News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

With all the tax changes over the last few years targeted at this (higher capital gains rates, restrictions on claiming capital gains and principal residence exemptions ...) the Canada Revenue will also be very happy about this!
Surely raising the breakeven profit point of home flipping could never result in higher prices when the home is re-listed. Affordability is important, and self-regulated prices on inelastic goods works every time.
 
Surely raising the breakeven profit point of home flipping could never result in higher prices when the home is re-listed. Affordability is important, and self-regulated prices on inelastic goods works every time.
Yes, but those tax changes mostly just apply to them. Flippers are also competing against other sellers who have still have more favourable tax treatment.
 
With all the tax changes over the last few years targeted at this (higher capital gains rates, restrictions on claiming capital gains and principal residence exemptions ...) the Canada Revenue will also be very happy about this!
So will the province's bottom line benefit - and they benefit without expending any political capital, unlike the feds.
 
Yes, the province is along for the ride by default. It would probably be more complicated than what it is worth to opt out.

But I really doubt much political capital has been spent taxing property speculators like other businesses.
 
From Taproot:



Echoing discussions from this forum. I'm not sure how well-founded the argument is, as typically vagrancy happens in retail areas and not in suburbs. I would certainly be concerned if I were a business owner with assets in the industrial area though.
Typical fear mongering, everyone knows we can't keep those services concentrated in Chinatown and need to spread them out, so when the GOA finds a less central location, the NIMBYs come out. Classic. I guarantee there would be more pushback against this location if it was in a residential area versus industrial, even though the Dovercourt people are saying an industrial location isn't appropriate.

No one wants a shelter to move in nearby, but they need to go somewhere,
 
Typical fear mongering, everyone knows we can't keep those services concentrated in Chinatown and need to spread them out, so when the GOA finds a less central location, the NIMBYs come out. Classic. I guarantee there would be more pushback against this location if it was in a residential area versus industrial, even though the Dovercourt people are saying an industrial location isn't appropriate.

No one wants a shelter to move in nearby, but they need to go somewhere,
I agree, and as previously mentioned by another person the separation of people in crisis from high-stress areas like the downtown core can be good for everyone. The new zoning bylaw allows shelters to be built in neighborhoods, so it sure could be a lot worse for Dovercourt residents.
 
Typical fear mongering, everyone knows we can't keep those services concentrated in Chinatown and need to spread them out, so when the GOA finds a less central location, the NIMBYs come out. Classic. I guarantee there would be more pushback against this location if it was in a residential area versus industrial, even though the Dovercourt people are saying an industrial location isn't appropriate.

No one wants a shelter to move in nearby, but they need to go somewhere,
I don't live anywhere near there, so I don't have strong feelings based on that but I'm not sure trying to portray this just as a NIMBY is fair or accurate.

I am very concerned how putting people in such an area with fewer services nearby could be very isolating and may be an unintentional (or maybe even an intentional) to ghettoize them. You know out of sight, out of mind.

I do agree the brunt has been borne by areas like Chinatown, but interestingly when a more suburban area is proposed it certainly isn't a better off one. Dovercourt sure isn't Glenora, maybe those putting this forward thought they would be more of a push over.
 
IMG_2147.png
 
The City of Edmonton (as of about an hour ago) is now allowing Administration to prorate taxes on remediated derelict properties. Prior to now, derelict properties have been (functionally) charged triple property taxes, but since the assessment cycle for 2024 is already complete any owners of derelict properties were paying high taxes even if they remediated or demolished the problem properties. This unintentionally discouraged property owners from addressing the problem properties in a timely manner, which is the reason for this change.

You can read the full report from the City FCS folks here:
 
City of Edmonton just put out a press release regarding this. I would also flag that this program has worked extremely well, I don't have the most up-to-date numbers but last I heard 10% of all derelict properties in the City were remediated this year:

Prorated tax forgiveness now available for remediated derelict properties

October 2, 2024

Today, City Council approved prorated tax forgiveness for derelict property owners. This represents an additional incentive for derelict owners to clean up their properties quickly, following the establishment of a derelict residential tax subclass last fall, the first of its kind in Canada.

Under the subclass, properties assessed as derelict are charged a tax rate that is approximately three times higher than the general residential rate. With this new policy, property owners can apply for a refund of the derelict residential property tax for the portion of the year that their property was cleaned up. For example, if a derelict house is demolished on May 1, this prorated tax forgiveness would mean the property owner would pay taxes at the derelict tax rate for January-April, and then would receive a refund so that their net amount paid is equivalent to the general residential rate for May-December.

“We’ve seen great progress from our residential derelict tax subclass in only one year, and this is another positive step,” said Cate Watt, Branch Manager of Assessment and Taxation. “Incentivizing property owners to clean up their derelict properties more quickly has a positive impact on community safety and vibrancy, and reduces the disproportionate amount of City costs associated with derelict properties for services like fire rescue response and bylaw enforcement.”

The policy will take effect immediately, allowing property owners who cleaned up their properties in 2024 the ability to apply for reimbursement of the additional taxes they paid this year. Derelict owners will receive more information with their tax notices on how to apply for the partial tax forgiveness when their properties are remediated. Of over 200 properties officially assessed as derelict in 2024, at least 23 were demolished. Assessments are being reviewed now in preparation for 2025.
 
District Policy and plans approved for next milestone in City’s planning modernization​
October 2, 2024

The City of Edmonton continues to modernize its plans for growth expected now and over the coming decades, as City Council approved the new District Policy and 14 district plans.

“We have taken major strides in streamlining how planning and development happens through the new District Policy and plans City Council approved, and through the new Zoning Bylaw approved a year ago,” said Mayor Amarjeet Sohi. “These two initiatives support City Council’s goal of making it easier to build in Edmonton as we continue to welcome record numbers of newcomers to our City and see record numbers of housing development permits.”

The District Policy and Plans shape the future of Edmonton’s neighbourhoods, advancingThe City Plan vision of a vibrant, urban and climate-resilient city where residents can easily access amenities and services close to home,” said Kim Petrin, Deputy City Manager, Urban Planning and Economy. “The District Policy and plans will be an important part of guiding growth and development in Edmonton, showing Edmontonians how and where they can expect their communities to change and evolve over time.”

The District Policy, plans and the Zoning Bylaw each play a role as we continue building our city through the 2050 timeframe outlined in The City Plan. The District Policy and plans set the general direction for how communities will grow and change over time, whereas zoning generally determines what can be developed on a plot of land today.

With City Council’s approval, the new policy and 14 new plans are now in effect as of October 2. Council will still consider the Rabbit Hill District Plan, at a future public hearing.

The City will begin implementing the new policy and the 14 approved plans immediately. Adigital map of the district boundaries, nodes, and corridors is available onedmonton.ca/districtplanning to help residents and stakeholders explore the changes in detail.​
For more information:
edmonton.ca/districtplanning

Media contact:
Mark Torjusen
Senior Communications Advisor
Urban Planning and Economy
780-914-8087​
 

Back
Top