Real Estate

Are property taxes in Ontario really going to double in a few years?

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 28th, 2023 12:44 pm
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 29, 2010
1625 posts
3388 upvotes
GTA

Are property taxes in Ontario really going to double in a few years?

5% I can handle

But I saw news that property tax in Markham is expected to double by 2026? That is ridiculous and a lot of people will be priced out. This will be a huge hit to affordability. Going from 10k to 20k a year is terrible, that's almost the rent for a condo.

Source: https://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/1 ... f-bill-23/

Is this like a worst case scenario? Everyone really took a big L on this except Doug Ford's developer buddies.

Is this fake news? Someone please tell me its fake news.
74 replies
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 16, 2012
3280 posts
489 upvotes
Mississauga
lolbeast wrote: 5% I can handle

But I saw news that property tax in Markham is expected to double by 2026? That is ridiculous and a lot of people will be priced out. This will be a huge hit to affordability. Going from 10k to 20k a year is terrible, that's almost the rent for a condo.

Source: https://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/1 ... f-bill-23/

Is this like a worst case scenario? Everyone really took a big L on this except Doug Ford's developer buddies.

Is this fake news? Someone please tell me its fake news.
Cities have only few ways to pay for infrastructure , you either levy development charges on new builds or have existing homeowners pay for the various services towns/cities provide.

As long as you had land to build out, property taxes where kept low due to development charges offsetting some costs, the kind of sprawl the GTA cities have been addicted too, costs alot of money to maintain.
Member
Jan 31, 2014
300 posts
575 upvotes
Another reason to vote Dougie out. They just keep piling up for Mr. Flip Flop.
Deal Addict
Sep 15, 2017
1601 posts
2483 upvotes
I'm curious what the breaking point will be for some people to leave the GTA for more affordable regions.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Oct 27, 2002
2065 posts
857 upvotes
Toronto
My feeling is that the increases would need to happen if the status quo stayed as is. Meaning taxes would go up 100%.

However, I think the articles are all PR. They will either cut in places, or supplement with other fees (my guess). As an example, seems like development fees are reduced - which affects new builds. So why don’t the cities just add a new LTT like Toronto to compensate? Transfer the development cost from the builder further on to the new homeowner. Problem unsolved.

I don’t see existing homeowners swallowing anywhere close to the figures that are being published. It’s just fear mongering by the cities.
Deal Addict
Nov 13, 2013
4527 posts
3688 upvotes
Ottawa
lolbeast wrote: 5% I can handle

But I saw news that property tax in Markham is expected to double by 2026? That is ridiculous and a lot of people will be priced out. This will be a huge hit to affordability. Going from 10k to 20k a year is terrible, that's almost the rent for a condo.

Source: https://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/1 ... f-bill-23/

Is this like a worst case scenario? Everyone really took a big L on this except Doug Ford's developer buddies.

Is this fake news? Someone please tell me its fake news.
Some of this is fake news lobbying by the fast growing cities. It is also the case that their sprawl model was unsustainable anyway as growth can't continue forever. But yes Markham is one of hardest hit areas. Your taxes don't pay for servicing your lot and the pyramid scheme is coming to an end.

It's a win for developers. Small win for new home buyers as some of the savings will get passed on. L for everyone else.
Deal Guru
Dec 20, 2018
10135 posts
10246 upvotes
f00kie wrote: My feeling is that the increases would need to happen if the status quo stayed as is. Meaning taxes would go up 100%.

However, I think the articles are all PR. They will either cut in places, or supplement with other fees (my guess). As an example, seems like development fees are reduced - which affects new builds. So why don’t the cities just add a new LTT like Toronto to compensate? Transfer the development cost from the builder further on to the new homeowner. Problem unsolved.

I don’t see existing homeowners swallowing anywhere close to the figures that are being published. It’s just fear mongering by the cities.
it's not PR..it's just a calculation on what the increase in property tax for existing homeowners are required to maintain current LOS with the changes to DC's (essentially reducing recovery to a fraction of actual costs which can be recovered through DCs). of course things like LOS can be adjusted..so maybe instead of say 1 fire station to serve 10k residents and a 10min response time..it's 1 fire station per 20k residents and a 15min response times. less parkland per resident, less recreational facilities per resident, more congestion without doing transportation network improvements and etc

and fyi, only city of toronto is allowed to collect LTT..other municipalities have been lobbying for it for years but province wont' let them. local municipalities have very little revenue tools besides property taxes and user fees

DCs were never used (as it was not allowed) to cover things like operations, capital construction for parks or any infrastuructre not directly required to serve new growth. Eg. even sec 37 funds have to be used within 200m of the development for example
fogetmylogin wrote: Some of this is fake news lobbying by the fast growing cities. It is also the case that their sprawl model was unsustainable anyway as growth can't continue forever. But yes Markham is one of hardest hit areas. Your taxes don't pay for servicing your lot and the pyramid scheme is coming to an end.

It's a win for developers. Small win for new home buyers as some of the savings will get passed on. L for everyone else.
it's not fake news, it's actual impact from the province making existing homeowners to subsidize developer profits by artificially reducing DC's. DC's are calculated via a background study and subject to the DC act on what it can be used for.. so it's not upto municipalities on using DC's for operations or maintenance/renewal of existing infrasturucte...it's only allowed to be used to fund infrastructure to serve net new growth

so it's not a pyramid scheme that DCs were used to fund previous growth.. the province is mandating growth targets to municipalities while at the sametime saying they cant use DC's to fund the actual costs to implement the growth the province mandates

for more knowledge and understanding on DC's... here's markham's DC background study

https://www.markham.ca/wps/wcm/connect/ ... e1-n-o4eOH

here's DC act

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/97d27

also ..DC's are reviewed and can be appealed by developers as another "check" in place on top of the DC act, DC background study, regular audits on DC accounts and how they've been spent etc.. so unless you think developers were fine with DCs being used to fund existing homes and servicing... they weren't used that way
Jr. Member
Aug 24, 2021
133 posts
209 upvotes
Markham
Also note that a lot of small green space, encumbered parkland, condo parkettes, which did not previously count towards parkland dedication will count now. There's going to be some big losses in both total parkland as well as "useful" parkland.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Nov 19, 2021
572 posts
612 upvotes
f00kie wrote: My feeling is that the increases would need to happen if the status quo stayed as is. Meaning taxes would go up 100%.

However, I think the articles are all PR. They will either cut in places, or supplement with other fees (my guess). As an example, seems like development fees are reduced - which affects new builds. So why don’t the cities just add a new LTT like Toronto to compensate? Transfer the development cost from the builder further on to the new homeowner. Problem unsolved.

I don’t see existing homeowners swallowing anywhere close to the figures that are being published. It’s just fear mongering by the cities.
I agree, IMO municipalities are playing games assuming that things will remain the same except paid for by taxes instead of developers. There's a reason they didn't do a big first year hike; they are hoping they can get the province to back down by having taxpayers opposed to it. If they can't they'll just lower their standards. They always treat developers money differently than their own.

Goes to show the staggering amount of money being extracted from new build buyers.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Nov 19, 2021
572 posts
612 upvotes
aaaaaaaa wrote: Also note that a lot of small green space, encumbered parkland, condo parkettes, which did not previously count towards parkland dedication will count now. There's going to be some big losses in both total parkland as well as "useful" parkland.
Didn't know that change was being made, imo only on exterior should count, if that.

One thing I always found crazy was that storm water /pond blocks don't count, even if they have underground storage tanks.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 25, 2015
2544 posts
2555 upvotes
Burnaby, BC
Noone is forced to own. Just rent and pay no property taxes. The rent may be higher to cover the costs but your choice.
Deal Addict
Oct 29, 2010
4475 posts
811 upvotes
Pretty sure if property tax doubles, demand and prices will plummet.

In the US it's very common that municipalities have different tax rates and as a result when a realtor takes you to see houses, that's like the 2nd/3rd question that comes up.
Differences can be $10k per year just by driving 5 minutes away.
Deal Addict
Mar 2, 2017
3841 posts
7803 upvotes
Toronto/Markham
StatsGuy wrote: it's not PR..it's just a calculation on what the increase in property tax for existing homeowners are required to maintain current LOS with the changes to DC's (essentially reducing recovery to a fraction of actual costs which can be recovered through DCs). of course things like LOS can be adjusted..so maybe instead of say 1 fire station to serve 10k residents and a 10min response time..it's 1 fire station per 20k residents and a 15min response times. less parkland per resident, less recreational facilities per resident, more congestion without doing transportation network improvements and etc

and fyi, only city of toronto is allowed to collect LTT..other municipalities have been lobbying for it for years but province wont' let them. local municipalities have very little revenue tools besides property taxes and user fees

DCs were never used (as it was not allowed) to cover things like operations, capital construction for parks or any infrastuructre not directly required to serve new growth. Eg. even sec 37 funds have to be used within 200m of the development for example



it's not fake news, it's actual impact from the province making existing homeowners to subsidize developer profits by artificially reducing DC's. DC's are calculated via a background study and subject to the DC act on what it can be used for.. so it's not upto municipalities on using DC's for operations or maintenance/renewal of existing infrasturucte...it's only allowed to be used to fund infrastructure to serve net new growth

so it's not a pyramid scheme that DCs were used to fund previous growth.. the province is mandating growth targets to municipalities while at the sametime saying they cant use DC's to fund the actual costs to implement the growth the province mandates

for more knowledge and understanding on DC's... here's markham's DC background study

https://www.markham.ca/wps/wcm/connect/ ... e1-n-o4eOH

here's DC act

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/97d27

also ..DC's are reviewed and can be appealed by developers as another "check" in place on top of the DC act, DC background study, regular audits on DC accounts and how they've been spent etc.. so unless you think developers were fine with DCs being used to fund existing homes and servicing... they weren't used that way
Isn't this calculation based on the 'worst case' scenario because of what's proposed in Bill 23?

I recently spoke to a city of Toronto planner, Bill 23 and its details are not finalized and are to be negotiated and finalized before the end of 2023.

Wouldn't that mean these articles are in fact used for PR to put pressure on Bill 23 negotiations to water it down?

There is absolutely no way property taxes will be doubled within 18 months.
RE Broker
Deal Addict
Mar 2, 2017
3841 posts
7803 upvotes
Toronto/Markham
fogetmylogin wrote: Some of this is fake news lobbying by the fast growing cities. It is also the case that their sprawl model was unsustainable anyway as growth can't continue forever. But yes Markham is one of hardest hit areas. Your taxes don't pay for servicing your lot and the pyramid scheme is coming to an end.

It's a win for developers. Small win for new home buyers as some of the savings will get passed on. L for everyone else.
Bill 23 will benefit the small mom and pop investors likely, on the commercial side people on that side don't feel it will move the needle for big developers.
RE Broker
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 8, 2014
32147 posts
15427 upvotes
Socially Distanced
MrNobody wrote: Another reason to vote Dougie out. They just keep piling up for Mr. Flip Flop.
Came here to say this, you can vote out a conservative who screws you despite the lies saying the alternative is worse.

While no one can predict the future, fear mongering to keep conservatives in office is very effective at screwing with our heads.
In fact in Rand McNally they wear hats on their feet and hamburgers eat people
Deal Guru
Dec 20, 2018
10135 posts
10246 upvotes
RichmondCA wrote: Isn't this calculation based on the 'worst case' scenario because of what's proposed in Bill 23?

I recently spoke to a city of Toronto planner, Bill 23 and its details are not finalized and are to be negotiated and finalized before the end of 2023.

Wouldn't that mean these articles are in fact used for PR to put pressure on Bill 23 negotiations to water it down?

There is absolutely no way property taxes will be doubled within 18 months.
Short answer is NO, it's not just for PR pressure as The bill has recieved royal accent already..see here

https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-busi ... -1/bill-23


Long answer

Well If you consider existing conditions and LOS with no adjustments to service delivery from existing conditions worst case then yes, that's what the projections from municipalities show
City staff confirmed that is the worst-case scenario that assumes maintaining service levels and the city would not get any money from the province to offset the loss of development charge.
.. the actual implementation (timelines on when each "initiative" is implemented and manner in how it's implemented aka regulations are being finalized and various acts which it impacts are being updated to comply with the act. So things like definitions of terms and methodology etc will be part of the regulation, what exactly are the conditions the CAs can impose are being defined. The schedules within the Bill take effect at different dates and some are not defined yet as the acts the bill affects like the ORM, GB act etc need to be updated for example

But the overall changes are already known and MMAH is already in without prejudice discussions with municipal staff on how it'll be implemented..just like then the TOCs were established and discussions with municpal staff was occuring well before the councilors knew details for example.

So the projections show all the revisions of bill 23 in effect for next fiscal year.

But think of it this way in layman's term... your boss has told you your salary will be cut by 40% ... So you run numbers on what impacts it'll have ..that's what Municipalities are doing.

What the planner meant was they're finalizing which pay period it'll come into effect and do they pay you 40% less or pay you regular and then deduct 40% and and and
etc...

But no I don't think property taxes will double in 18 mths.. where you see that?..it's by 2026 it'll be double if there's no additional funds and/or there's no reduction in level of service and planned infrastructure moves ahead as scheduled
IMG-20230203-WA0000.jpg


They can cut service (less snow plowing, reduce maintenance and renewal, less programs, user fees etc) which I think they will do so property tax increase won't be as large as shown.
Last edited by StatsGuy on Feb 3rd, 2023 8:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Deal Addict
Sep 15, 2017
1601 posts
2483 upvotes
Quentin5 wrote: Came here to say this, you can vote out a conservative who screws you despite the lies saying the alternative is worse.

While no one can predict the future, fear mongering to keep conservatives in office is very effective at screwing with our heads.
Works nicely at the federal level.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 8, 2014
32147 posts
15427 upvotes
Socially Distanced
oilerfan89 wrote: Works nicely at the federal level.
Harper was eventually replaced.
We can forget the insane stuff he did but that doesn't change anything.
PP is on his authoritarian slide so its good that voters are so far seeing through this.

I don't like Trudeau for reasons that are very different than convoyers and conservatives, but worse is not superior to better. A PP government would be much worse than a Trudeau one.
Coming back to the topic at hand, if Ford screws Ontarians enough they will get rid of him despite his nonsense games.

How badly does he need to screw voters before he reaches the magic camel's back breaking straw, thats the real question at hand.
Last edited by Quentin5 on Feb 3rd, 2023 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In fact in Rand McNally they wear hats on their feet and hamburgers eat people
Deal Addict
Sep 15, 2017
1601 posts
2483 upvotes
Quentin5 wrote: Harper was replaced.
We can forget the insane stuff he did but that doesn't change anything.
PP is on his authoritarian slide so its good that voters are so far seeing through this.

I don't like Trudeau for reasons that are very different than convoyers and conservatives, but worse is not superior to better. A PP government would be much worse than a Trudeau one.
Coming back to the topic at hand, if Ford screws Ontarians enough they will get rid of him despite his nonsense games.

How badly does he need to screw voters before he reaches the magic camel's back breaking straw, thats the real question at hand.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. There's not much that could be worse than another Trudeau term. I suppose a meteor could hit the planet?
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 30, 2021
3438 posts
4522 upvotes
I will gladly give 2x, 5x, hell even 10x to the municipal government! Paying tax is part of being a Canadian! Makes me proud to see my money go to good use, to support my local community. As well as my fellow Canadians Regional Indicator Symbol Letters Ca .

If you are true Canadian, you will gladly pay more property tax. What are you Cayman Island TAX CHEAT?? Shame on you!

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)