Cost of housing in Canada

[Lumber]

I don't think you would, and I don't think our property taxes would have risen as much.

The reason we have to keep putting them up is the cap, we need to raise taxes to cover the shortfall it creates.

Mind you we also need a city council that understands needs V wants...

Ive been in my house 15 years, I am capped. And I think its wrong.

Capped as in it never goes up? How does that work? How is that even at thing?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Capped as in it never goes up? How does that work? How is that even at thing?

I dont understand your question.

Capped Assessment Program (CAP) | Property Valuation Services Corporation

In addition to providing annual property assessments, PVSC administers the Capped Assessment Program (CAP) on behalf of the Nova Scotia Government. The Capped Assessment Program (CAP) places a ‘cap’ on the amount that the taxable assessment for eligible residential property can increase year...

www.pvsc.ca

 

[mariomike]

Home buyers calculating Property taxes across Canada may find this of interest to the discussion,

Canada Property Tax Guide 2026​

Highest to Lowest Property Taxes Across Canada in 2026​

Major Cities With the Highest and Lowest Property Taxes Across Canada​

Canada Property Tax Guide 2026 - nesto.ca

Compare property taxes across Canada by province and city. Learn how municipal tax rates affect your mortgage qualification and affordability.

www.nesto.ca

 

[Brad Sallows]

Capped as in it never goes up? How does that work? How is that even at thing?

They pretend to limit the change of an exogenous variable which is beyond their control from which they calculate a result.

Control freaks, who exercise a strange kind of denial when the real world exceeds the parameters within which they want to operate.

 

[foresterab]

No, they are always lower than true market value (or at least mine have always been). It was the same when I lived in Ontario; the assessed value was always lower than the market rate, but the two would go up together, just not always by the same amount.

I always took it as a rule that legally assessed values for tax purposes were always less than market value, but now that I think of it I have no idea if that's a universal truth.

In terms of property assessments I've been using it as an annual "health" check of my house value. Bought 15+ years ago in a "low" point and saw tax assessment drop next year to just under what I paid...and now it's only up +8%. That said when looking at similar homes in the neighborhood that have sold I find the office property tax assessment about $25K below market list price. So if I was to list my home I'd be in the +16-20% profit range or to express it another way...1% gain per year.

Thankfully housing in town hasn't been bad. Raw rural land though has doubled in price in the last 5 years and seems to continue to increase at a vastly different rate than housing.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Everyone who stays in a house longer than intended before downsizing is militating against solving the "housing crisis".

Which is already happening due to people feeling entitled to 2021-2022 valuations and not being willing to take the "hit" of selling a property for 3-6 times what they paid instead of the 4-7 (depending on how long they've been in it)

Ha- put a downsizing/exiting seniors exemption/credit that is not applicable for deemed disposition upon death

 

[Eaglelord17]

It will encourage people to sit on property as long as possible and refrain from sinking money into upgrades. (It yields incentives similar to rent controls.) This is a good policy only if you favour stagnation.

People already sit on properties. No one is downsizing these days, the boomers are preferring to hold on to the properties and live off the equity.

This would hurt the housing market value. Most of it is only being borne by people who already owned homes before the prices went nuts. Basically if you can't transfer capital from a already owned property you aren't getting into one.

My house was 167k when I bought it 7 years ago. Today it would be at least 300k, maybe towards 400k. I couldn't step into the market if I had to buy my house at todays rate. I couldn't upgrade if I wanted to without having owned a house at the lower rate. And this is a fairly depressed housing market in comparison to most the country.

The only people who win with the nonsensical housing market we have today are those who owned before prices went crazy and are selling for good, the banks, and the municipalities (and even then only if they are able to adjust to current rates).

It kills investment in this country. It kills population growth. It kills having children. It kills our youth having a future. It kills businesses from starting. People need to make that much more money to actually get ahead and most jobs can't afford to pay that amount.

We waste so much money going into housing, literally doing nothing except paying interest to the banks because magically the prices jumped. If prices were lower people would have more money to spend elsewhere, stimulating the economy, encouraging population growth, and making things better for society.

I also don't say this as a hypocrite. I own property bought before prices went nuts. I would technically lose if prices were to drop dramatically. But it is better for the nation and I am willing to make that sacrifice because of that.

 

[YZT580]

Nope. My proposal was a 14.5% tax on the difference between the sale price and the inflation adjusted cost base.

Assuming "several decades" = 4 placing the purchase at 1986 and you didn't do any permit requiring upgrades/additions- that would mean an inflation adjusted cost based 2.77 times that of your purchase price. Call that purchase price 100k, and using your 800k sale from earlier, that would be a windfall of 523, tax of 76k. Assuming mortgage free, after real estate commissions and that tax still netting 692k. Invested at 5% and withdrawing 40k per year (increasing the withdrawal 2% per year for inflation), that 672 supports 21-24 years of covering a "decent home"

So what? Our careful savings and budgeting means that our children have a chance at owning their own homes; which they do along with the associated mortgage payments. It means their children have a chance at advanced education with a little help from their own parents. Your 76000 windfall tax pays for one trip across Canada in your shiny new Airbus but without catering. In other words you want to enable the government to squander even more than they are now without being accountable. My generation has enabled your generation (assuming you are at least 30 years younger than myself) to go to university, to purchase an F150 to tow your 28 ft. camper or your fishing boat and take a one week cruise annually on Celebrity simply by being in an earned position to help out. Our money goes a lot further than the same money in government hands and we do it without borrowing and leaving it to your kids to pay. I have read a lot of bitching about us old folks but I haven't seen a lot of gratitude expressed for what you have attained as a result.