this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
300 points (97.5% liked)

Canada

9454 readers
1167 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Election Interference / Misinformation

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 40 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I think the most novel proposal we put forward in the report is taxing the total real estate holdings of large landowners, as opposed to individually taxing each property using the aforementioned brackets. This could entail situations where large landowners own a portfolio of properties, each falling below that $3 million threshold, but that cumulatively add up to tens of millions of dollars. In this scenario, by taxing the total holdings instead of each property separately, these owners would no longer be able to avoid paying those progressive property tax rates.

There's a few interesting bits to this article, but I like this one the most. Property taxes on the cumulative amount of property a person or company owns is huge. It provides a punishment for buying up large amounts of property.

[–] yads@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago

People already pay taxes on cumulative properties. You need this plus the progressive tax idea.

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think the concern is that:

  • The rich would try to skirt this with numbered or shell companies, or family or other relations.
  • The rich would pass this onto tenants.

Now, the solution is to a) couple this with rent control, b) exempt purpose-built rentals from this endeavour, and c) punish serial transgressions with confiscation.

Frankly, I think the idea of punishing malfeasance by landlords with confiscation to be just awesome: if you're a predatory slumlord, we take the house and repurpose it as RGI public housing. Do I worry about the government becoming predatory? Yes, yes I do, but in this case it's a lesser-of-two-evils thin.

[–] errorgap@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Slumlords and overpriced rentals can be storage issues though. It can be a nice place, but if you're paying $2k+/mo for a 1b1b that's way too fucking much even if it's in good condition

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 25 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There are so many great ideas that could have been implemented by now, and have been implemented in other countries. But the Liberals have only instituted policies to make it worse. Only now that the youth vote is leaving them they may at least pay lip service to it. It's honestly disgusting.

Only the greens have put forward anything that would help stem the investor class from depriving Canadians of a place to live.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

Preach. I voted Green. Mike shows promise and he's consistent with messaging. Next election I'll more than happily stump for them.

[–] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

how about prevent cooperate take over of nin commercial property, especially foreign takeover. Look at how they're swooping in on the victims in Hawaii after the fires.

[–] abogical@lemmy.one 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Land value tax would fix this.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Georgism making a comeback baby!

[–] abogical@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I hope so. Subscribe to !georgism@kbin.social if you haven't already.

[–] uphillbothways@kbin.social 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Triple property taxes for units not occupied by owners. Quick fix.

[–] Overzeetop@kbin.social 12 points 2 years ago

Forbid corporate ownership of anything under 4 units/12 bedrooms, and require them own 100% of any contiguous building over 4 units. Added taxes will just be passed on to residents. Corporations are used to aggregate money (both public corps and family/friend groups) and avoid taxes.

Then make a financial law that forbids making property loans with collateral which includes any real property that is not the property being purchased. No condo bros buying units and then re-fi-ing out to buy more.

[–] MrFlagg@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (5 children)

how does that not just increase rent?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The issue is owners just fake the documents when your property tax or vacancy tax mail arrives. Friend of mine rents basement suite, landlord has not lived in main house for over two years, it has been empty the entire time. somebody comes every few weeks to collect mail.

[–] klisklas@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Then why not check on it occasionally and put a hefty fine on it when they fake the documents? If you cannot make a new and important law because rich people will try to bypass it is not than the state is useless.

[–] Gerbler@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago

Agreed.

People forging documents to evade taxes? That's fraud. Put them in jail or if they're a foreign national; take their property until they set foot in the country; then put them in jail.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 years ago

You'd have to have someone go door-to-door at random intervals for an absolute check, I think, but that isn't a bad thing provided that the people doing it are paid a reasonable wage.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

There definitetly should be a better method. An honour system by mailing and online affirmation of occupied unit is useless.

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Whistleblower law that lets people who finger this kind of landlord take ownership of the property at a nominal fee for processing the paperwork. Call it $25.

[–] CanadaPlus 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

We still don't physically have enough houses. It's quick, but not a fix.

[–] Hotdogman@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

So Basically, there's always going to be a crisis. Cool thanks.

[–] lilShalom@lemmy.basedcount.com 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

The solution is to build more housing.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

So BlackRock can buy it and rent it out to people for $3,000 a month? What use is more housing if rich people who own 1,000 houses are just going to buy it? The solution is more complicated.

[–] SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The solution is complicated because people can't agree on the problem.

As with your comment and subject of the article there is plenty of people that are perfectly happy with the housing crisis as long as the remain to the favourable side of it.

If there is too much inventory the price for rent will go down.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That is part of the solution, the othee part is not letting a foreign owner buy a place and leave it vacant.

[–] Evkob@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (13 children)

Why do people always specify "foreign" owners? I don't see how being born in Canada should enable one to hoard housing.

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Because the people who are the actual problem love that Canadians are looking abroad for the source of the problem instead of a wee tad closer to home.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Overzeetop@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

That would require making more land and increasing the capacity of existing high-use, aging infrastructure for water, sewage, power, and trash. I can find you a cheap place to live out in the sticks. Hell, the town down the road from me has brand new, 3BR 2.5BA 1900SF homes with garage for $270k (USD). You only need 2BR/1BA and 1100SF? $150k. Thing is, it's a 30-40 minute drive to the center of my 200,000 person MSA. But this isn't a fun, entertaining city with excellent walkability, public transit, a major airport, and multiple concert venues and public spaces so people aren't flocking to move out here.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί