2018 Property Tax

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Smartcar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax

Just no. And here I thought you were progressive.

Lol, I am progressive! The thing with income tax is theres no limit. You make more, and you pay more and every dollar you earn you keep less and less. Add to this the sheer stupidity of saving every little slip of paper and sending in documents to the government (that they already have!) and it’s just completely redundant. I have argued many times on here for a pure consumption tax, which I still think is the most equitable. It keeps the government income stable, taxes people on unnecessary spending (which increases only when they have more disposable income) and is much more efficient than where we are now.

Anyway....back to the property taxes.

[8 Ball]

My residential went up 320.00 a year, commercial went up 2,500.00 a year. Fun times...

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

My building has a combined assessed value of about $30,000,000. So we pay just under $200,000 in property taxes. I don't know if that's fair or not based on the services we receive but I'm just putting those numbers out there.

Would need to know how many units to get an idea what those numbers mean.

[Fuzz]

Slava

I guess it depends on what the point of taxation is, right? Are we trying to even things out so that people “who can afford it” pay more, or are we trying to cover the civic budget?

I'm just suggesting if you made a tax system where the person taking up 800 sq ft pays the same as someone taking up 10,000 sq ft you would probably have a lot more backlash than the system we use now. I don't think it would be fair to expect them to both pay the same.


Are there any municipalities that don't use some sort of assessment value for property taxes?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Slava
I'm just suggesting if you made a tax system where the person taking up 800 sq ft pays the same as someone taking up 10,000 sq ft you would probably have a lot more backlash than the system we use now. I don't think it would be fair to expect them to both pay the same.


Are there any municipalities that don't use some sort of assessment value for property taxes?

Yeah that’s definitely true. It’s impossible to please everyone regardless of how you figure it out, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that what we have today isn’t working. There are a lot of reasons for that, and maybe nothing to correct all of them. At the same time, the city appears to be hiring a Cycling coordinator and a walking coordinator though, with each position paying around $100k. I’m not suggesting that’s not valuable, because it is, but maybe they should spend a couple hundred grand on paying a couple people to come up with some options. Council wasn’t able to, so letting this fester seems like a poor option, and it’s incredibly important for the future of the city.

[Smartcar]

Likely nobody here remembers this but up to the mid '90s Calgary had a split mill rate where multi-family residential paid about 30% more than single family/duplex residential. The thinking was that landlords could expense the property tax, unlike home owners. There was a booming business in condo conversions where nothing changed other than the property tax rate, and the cost of condo conversion would be recouped in the first year.

Until some forward-thinking (progressive) politicians were persuaded that actually renters would be paying the extra property tax, and that it wasn't fair to make renters pay more than homeowners.

[GGG]

I think that there should be a sprawl based component to property tax based on the size of your property.

So Condos would pay a lot less on the sprawl component compared to housing. This should try to be based on the cost of sprawl rather than a value judgement that sprawl is Bad. It would also be location agnostic as the cause of sprawl is lot size not lot location.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think that there should be a sprawl based component to property tax based on the size of your property.

So Condos would pay a lot less on the sprawl component compared to housing. This should try to be based on the cost of sprawl rather than a value judgement that sprawl is Bad. It would also be location agnostic as the cause of sprawl is lot size not lot location.

I'd be fine with a portion being charged by lot size.

When I lived in Edmonton the water/sewage bill had a component for storm sewers that was based on the acreage of the land you owned, so big lots payed more.

I don't think municipalities can charge property tax based on anything other than assessed value, but something like that could be a way around it.

[rohara66]

Except property values are higher if you have a larger lot.

And higher property values means higher taxes. So it’s already being done that way.

[Ironhorse]

After tax fiasco, the province should fire city council

City council has proven itself utterly dysfunctional in this matter of grave importance, the support of business owners whose money is expected to fill the vast tax hole downtown.

The level of incompetence here, the complete failure to reach any solution to a problem obvious for three years, is beyond any fiasco seen at city hall in decades.
These councillors are good people, they want the best, but collectively they are an equivocating, quibbling mess.

Council as a whole does not deserve to carry on. The province should fire the whole lot, appoint an official administrator, and call a new election

https://calgaryherald.com/news/polit...e-city-council

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

This is nuts.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by rohara66

Except property values are higher if you have a larger lot.

And higher property values means higher taxes. So it’s already being done that way.

Sort of, That is the progressive part of property taxation. We accept that those who can pay more do pay more.

But a person who is spending day 600k on a house should be rewarded in lower taxes when they choose a smaller footprint. So you incentivize a multi family inner city home over a suburban home.

[bizaro86]

When I saw that headline I was expecting Rick Bell not Don Braid. Sad that it has come to this.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Locke

Now, he was referring to it in regards to parasite communities not paying their fair share, this is in reference to Airdrie, Okotoks, Rockyview, Dewinton, etc. Which is a very serious problem.



But also as to the issues of collection and redistribution of funds.

Toll booths fix this problem.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Toll booths fix this problem.

Not really,

Our problem is a lack of business taxes to continue to subsidize are residential taxes. Moving in more residents (the end result of tolling) without more downtown jobs in high value real estate just makes the problem worse.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Toll booths fix this problem.

No. They dont.

[burn_this_city]

City operating budget 2014 $3.2B, operating budget 2019 $4.1B. Spending is up ~5% a year and population has been flat between 2014 and 2019. Something doesn't jive here, oil and gas industry has seen costs fall 25% and the public sector can't even hold the line.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

City operating budget 2014 $3.2B, operating budget 2019 $4.1B. Spending is up ~5% a year and population has been flat between 2014 and 2019. Something doesn't jive here, oil and gas industry has seen costs fall 25% and the public sector can't even hold the line.

Does it include Capital Projects? I know we've got a few of those on the books.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Locke

Does it include Capital Projects? I know we've got a few of those on the books.

Not sure, my extensive research lasted approximately 5 mins. I think all spending should be examined on the nice to have vs. need to have, at least until the tax base recovers. That includes the Flames arena. Belt tightening should have been happening based on the broader economic situation, no one on council should really be surprised at this point.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

City operating budget 2014 $3.2B, operating budget 2019 $4.1B. Spending is up ~5% a year and population has been flat between 2014 and 2019. Something doesn't jive here, oil and gas industry has seen costs fall 25% and the public sector can't even hold the line.

The city has a real spending problem.

Some postings currently on their careers page:

Walking coordinator $88,307-$135,252
Cycling Coordinator $88,307-$135,252
Liveable Streets Manager $96,270-$170,071
Eco Mentor $76.094
Climate Leader $88,307-$135,252

Total $437,305 - $651,921/year

How many more of these positions exist?