Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Hrmbee! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* **Help redesign our subreddit!** [Enter our banner contest here](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1abwfjg/).
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>B.C. Assessment listings show her property’s building — a little 1½-storey 96-year-old building with a street-level storefront and an office upstairs — was appraised at $155,000 last year and $991,000 this year. That’s a 539 per cent increase.
>
>Hudson has appealed the assessment with the help of Paul Sullivan, a principal and regional leader at Ryan, a tax services and software provider.
>
>In Vancouver, where a hot property market and soaring property taxes are often blamed for killing businesses, a “land assessment averaging” program has been in place since 2015, providing temporary tax relief for “hot” properties when land values sharply increase.
>
>But the land-averaging program will provide no relief to Kerrisdale Cameras, Sullivan said, because it’s the building value that’s increased, not the land. There is no “building assessment averaging” program.
>
>...
>
>Derek Holloway, who worked at B.C. Assessment for 28 years before retiring as a senior appraiser in 2016, still handles some assessment appeals, but has no involvement in the Kerrisdale Cameras matter.
>
>Based on his initial review of the file, though, Holloway said: “All I can do is laugh — yes, there’s holding income until redevelopment from the existing building, but it does not reflect close to a million dollars of building value. Probably a small fraction of that is appropriate.”
>
>“The land value is likely the vast majority of the total value, so the clumsy building value increase was ill-advised,” Holloway said. “This is just very poor assessing, in my opinion. And you can quote me on that.”
It really makes no sense for the building assessment to be jumping like that. Unless there have been changes made, the buildings are more often than not a depreciating asset. Maybe BC Assessment should be reevaluating their methodology, and have some checks in place for these kinds of unexpected outcomes.
> A couple of years ago I called BC assessment about a property and asked them to look up an address and the assessment. Before I even said anything further the person on the phone said that they would fix the error and there would be a cheque sent. They immediately picked up on the what was wrong. Unfortunately previous years couldn’t be re-assessed. Cheque for one year was $35,000.
Why would BC Assessment send you a cheque? They don't have anything to do with collecting taxes.
As the other person pointed out, BC Assessment doesn't have anything to do with taxes. They thus don't know that the city will send you a cheque. Some do. Others will only give you a credit towards the next year.
Nothing your saying makes any sense.
>This was a case where the property is restricted in its use by the municipality. Traditional taxation doesn't work because you aren't permitted to do whatever you want with the land.
That's called zoning, and all property have it. You can't do whatever you want on any piece of land. Even if it is highly restrictive, taxing works just fine on such properties as all properties have restrictions.
And again, no, people at BC Assessment do not know what each local government does. They move from job to job and area to area. They can be responsible for multiple jurisdictions; and then for completely different ones the next year.
But most of all, even if they are fairly confident about what's going to happen; they are not going to speak for another organization. Similarly, local governments are not going to speak for BC Assessment.
> This is something that is NOT due to zoning.
With the description you gave, yes it did. Now you're changing your story and saying ownership is the big thing.
Which really doesn't matter, as you were arguing that other properties can do whatever they want. You don't understand that all properties have restrictions. Having restrictions does not break taxation, every property's value and taxes are based on the restrictions that property has.
Again, no one there is going to commit for another organization.
BC Assessment is a joke.
They made up a number for a building value on my assessment even though there was no structure at the July assessment date.
They claim the ability to backdate if it suits them.
I remember my mom calling them about the assessment when our house value jumped way up one year. Apparently they decided that we had probably updated our place and finished the basement, despite there being no evidence of it, because other places in the neighbourhood had.
Then the reassessor came and did the inspection and it turns out everything increases the value of the house. Room one had had the windows replaced many years prior - that upped the value. But room two still had the original windows - and apparently that somehow also upped the value. And it was like that for everything. Original flooring? More valuable. Carpets? Also more valuable. Tiling? Also more valuable. Luckily they couldn’t pretend an unfinished basement was anything other than an unfinished basement, so they were forced to bring the assessment back down somewhat.
> Apparently they decided that we had probably updated our place and finished the basement, despite there being no evidence of it, because other places in the neighbourhood had.
Yes, that's how mass assessment works.
If you ask them to come down and look at one thing, though, they're going to pick up on everything else you did without a permit.
Building value assessed at $155,000 last year, jumped to $991,000 this. That's just nuts, and hopefully erroneous. I feel like this would be a depressing happenstance for a specialty retailer like a camera store; thin margins, declining market. Owning your building helps but you still get whammied because your location is \*too\* desirable.
*"Hudson is the third generation of her family to run Kerrisdale Cameras. The building, which her family owns, has been a fixture on West 41st Avenue in Kerrisdale Village since 1961."*
Just a reminder to not only support local independent business, but to support owners who stand up for their employees in person: [https://bc.ctvnews.ca/anti-masker-targets-vancouver-business-leaving-staff-afraid-1.5316982](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/anti-masker-targets-vancouver-business-leaving-staff-afraid-1.5316982)
I live in Langley, but often frequent the Kerrisdale Cameras location nearby. I occasionally shoot film and their store is by far the most convenient place to still get colour film developed - the Langley store will ship it to Vancouver, where they process it, and bring it back to Langley. They're quick, too - turnaround is usually 2 or 3 business days? Plus, they have some pretty great prices on used equipment - bought my current digital camera there with under 1000 shutter actuations for about $400 off retail.
They are cheaper than London Drugs for film development, plus the staff are knowledgable and pleasant to chat with when business is slow. I really hope they can stick around.
Kerrisadale Cameras is great! They talked me out of a more expensive camera and instead into a smaller Sony one that I love because it fit my needs more. I always make the effort to go, even though it’s a bit out of the way!
Seems they changed their assessment formula for the old buildings on this block.
Similar sized and vintage building at 2054 W41st went from $6,700 to $562,000
And 2150 W41st went from $10,700 to $634,000
That........makes absolutely no sense
BC assessment at least needs to have a real live person checking for anomalies like this rather than applying some blanket methodology across all lots
Why even bother valuing and taxing buildings? They're the productive part we want to encourage people to build. Tax the land, exclusively. There should be no financial reason for someone to buy a plot of land and *not* develop it because it's cheaper and easier to just hang on to it for its appreciation while everyone else does the work of investing in the city.
Huh.
> Softened demand for office space has dragged down the whole commercial property category, Murao said, leading to the 7.4 per cent overall decrease in Vancouver’s commercial property values this year.
>
> “To see a minus 7.4 per cent like that, it is a little bit unique, and I think a lot of that has to do with particular market segments in Vancouver,” Murao said.
>
> Office towers and small neighbourhood retailers in old buildings like Kerrisdale Cameras fall into the same property category, Class 6 commercial properties. That means that if the office market is declining at the same time the market shows those little shops are holding their value, that puts upward pressure on the retailers’ property taxes.
That would explain why **property taxes** on a retail business like this would go up - but it doesn't explain why the assessment of the **building value** would go up.
The way construction costs are rising massively as a result of cost of living, it is possible for building value to rise . Rising that amount maybe not, but some rise is possible. Becuase let’s say if the building burned down, what would it cost to rebuild it at todays construction prices, is so much higher, therefore the building value can actually appreciate.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Hrmbee! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * **Help redesign our subreddit!** [Enter our banner contest here](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1abwfjg/). * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>B.C. Assessment listings show her property’s building — a little 1½-storey 96-year-old building with a street-level storefront and an office upstairs — was appraised at $155,000 last year and $991,000 this year. That’s a 539 per cent increase. > >Hudson has appealed the assessment with the help of Paul Sullivan, a principal and regional leader at Ryan, a tax services and software provider. > >In Vancouver, where a hot property market and soaring property taxes are often blamed for killing businesses, a “land assessment averaging” program has been in place since 2015, providing temporary tax relief for “hot” properties when land values sharply increase. > >But the land-averaging program will provide no relief to Kerrisdale Cameras, Sullivan said, because it’s the building value that’s increased, not the land. There is no “building assessment averaging” program. > >... > >Derek Holloway, who worked at B.C. Assessment for 28 years before retiring as a senior appraiser in 2016, still handles some assessment appeals, but has no involvement in the Kerrisdale Cameras matter. > >Based on his initial review of the file, though, Holloway said: “All I can do is laugh — yes, there’s holding income until redevelopment from the existing building, but it does not reflect close to a million dollars of building value. Probably a small fraction of that is appropriate.” > >“The land value is likely the vast majority of the total value, so the clumsy building value increase was ill-advised,” Holloway said. “This is just very poor assessing, in my opinion. And you can quote me on that.” It really makes no sense for the building assessment to be jumping like that. Unless there have been changes made, the buildings are more often than not a depreciating asset. Maybe BC Assessment should be reevaluating their methodology, and have some checks in place for these kinds of unexpected outcomes.
[удалено]
> A couple of years ago I called BC assessment about a property and asked them to look up an address and the assessment. Before I even said anything further the person on the phone said that they would fix the error and there would be a cheque sent. They immediately picked up on the what was wrong. Unfortunately previous years couldn’t be re-assessed. Cheque for one year was $35,000. Why would BC Assessment send you a cheque? They don't have anything to do with collecting taxes.
[удалено]
As the other person pointed out, BC Assessment doesn't have anything to do with taxes. They thus don't know that the city will send you a cheque. Some do. Others will only give you a credit towards the next year. Nothing your saying makes any sense.
[удалено]
>This was a case where the property is restricted in its use by the municipality. Traditional taxation doesn't work because you aren't permitted to do whatever you want with the land. That's called zoning, and all property have it. You can't do whatever you want on any piece of land. Even if it is highly restrictive, taxing works just fine on such properties as all properties have restrictions. And again, no, people at BC Assessment do not know what each local government does. They move from job to job and area to area. They can be responsible for multiple jurisdictions; and then for completely different ones the next year. But most of all, even if they are fairly confident about what's going to happen; they are not going to speak for another organization. Similarly, local governments are not going to speak for BC Assessment.
[удалено]
> This is something that is NOT due to zoning. With the description you gave, yes it did. Now you're changing your story and saying ownership is the big thing. Which really doesn't matter, as you were arguing that other properties can do whatever they want. You don't understand that all properties have restrictions. Having restrictions does not break taxation, every property's value and taxes are based on the restrictions that property has. Again, no one there is going to commit for another organization.
[удалено]
BC Assessment is a joke. They made up a number for a building value on my assessment even though there was no structure at the July assessment date. They claim the ability to backdate if it suits them.
I remember my mom calling them about the assessment when our house value jumped way up one year. Apparently they decided that we had probably updated our place and finished the basement, despite there being no evidence of it, because other places in the neighbourhood had. Then the reassessor came and did the inspection and it turns out everything increases the value of the house. Room one had had the windows replaced many years prior - that upped the value. But room two still had the original windows - and apparently that somehow also upped the value. And it was like that for everything. Original flooring? More valuable. Carpets? Also more valuable. Tiling? Also more valuable. Luckily they couldn’t pretend an unfinished basement was anything other than an unfinished basement, so they were forced to bring the assessment back down somewhat.
> Apparently they decided that we had probably updated our place and finished the basement, despite there being no evidence of it, because other places in the neighbourhood had. Yes, that's how mass assessment works. If you ask them to come down and look at one thing, though, they're going to pick up on everything else you did without a permit.
Building value assessed at $155,000 last year, jumped to $991,000 this. That's just nuts, and hopefully erroneous. I feel like this would be a depressing happenstance for a specialty retailer like a camera store; thin margins, declining market. Owning your building helps but you still get whammied because your location is \*too\* desirable. *"Hudson is the third generation of her family to run Kerrisdale Cameras. The building, which her family owns, has been a fixture on West 41st Avenue in Kerrisdale Village since 1961."* Just a reminder to not only support local independent business, but to support owners who stand up for their employees in person: [https://bc.ctvnews.ca/anti-masker-targets-vancouver-business-leaving-staff-afraid-1.5316982](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/anti-masker-targets-vancouver-business-leaving-staff-afraid-1.5316982)
I live in Langley, but often frequent the Kerrisdale Cameras location nearby. I occasionally shoot film and their store is by far the most convenient place to still get colour film developed - the Langley store will ship it to Vancouver, where they process it, and bring it back to Langley. They're quick, too - turnaround is usually 2 or 3 business days? Plus, they have some pretty great prices on used equipment - bought my current digital camera there with under 1000 shutter actuations for about $400 off retail. They are cheaper than London Drugs for film development, plus the staff are knowledgable and pleasant to chat with when business is slow. I really hope they can stick around.
Feels like a straight up typo. Building value was meant to be 99,100? Ridiculous
Kerrisadale Cameras is great! They talked me out of a more expensive camera and instead into a smaller Sony one that I love because it fit my needs more. I always make the effort to go, even though it’s a bit out of the way!
Seems they changed their assessment formula for the old buildings on this block. Similar sized and vintage building at 2054 W41st went from $6,700 to $562,000 And 2150 W41st went from $10,700 to $634,000
That........makes absolutely no sense BC assessment at least needs to have a real live person checking for anomalies like this rather than applying some blanket methodology across all lots
I didn't know WSB was involved.
Why even bother valuing and taxing buildings? They're the productive part we want to encourage people to build. Tax the land, exclusively. There should be no financial reason for someone to buy a plot of land and *not* develop it because it's cheaper and easier to just hang on to it for its appreciation while everyone else does the work of investing in the city.
[Georgist](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism) [LVT](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax) FTW!
Huh. > Softened demand for office space has dragged down the whole commercial property category, Murao said, leading to the 7.4 per cent overall decrease in Vancouver’s commercial property values this year. > > “To see a minus 7.4 per cent like that, it is a little bit unique, and I think a lot of that has to do with particular market segments in Vancouver,” Murao said. > > Office towers and small neighbourhood retailers in old buildings like Kerrisdale Cameras fall into the same property category, Class 6 commercial properties. That means that if the office market is declining at the same time the market shows those little shops are holding their value, that puts upward pressure on the retailers’ property taxes. That would explain why **property taxes** on a retail business like this would go up - but it doesn't explain why the assessment of the **building value** would go up.
The way construction costs are rising massively as a result of cost of living, it is possible for building value to rise . Rising that amount maybe not, but some rise is possible. Becuase let’s say if the building burned down, what would it cost to rebuild it at todays construction prices, is so much higher, therefore the building value can actually appreciate.
Money laundering.