City of Calgary Taxation on Golf Courses

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Slava

Which private property can you take your kid tobogganing on?

Presumably they are being taxed more effectively than Private golf courses, so I'm alright with the exclusion.

[Leondros]

While we are at it, why don't we just tax Manchester Industrial park as residential as well? Its basically Parkhill, just across from Macleod Trail. If those were homes it would be far more tax... Why are we subsidizing these businesses?

In fact, you could effectively build a condo tower on most lots in Mount Royal, why aren't those taxed as mid rises? I am sick of subsidizing these rich folks...

[Jason14h]

A lot of golf courses wouldn’t have developments put on them if they weren’t golf courses . Sure inner city golf courses most likely would, but a lot of courses are built in places with cheaper land to begin with

Then it really is just a question of do we as a society /city want inner city golf courses ?

In fact , if they paid the “proper” tax rates their prices would raise even higher and exclude even more people

I am all for a debate whether we should have / want inner city green spaces

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Leondros

While we are at it, why don't we just tax Manchester Industrial park as residential as well? Its basically Parkhill, just across from Macleod Trail. If those were homes it would be far more tax... Why are we subsidizing these businesses?

Agreed we should tax everyone using prime residential land until they leave and we can build more inner city(ish) housing !

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Leondros

While we are at it, why don't we just tax Manchester Industrial park as residential as well? Its basically Parkhill, just across from Macleod Trail. If those were homes it would be far more tax... Why are we subsidizing these businesses?

In fact, you could effectively build a condo tower on most lots in Mount Royal, why aren't those taxed as mid rises? I am sick of subsidizing these rich folks...

I don’t know what analogy you think you’re making but it’s not working.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I am all for a debate whether we should have / want inner city green spaces

I would say from Greenspace point of view Calgary Golf and Country Club has a lot less public value than North Glenmore Park because only a very few people can access it.

Having that be taxed on its market value as what it would sell for seems fair to me.

But property taxes on land are weird in Alberta. Farm land pays taxes based on a formula that massively undervalues it, as another example.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Everything else?

Like hockey arenas?

Like lowering corporate tax rates and implementing user fees on public services?

I don’t disagree that it goes both ways, but it’s not exactly shocking when it goes that way either.

Did it though?
The thread was made on the premise that golf courses don't pay enough taxes simply on some assumption.

Can we start with whether or not that's actually true before playing the eat the rich game?

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I don’t know what analogy you think you’re making but it’s not working.

My analogy is that if we were trying to implement a taxation system purely based on 'best use' which is what the OP is suggesting, then it would turn into absurdity. For example, lets look at the Safeway Distribution Center off of 42nd. If I turned that into a 150 unit midrise plus a mixed use that would be far more property tax than just what the center is paying:

Assessed value 2022 - 11,000,000 * 0.2935 (business rate) = $241K

Versus 150 units at $275K per unit (0.00715 residential rate) is $295K plus commercial at the bottom at lets say $1,000,000 = $22K for a total of $317K.

Should that property be paying its assessed value? Or should it pay on the potential value if someone dumped a bunch of capital into it?

Its absurd. Especially when in 2017 city council was considering changing the rules because private courses were struggling with their already inflated assessed values.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ncil-1.4001210

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Did it though?

I guess we’ll find out in this thread.

The thread was made on the premise that golf courses don't pay enough taxes simply on some assumption.

This thread appears to have been made on the premise that the poor subsidizing the rich isn’t a common thing. Whether this is a legit example of it or not I think it would be silly to specifically target golf courses in isolation while there are numerous other examples.

Can we start with whether or not that's actually true before playing the eat the rich game?

Yeah definitely.

But my comment wasn’t based on the golf example, it was based on someone appearing to be shocked by the concept of the poor subsidizing the rich in general.

[flamesfever]

I think our green spaces, including our golf courses, walking path system, parks, etc. help make Calgary one of the best cities in the world in which to live. I give credit to the many Calgarians in the past who had the vision and for sight to realize the value of our green space.

Let's not ruin it for the sake of the almighty buck.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Mull

Now, it would be good if someone could give us an accurate baseline on what actually occurs. My understanding is the City values the land as a golf course, and not as undeveloped land in a similar area would be worth.

To play devil's advocate here, all property taxes are based on what is actually on the land, not what could be there if the land was "optimized". You could make the same argument about residential property. Wouldn't it better optimized if your house was replaced by a tower that could house many people?

For the record, I'm not a golfer. Calgary needs those courses to attract the corporations it wants to though. You do have to look at the bigger picture and account for the revenue that all brings in.

I do find the amount of golf courses in Calgary excessive though, but Calgary would probably just replace that land with more urban sprawl, if given the opportunity. I also wouldn't describe Calgary as having a shortage of green/park space. That's one thing, for a city of 1.5 million, that Calgary has in excess. Also, many of the golf courses in Calgary don't just cater to the rich. There are multiple courses where you can get a round for $50 or less and on a good course, which is pretty incredible when compared to most cities.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

This discussion reminded me of an older Malcolm Gladwell podcast (Revisionist History). Slightly different context, as these LA golf courses with presumably, super-duper expensive real estate.

Basically bashing rich white guys, but there is some stuff on highest and best use tax treatment. Crazily, in California, the tax break was part of a (state) constitutional amendment!

https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/revi...d-walk-spoiled

[Torture]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think our green spaces, including our golf courses, walking path system, parks, etc. help make Calgary one of the best cities in the world in which to live. I give credit to the many Calgarians in the past who had the vision and for sight to realize the value of our green space.

Let's not ruin it for the sake of the almighty buck.

Sure, but walking paths, parks, etc are accessible to the public for free. Many of our parks also serve valuable purposes for storm water retention or provide habitat for wildlife.
Private golf courses? Not so much, and they exist for "the almighty buck"...

Let's not confuse golf courses with green spaces simply because the grass on the fairway is green.

[Northendzone]

isn't the entire taxation system loaded with inequities?

so if you could ever look at it all and fix it, somone with a smart lawyer and a team of accountants and whatnot would then come along and poke holes in the the new laws and then start us down a new system full of inequities

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by KTrain

No one is saying they can't, just that private golf courses should be taxed at the optimal rate for the land they own.

I'm all for a land value tax , would get rid of a lot of surface lots and spur lots of building to help push more efficient development, but nobody else is taxed this way. Why should golf courses get singled out?

Originally Posted by Torture

Sure, but walking paths, parks, etc are accessible to the public for free. Many of our parks also serve valuable purposes for storm water retention or provide habitat for wildlife.
Private golf courses? Not so much, and they exist for "the almighty buck"...

Let's not confuse golf courses with green spaces simply because the grass on the fairway is green.

Golf courses definitely provide habitat for wildlife, especially birds, and many courses have stormwater management in mind, especially if they're dependent on it as a water source: Canyon Meadows and Country Hills are integrated into the city's stormwater system and act as a buffer between street runoff and Fish Creek and Nose Creek respectively. And Silverwing (or whatever it's called now) gets its water from the new runway at YYC which is one of the reasons the course has dead grass all the time.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

I'm all for a land value tax , would get rid of a lot of surface lots and spur lots of building to help push more efficient development, but nobody else is taxed this way. Why should golf courses get singled out?





Golf courses definitely provide habitat for wildlife, especially birds, and many courses have stormwater management in mind, especially if they're dependent on it as a water source: Canyon Meadows and Country Hills are integrated into the city's stormwater system and act as a buffer between street runoff and Fish Creek and Nose Creek respectively. And Silverwing (or whatever it's called now) gets its water from the new runway at YYC which is one of the reasons the course has dead grass all the time.

The bold is another one. 550 2 Ave SW, Surface lot - assessed at $32.5M. Exactly same sized block south of it is Centenniel Place. Assessed at $420M. Should the holder of the parking lot have to pay based on potential value or land value? Why should golf courses be any different...

[jammies]

Is it too early to suggest overthrowing the elites and throwing open all their gated properties to the people? Expropriation may not be the best solution, but it's still a solution.

[BlackArcher101]

Just make golf courses dual purpose, they can also be dog parks.

[Slava]

Why is this all about class when it comes to golf? The truth is, recreation overall is expensive and this ends up subsidized in one form or another. Governments at various levels make all kinds of exceptions and fund all kinds of venues for these things. I'm not sure why golf would be any different.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Slava

Why is this all about class when it comes to golf? The truth is, recreation overall is expensive and this ends up subsidized in one form or another. Governments at various levels make all kinds of exceptions and fund all kinds of venues for these things. I'm not sure why golf would be any different.

I have some friends who are really into golf and a lot of their disposable incomes go into it. They make below the median in terms of Alberta incomes.