Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
Anyone who has held property for decades was totally fine holding an investment property under a 75% inclusion rate (with no exemption on the first $250K) which was the case until it was lowered in 2000, so why is a 50% inclusion rate somehow treated as sacrosanct?
|
It's 2024, you're talking about a change 24 years ago.
Most people with investment properties now, won't be aware of that or thinking of that. They're going to care that this change has impacted them directly.
You can nitpick at my using "decades" but lets say they bought in 2001 for the sake of eliminating semantics.
Quote:
|
And beyond that, I'm just not sure the average person is super worried about couples with a $1M gain paying ~$290K in tax now rather than ~$245K in tax under the old inclusion rate. Because you have to earn a very significant gain to even be affected by it, and have to be earning into the millions to increase the tax burden by more than a few percentage points, it's just not a huge difference in reality.
|
The couple with that gain IS the average person and they will care.
It may not seem like a big difference to you, but if it's your money it would.
The point is it's misleading to pretend this change only targeted the very wealthy.