[nfitz]

But a freeze on the commercial rates is a great idea and likely badly needed to say the least.

The city has been dropping commercial rates for the last few years, in order to rebalance the load between residents and commercial. Shouldn't we continue that relief of commercial rates; I'm not sure why we'd want to freeze the drop.

 

[taal]

The city has been dropping commercial rates for the last few years, in order to rebalance the load between residents and commercial. Shouldn't we continue that relief of commercial rates; I'm not sure why we'd want to freeze the drop.

No it hasn't!

It's just been increasing them less in proportion to residential tax rates ... but they've still been going up every year now - some more then the others.

There is no 'drop'.

 

[kEiThZ]

Rob Ford's plan is even a bit aggressive for me. But from a political standpoint, Rob Ford may have just one all of Scarborough and North York. And I suspect he's willing to throw the downtown crowd under the bus (so to speak) since he doesn't think they'll vote for him anyway.

None of this would have happened, if some subway expansion had been included in the original plan. A short extension on Sheppard, even to say Vic Park and a BD extension to STC, would have made it far more difficult to attack the rest of the plan. But the one-size-fits-none Transit City vision virtually guaranteed that a future candidate would come along and adopt an absolutely contrarian approach.

And sadly that means, if Ford gets elected, we are in for a long fight with the province, nothing getting built, and another mayor who comes along and present yet another diametrically opposed vision in the future.

For once, I'd like someone with just a bit of balance....who doesn't entirely throw Scarborough under the ummm tram.

 

[nfitz]

No it hasn't!

It's just been increasing them less in proportion to residential tax rates ... but they've still been going up every year now - some more then the others.

There is no 'drop'.

You sure about that? It was reported this year that the residential tax increased by 2.9%. The residential mill rate itself dropped from 0.6027807 in 2009 to 0.5895702% in 2010; a drop of 2.2% (because property values themselves increased far more than 2.9%). However the commercial rates dropped from 2.0431761% in 2009 to 1.9367482% in 2010; a drop of 5.2%.

To me that looks at though the difference between the drop of the residential rate and the commercial rate exceeds the increase in the total taxes paid, so commercial rates are dropping. Even if frozen compared to residential taxes they are dropping versus inflation.

Not sure I'm missing something, I'm only looking at this, and not something else ...

 

[js97]

^^^ man, if you truly believe that, and not just being a political advocate.... then next time you need a life insurance policy, mutual fund, an overpriced home, or a used car, let me be your broker.

The only thing that's 'droping' are the INCREASES... but their finding ways to nickel and dime in other ways, like the 'fine' for downtown restaurants not providing parking spots... perhaps we should go back to the days of strip mall design?

 

[Glen]

You sure about that? It was reported this year that the residential tax increased by 2.9%. The residential mill rate itself dropped from 0.6027807 in 2009 to 0.5895702% in 2010; a drop of 2.2% (because property values themselves increased far more than 2.9%). However the commercial rates dropped from 2.0431761% in 2009 to 1.9367482% in 2010; a drop of 5.2%.

To me that looks at though the difference between the drop of the residential rate and the commercial rate exceeds the increase in the total taxes paid, so commercial rates are dropping. Even if frozen compared to residential taxes they are dropping versus inflation.

Not sure I'm missing something, I'm only looking at this, and not something else ...

Yes, you are missing the relative changes in assessment values. During the last assessment cycle non residential assessment values increased more than residential ones. As such the mill rate decreases more. You should also note that when this occurs, non residential increasing faster than residential, they city lets it go because it decreases the ratio with little impact on revenues. But when the opposite occurs, they city runs to the Province and gets the minister of finance to prevent "cva related tax burden shifts". Toronto cries that it is unfair to allow tax shifts when residential assessments rise faster than non residential, but allows the opposite to occur.

From June 2004,

Furthermore, in the 2004 taxation year, for the first time since the introduction of CVA, the tax
ratio rules would have resulted in a shift of tax burden from the commercial class to the
residential class for the sole reason that residential properties had increased in assessed value
faster than commercial properties. This impact, estimated at $60.00 per household, would have
been above and beyond any financial impact to the residential class arising from the budgetary
levy increase restriction on the non-residential class.
As a result of the numerous issues arising from the current assessment and tax system, Council,
at its meeting of January 27, 28 and 29, 2004, directed, amongst other things, that the Mayor
and/or Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer meet with the Minister of Finance and other
Provincial staff as appropriate to discuss issues related to the property assessment and taxation
system, with a view of identifying and implementing regulatory and legislative changes
necessary to achieve property tax stability and fairness in Toronto. The subsequent staff level
meetings have been productive. There was an early recognition of short-term actions that could
be implemented for 2004, with a view to engaging stakeholder consultation on a longer-term tax
policy strategy for 2005 and beyond.
On March 15, 2004, Finance Minister Greg Sorbara announced adjustments to the municipal
rules under the Ontario Property Tax System for 2004. These adjustments enabled the avoidance
of the tax burden shift from the commercial class to the residential and multi-residential classes
that would otherwise have occurred due to the changes in CVA for 2004, and provided partial
relief from the budgetary levy restrictions imposed on municipalities whose tax ratios were
above the provincial threshold level (e.g. Toronto).

 

[taal]

Right, so in short and using simpler terms - property values increased hence this aloud commercial rates to decrease - the mill rate that is.

But technically, this means the rates being paid are lower (given the fact that property values went up) ... did property values in the 905 also increase? If they did, and they also decreased their mill rates were in the same boat ... no progress whatsoever, otherwise something was still accomplished.

Regarding the running to the province - that's all political ... residential rates get way more press in the media, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.

Moreover I'll very much argue that the 416 has it much much worse in terms of this media spotlight when rates do go up - when it happens in the 905 you barely hear a peep. So again ... all political.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, you are missing the relative changes in assessment values. During the last assessment cycle non residential assessment values increased more than residential ones.

Interesting. That does create a dlilemna. And it surprises me, given the amount of vacant commerical lands we see through much of the outer 416 area. Given we don't have acres of residential lands empty, and we do have acres of commercial/industrial lands empty, I'm surprised that market forces are pushing up commercial/industrial lands faster than residential lands. Again, I'm wondering if I'm missing something ... (and I see this in good faith!).

 

[taal]

Interesting. That does create a dlilemna. And it surprises me, given the amount of vacant commerical lands we see through much of the outer 416 area. Given we don't have acres of residential lands empty, and we do have acres of commercial/industrial lands empty, I'm surprised that market forces are pushing up commercial/industrial lands faster than residential lands. Again, I'm wondering if I'm missing something ... (and I see this in good faith!).

I don't think their values are really increasing per say ... rather the property values have not been adjusted in many years through MPAC.

But this is odd to me as well ... I know about many of Toronto's claw back programs that are meant to help ease the increase in property tax ... but the mill rate should just lower in this case and the net dollar amount brought in left unchanged ... ?

 

[Glen]

Interesting. That does create a dlilemna. And it surprises me, given the amount of vacant commerical lands we see through much of the outer 416 area. Given we don't have acres of residential lands empty, and we do have acres of commercial/industrial lands empty, I'm surprised that market forces are pushing up commercial/industrial lands faster than residential lands. Again, I'm wondering if I'm missing something ... (and I see this in good faith!).

Speculation. Many commercial properties have assessment values that poorly related to cap rates (income). MPAC can choose, and does so, to value non residential properties market values instead of based on income. Many non residential properties have a market value that is related to their redevelopment potential (residential). MPAC looks at recent sales, which is influenced by purchases of such sites, and extrapolates the heightened values to other properties. Most office buildings are valued on a strict income approach.

There is also the issue of promised tax cuts. Toronto's high taxes have decreased values. When the city announced the program to reduce taxes, values increased in anticipation of of higher net rents.

One simple step the province could take is to change the way that MPAC values non residential properties to be valued on as is current use (income) basis. This would remove the speculative distortions.

 

[nfitz]

I don't think their values are really increasing per say ... rather the property values have not been adjusted in many years through MPAC

Why were commercial properties not revalued in 2008 when residential properties were revalued?

 

[taal]

It's only a matter of time before we get shunned for going off topic ... as always happens when this conversation comes up ... so I created a new thread and took some of the posts above ... please feel free to continue the conversation there.

 

[nfitz]

I've started to wonder if Thomson may be the answer he. Sure, she's a bit conservative, but she's had some decent ideas ...

... but then I heard about her comments about privatizing the libraries in Toronto?

That's not just crazy ... that's Rob Ford crazy.

Has she said anything more about this since she mentioned it in January?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

thomson frightens me. IMO, thomson seems like the type of woman who would send their children a bill for breast milk when they reach the age of maturity.

 

[jn_12]

Miller showed up to where candidates submit their nomination papers with $200 in hand only minutes before the 2:00 deadline. Unfortunately, he was just having a bit of fun with the reporters, but man, there was a pretty good part of me that was holding out hope he'd throw his hat in the ring. Looks like Toronto will have a new mayor (not that that's all that surprising).