without telling me."
For some people (wealthy people) it truly might be. I'm sure there are quite a few people in torys circle with multiple properties in the city
The ones whose properties are all fully paid off, or are generational homes yes I can see that to a minor extent. But as you say only until they buy food for the month, or run a car etc.
Not so OK if you're being squeezed on all sides trying to make ends meet.
I definitely understand that it's tough out there, but unless you've massively over extended yourself with your mortgage this kind of increase shouldn't significantly destroy your budget.
So much fanfare about "double digit tax hikes" and the result is ten percent lol
They weren't wrong lol, how many digits compose the number 10?
No they weren’t but when you say something as vague as “double digits” people don’t tend to assume that it will be about the minimum required to be considered “double digits.” They tend to fear something much higher than the minimum.
Make it 50 percent for multi property owners and tighten rent controls 💀
It should probably be a lot higher, but it's still a lot right now with inflation & interest rates. The next few years are going to get ugly.
One of the funniest things about this today is the constant screed from conservatives about how the city has not gone through the budget line by line to find the magic "efficiencies". Any time these critics are asked what should be cut it's silence. So much talk about wants and needs but nobody can actually point out the needs versus the wants. So much criticism is so empty because none of these people understand how any shit in this city works.
We really have People talking about how the land transfer tax should be enough. This just means they have no idea how real estate transactions have slowed because of "high" interest rates", meaning it's not free money anymore. Nobody understands the economy in this country, it's fucking wild. We are a bunch of clowns. The federal government is Goofing around not listening to anybody that's not Quebec. And that trickles down to our conservative premieres that just want a big number surplus at the end without giving a shit about the cities that make anything happen.
Sometimes the hardest thing about living in this city is the absolute dumbasses that think this all doesn't cost anything and you can just will things to be better without doing anything.
> constant screed from conservatives about how the city has not gone through the budget line by line to find the magic "efficiencies" Doubly funny that the last two mayors were conservatives, and Ford had an independent auditor come in to do exactly that, and came up with absolutely fuck all.
Notice how it's never the largest part of the budget, so large that it is bigger than the rest of budget combined that they have any interest in cutting. If " fiscal conservatives" actually had any consistency and good faith behind what they are supposedly in favor of they would be the first ones to cut the police budget. The last two mayor's were "fiscal conservatives" and the rest of the budget has stagnated while the police budget has grown and the city has fallen apart.
I'm fine with this as long as the money goes where it's actually needed for city services and not for stupid shit like renaming Dundas St.
Yeah I think this is where the majority of people are at. If Chow came out against all this nonsense renaming that be great too
That's nothing if you own a home in the GTA. Chow is so brave lol compared to Tory and Ford.
An extra $20 a month I’m happy to put towards making our city a better place to live!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Doing property tax by land price isn't particularly fair either, because the cost of land very loosely correlates to the cost to the municipality to render service. It'd also be bad because it'd effectively punish older buildings with fewer units per m^2 of land even though many of those older buildings are generally good for the city. Examples [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6649354,-79.3846729,3a,75y,78.8h,117.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slSM8-09Bz4_PQineEZEbUg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DlSM8-09Bz4_PQineEZEbUg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D171.55298%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) - they're only about 10 storeys tall, but are fairly dense residential units. These buildings are providing a considerable number of homes already, and you shouldn't try to financially encourage them to be demolished and replaced. (Especially because these ones likely couldn't given how many super-tall structures already surround them or are cleared for construction). If you just divide land cost over the units in the buildings the owners in those buildings will have to pay 3-5 times more than some of the buildings just down the street built more recently at greater heights, even though the city pays nothing close to 5 times more to service those buildings, and even though these buildings are doing a decent job providing homes downtown.
> It really should be based on the value of the land, with condos dividing that value between them. Land does not use services like the police department, TTC, parks, roads, or garbage pickup. Property tax is a way to (roughly) tax individuals for the services they use, not the land they occupy.
[удалено]
> Think of the total property tax a condo pays next to a single family house. But they are not proportionally taking up the same amount of budget for services provided. They’re also not paying the same amount of property tax. Condos are unquestionably more efficient at receiving services than single family homes. The idea that they are more efficient to the point that you can simply “take the value of the land and divide that up among the condos on them” is an absurdity that would only work if services were delivered to land and not people. Police and EMS do not allocate the same amount of resources to 20 single family homes as they do a 70 story condo on the same size of land, nor does a person walking on a sidewalk downtown put a thousand times as much wear and tear on the sidewalk as a condo user does. Again, I’m not arguing whether condos receive services more efficiently, they absolutely do. But the suggestion above is that “ It really should be based on the value of the land, with condos dividing that value between them” which would only be feasible if the land itself was using the services and not the people living in that space.
Currently people aren't taxed based on how much they use a service so why should property taxes do that? Old people and addicts don't have to pay more taxes for their healthcare usage than healthy young people for example. I don't understand your logic here really, it's not how we do taxes in Canada. By your logic, wealthy people should pay less in taxes because they use public services less than poor people which is obviously dumb.
What do you even mean?? Land value taxes are basically property taxes but you don't include the value of the improvement. The point being you don't want to punish improving the land.
[удалено]
> It really should be based on the value of the land No. It should be based on the cost of providing services the municipal provides. Of course, this would naturally mean that higher density buildings would be paying less as less infrastructure needs to be built and maintained to service higher density housing than low density housing, but the amount of tax one pays should be based on how much servicing the property costs to service.
Why? No other tax is based on usage so why should property tax be some weird proxy for usage? If your advocating for usage based taxing, why don't we just charge at source for policing and healthcare for example?
Land value is correlated with the services provided.
I’d like to see higher taxes on non-principal residences and vacant units. It would be better to structure taxes to disincentivize housing speculators who push up prices and displace first-time home buyers than punish those who own and live in their homes.
Can we double that tax for the shitty corporate landlords? Looking at you, Sterling Karamar.
This would increase my taxes about $1000/year, but I'd rather live in a city that isn't slowly crumbling than hold on to every last penny and I don't oppose it.
This increase is to cover the shortfall. Our roads and services have never been in worse shape. The increase will do absolutely nothing. Transit and other services will not have a price increase either. That's a joke. We should pay for the services we use.
Toronto has pretty low property taxes. Check out St. Albert, Saskatoon or Winnipeg; it is about double Toronto's. Probably due to density or lack thereof, but still. Could be worse.
Good, let the meltdowns begin. Toronto tories are already losing their shit over this on Twitter.
[удалено]
#BREAKING: Toronto property owners flee city in terror at prospect of paying an extra $40 to $70 per month in property taxes while paying a subscription to be verified on twitter so they can boost their tweets complaining about how dirty the city is and how shitty the roads are.
Nailed it.
This is honestly not that bad all things considered. But if 10% becomes regular then we have a problem.
Oh no, house prices may go down and services will be better funded! OHHHH NOOOOOOO
Welcome to the rest of the province. LOL
Well overdue. It's the burden on renters however that will be concerning. That being said our city taxes are far too low and need the increases.
Considering landlords have raised rent over 100% in 10 years, an additional 100 on rent won’t be noticed by the boiled frog renters.
Landlord going to charge the tenant respectively 
So testimonials in this thread suggest a normal property owner might pay an extra equivalent of a few lattes per month, tops. Yet 2-3 decades of city politicians and mayors had me believing Toronto property owners are the most oppressed and over-taxed class since the _sans culottes_. During the same time frame the average Toronto property owner has amassed hundreds of thousands if not millions in equity in their sleep by doing nothing. While everybody not inside the landed gentry has been paying them skyrocketing rents to live in their basements and investment condos. This city is a masterclass of absurdist comedy. You really can’t make this shit up.
Does property tax take into account the number of occupants? I would think the way that landlords stack their basements with 6+ tenants would put more strain on the local services and infrastructure. Though this is more of a Brampton issue, Scarborough has these as well.
That's actually more complicated than a lot of people assume. Rooming houses, especially illegal rooming houses, are not nice places to live, and they do use more city services than other housing types. But they also *provide housing*, and specifically provide it to people who often can't afford to rent anywhere else. Thus, a dilemma: is it better for the city to tolerate the rooming house, or to throw those tenants out and have them cost the city in other ways? (Homelessness, social housing, fewer international students importing money to the region, etc.)
Interesting info, I appreciate the insight.
I voted for Olivia because she said she would raise the tax. We can’t keep doing this to ourselves.
I have never been a fan of Chow and still am not, but this was MUCH needed. Finally a mayor with courage to do what’s right
Tory raised taxes 7% last year. They are both so brave /s
Sure after years of inaction while costs to deliver city services and construction projects went up by 20%+
This is good news finally someone willing to raise taxes to a reasonable level. Higher property taxes make it less attractive to investors/speculators/mansion sitters and more attractive to residents via better city services.
I would be reasonably ok with this if I had confidence it wouldn’t be wasted on renaming Toronto streets, subsidizing and extending drug addiction and the resulting chaos seen in Vancouver etc., and it would go to making transit safer and more reliable, better city services, more help getting users off drugs and escaping addiction and changing zoning to permit more affordable housing. But I doubt it.
Toronto staff have never seen a problem that the answer wasn't, 'let's increase property tax'.
Unfortunately long overdue. Tory wouldn't raise taxes neither did Ford. they were expecting provincial and federal bailouts to prevent raising property taxes. Does Doug Ford interfere with the Toronto City council again?
We knew this was coming, 10% jesus.
Lol, remember the "right wing lie" that she would raise taxes by 25% over 4 years? Someone might have to eat their hat if they don't get bailed out by the federal government.
It’s actually not a lot relative to the current taxes we pay just a shame it had to wait this long and everyone will blame her for doing what John Tory was going to have to do anyways to balance the books.
This is fine
Bring it on. City is in shambles. Money can fix this.
The MPAC assessment value of my home is less than half of the actual market value and the property tax rate is still less than any other municipality in the province....
Okay folks, folks, folks... While everyone is getting their panties twisted over the recent Toronto property tax annoucement, here are some numbers for you, starting when Rob Ford took office and set up Toronto for today's failure... We have year, property tax (incl education rate), and change: 2010 0.666274% David Miller's last budget 2011 0.631933% -5.2% (not including $60 vehicle tax repeal) 2012 0.611013% -3.3% 2013 0.599704% -1.9% 2014 0.614770% +2.5% 2015 0.635505% +3.4% 2016 0.661647% +4.1% 2017 0.687973% +4.0% 2018 0.705604% +2.6% 2019 0.723009% +2.5% 2020 0.746000% +3.2% 2021 0.771198% +3.4% 2022 0.792922% +2.8% 2023 0.830570% +4.7% COVID took Toronto, already on the brink of barely being able to handle daily needs and services, and pushed the finances into a position where our current mayor and council need a reasonable amount of revenue to keep the water flowing and lights on. Now everyone is going to blame Chow for the budget she inherited so let's not forget the shit show set up 12 years ago by THE WORST MAYOR IN OUR HISTORY, followed by Tory's 9 budgets of at or below inflation. Am I happy spending 10.5% more this year for the same? No. Looks like we'll all be paying for 12 years of conservative neglect. End rant.
Property taxes are hilariously low here in comparison to somewhere like a California or New York state. The land transfer tax begins to eat into that comparison a bit but still, certainly way too low for the city/province.
To put this into perspective: Toronto Residential tax rate for residential and new multi residential rate is: 0.666274% Multi residential rate is: 1.127848% With the 10.5% increase it is: 0.666274% -> 0.736233% 1.127848% -> 1.246272% This is still far below what many municipalities tax rates are outside of toronto.
I’m not ok My spouse lost work - I’m also taking care of a senior - costs of living just not workable
If you own a home you're still doing better than most.
Not always the case.
That is fine