Vancouver Wields C$10,000-a-Day Fine in Crackdown on Empty Homes

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

And surely, the CoV could work with AirBnB to ferret out short-term rentals.

Aren't short term rentals the reason AirBnB exists?

[WarrenC12]

Isn't this the EHT that you need the declaration by Feb 2018? Why is the tax coming in now?

[SpongeG]

Vancouver property owners 'panic' to rent as vacancy tax implemented
New tax will increase number of rentals but not affordability, says property manager
By Clare Hennig, CBC News Posted: Jul 04, 2017 9:18 PM PT Last Updated: Jul 05, 2017 9:24 AM PT

Vancouver's empty homes tax came into effect over the weekend, causing some property owners to scramble to rent, sell or find a way around the fees, according to one property manager.

Cameron Fazli is with Re/Max Crest Realty. He has seen a spike in calls from concerned owners looking for advice and solutions, he told CBC guest host of On The Coast Gloria Macarenko.

"We are getting a lot of calls from people who are unsure what they are going to do," Fazli said. "There is a lot of uncertainty and definitely a lot of unhappy property owners."

Under the new rules, homes that are not occupied for at least six months of the year are subject to a tax of one per cent of the property's assessed value. The deadline to rent out empty dwellings was July 1.

Looking for ways to avoid the tax

Fazli said many of the people he has talked to are thinking of renting or selling their properties. He recently met with a woman who owns three empty properties in Vancouver — and says one of them is now listed for rent, another will be listed shortly and she is thinking of selling the third.

"This is a scenario of someone who is kind of in a panic now and needs to rent them out," he said.

Other property owners are still figuring out exactly how much of the year they spend in the property, Fazli said, and are seeing if they can find a family member to occupy enough to make it over the six month threshold.

More rentals but not cheaper

The tax, approved last November, was created in an attempt to ease pressure on the rental housing market.

Fazli said while it will lead to more housing being available because of lower vacancy rates, it won't drive down prices.

"It's going to bring more rental properties onto the market but, on the affordable aspect, I think we're going to see the properties being more on the higher end side," he said.

'I'm on the verge of moving out:' frustrated Vancouverites vent to city over housing woes
Vancouver housing ranked 3rd most unaffordable by international study

...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...fect-1.4190576

[whatnext]

In the midst of a housing crisis, they City of Vancouver buys homes and leaves them empty:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/real...ticle35513761/

Which begs a few questions: Are they paying the tax? Why do they need to expand the park at Trout Lake anyway?

[twoNeurons]

Was the empty homes tax simply lip service? Did anyone ACTUALLY think that it was going to accomplish anything other than to give the illusion that the government was doing something?

[casper]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Was the empty homes tax simply lip service? Did anyone ACTUALLY think that it was going to accomplish anything other than to give the illusion that the government was doing something?

All it was going to do was create revenue for agents and city bylaw officers while undermining property rights.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Was the empty homes tax simply lip service? Did anyone ACTUALLY think that it was going to accomplish anything other than to give the illusion that the government was doing something?

Well, to be fair, even though I think it's a ridiculously unenforceable tax, the deadline to declare is February 2, 2018, so we won't have any stats until next year. That said, asking people to self-declare to get taxed is stupidly naive. How many staff did the city hire to enforce it? Is there a snitch line (there should be).

[trofirhen]

$10,000 per day is $3,650,000 per year. As long as that is upheld and enforced, I can't understand why it doesn't have any effect.
But then, I'm just a white-collar peasant with little financial or legal savvy. Better to leave it to the finance people and lawyers for an answer, I think
...... but I still don't get it why there is no deterrent effect.
Might someone be able to give an explanatory 'précis'? Thanx

[casper]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

$10,000 per day is $3,650,000 per year. As long as that is upheld and enforced, I can't understand why it doesn't have any effect.
But then, I'm just a white-collar peasant with little financial or legal savvy. Better to leave it to the finance people and lawyers for an answer, I think
...... but I still don't get it why there is no deterrent effect.
Might someone be able to give an explanatory 'précis'? Thanx

It is complicated, look at all the exception.....

http://vancouver.ca/home-property-de...-be-taxed.aspx

You also have to ask is it the property owners responsibility to demonstrate compliance or is the cities responsibility to demonstrate non-compliance. How are you ever going to provide you lived in the home for at least 180 days without some tracking device attached to you. It is completely unreasonable for the city of Vancouver to have any business keeping track on how many days someone spends sleeping in their home vrs. time they spend in the hospital vrs time they spend traveling. Some of the examples the city gives involve going to your employer and asking for a letter to show the property tax people that you are employed in the city. Asking your condo association for a letter stating you are allowed or not allowed to rent a unit.

Every property owner is going to have to fill out the city silly form. If you don't fill out the form then there is a $10k per day fine for not doing the paper work to their satisfaction.

[djmk]

Property owners already fill out the form for the grant. What's one more check box?

[casper]

Originally Posted by djmk

Property owners already fill out the form for the grant. What's one more check box?

From the city of Vancouver web site:

If a family member occupied the home
- Supply the name of the family member(s), and their phone number

If you rented the property
- Supply the names of tenants from each of the tenancy agreements

If it is not your primary residence but you occuplied it for 180 days and your employer is in the City of Vancouver:
- Supply the name and contact info for your employeer

If the property is under development or a heritage property:
- Supply the permit number and a description of the development process

If you were in the hospital, long-term or short-term care:
- Supply name of person receiving care
- The supervising physician
- Contact information for the hospital or care facility

If it under a court order that:
- Supply the court order info

If you are audited you need to supply:
- ICBC vehicle insurance and registration
- Government-issued personal identification, including, driver’s licence, BCID card, and British Columbia Services Card
- Medical Services Plan invoice
- Income tax returns and notices of assessment
- Employment contracts, pay statements, or records of employment
- Insurance certificates for homeowner's(s') insurance

To declare that your property is rented, it must be occupied by a tenant for at least six months of the current year. This requirement can be met through either:

- A long-term lease (minimum of six months in duration); or,
- A combination of rental periods, each lasting 30 or more consecutive days, for a total of at least six months of tenancy. Types of evidence that can be submitted in support of a declaration include (but are not limited to):

- Tenancy agreement(s)
- Income tax returns or notices of assessment stating rental income
- Bank statements showing reoccurring rental income
- Insurance certificates for tenants insurance
- Information from a long-term tenant proving occupancy

[mintzilla]

If this does work (I doubt it ) and these homeowners rent out their properties, won't the rents be through the roof? Like how does that help affordability?

If your home is worth a million plus you are not gonna rent it to some broke ass student for $500/ month

[Envder]

Originally Posted by mintzilla

If this does work (I doubt it ) and these homeowners rent out their properties, won't the rents be through the roof? Like how does that help affordability?

If your home is worth a million plus you are not gonna rent it to some broke ass student for $500/ month

i thought if they don't rent it out they get hit with it. So if people aren't taking the high rent prices they will have to lower it till people will want to rent. Untill that happens they get hit with it. So either they take lower rent pay then they want or they get screwed with a large fine

[Spork]

Originally Posted by casper

All it was going to do was create revenue for agents and city bylaw officers while undermining property rights.

Hilarious.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Spork

Hilarious.

It would be Hilarious, if were not such a nuisance and intrusion of the city of Vancouver into the lives of it citizens. I have a family member that has been in and out of hospital a fair bit. Last thing we need to deal with is getting a letter from the doctor and having the hospital deal with this nonsense to satisfy some politicians desire to create the optics while all he is doing is create a make work activity for city staff to collect taxes.

Terrible intrusion on property rights. You save up to buy a home and you have the city come in and play games like this.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by casper

It would be Hilarious, if were not such a nuisance and intrusion of the city of Vancouver into the lives of it citizens. I have a family member that has been in and out of hospital a fair bit. Last thing we need to deal with is getting a letter from the doctor and having the hospital deal with this nonsense to satisfy some politicians desire to create the optics while all he is doing is create a make work activity for city staff to collect taxes.

Terrible intrusion on property rights. You save up to buy a home and you have the city come in and play games like this.

The word 'citizens' used very loosely of course.

[casper]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

The word 'citizens' used very loosely of course.

There is what 631,486 people living in the city of Vancouver in 2016.

That is aprox. 30,000 more than 2011
That is aprox. 50,000 more than 2006
That is aprox. 90,000 more than 2001
That is aorox. 115,000 more than 1996

This city has not had massive stretches of underdevelopment land. That growth is all accommodated within the same land mass.

Yes it is an intrusion by the city of Vancouver into its citizens lives.

[Spork]

Originally Posted by casper

It would be Hilarious, if were not such a nuisance and intrusion of the city of Vancouver into the lives of it citizens. I have a family member that has been in and out of hospital a fair bit. Last thing we need to deal with is getting a letter from the doctor and having the hospital deal with this nonsense to satisfy some politicians desire to create the optics while all he is doing is create a make work activity for city staff to collect taxes.

Terrible intrusion on property rights. You save up to buy a home and you have the city come in and play games like this.

You don't need to get a letter if you are not audited.

And for the record, there are lots of restrictions on how one's personal property can be used, so this is no more of an intrusion than the city telling you that you cannot have a pub in your home, have any more than 5 unrelated persons living together in your home, or not operating a B&B in your home.

I agree that the paltry 1% won't do anything to decrease the demand for land banking in this city, but what if it does? That's great. If it doesn't? Maybe they will raise the tax to 5% next year or take other substantial, meaningful steps to making this city more affordable.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Is there a snitch line (there should be).

Oh yes, I can see that working really well to build up trust in the community.

Snitching was frequently used during China's Cultural Revolution.

If you can't beat them, join them, eh?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Oh yes, I can see that working really well to build up trust in the community.

Snitching was frequently used during China's Cultural Revolution.

If you can't beat them, join them, eh?

There's a big difference between being hit with a fine and being thrown in a re-education camp. Residents need a means of reporting empty homes as the city will not hire inspectors to do the work.