Over the past few weeks I have participated in a number of media interviews and discussions on the topic of housing affordability. Some have appeared in the newspaper, dealing with Homeowners Grants, deferring property taxes, and how to create affordable housing. Others have been on radio and TV.
Years from now, it might be interesting to see whether any of my observations were even close. So for the record here are links to some recent interviews:
Vancouver Sun on the new Homeowner Loan program (December 15) http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-government-offers-down-payment-loans-to-first-time-homebuyers
Dinner with Kirk Lapointe (December 5, 2016) http://cirh.streamon.fm/listen-pl-6651
Global TV Vancouver shouldn't boast about rental housing (January 4) http://globalnews.ca/news/3161602/vancouver-shouldnt-boast-about-new-rental-housing-real-estate-consultant/
Conversations that Matter with Stu McNish (January 6, 2017) http://cirh.streamon.fm/listen-pl-7292
Global News Land Assembly along East Broadway http://globalnews.ca/news/3168279/attempted-land-assembly-deal-has-33-foot-east-vancouver-lots-listed-for-3-4-million/
Martin Strong on Roundhouse Radio (January 11, 2017) http://cirh.streamon.fm/listen-pl-7292
The Real Estate Therapist January 28, 2017 (http://cirh.streamon.fm/listenlater-pl-7683)
I welcome your comments! :-)
Sunday, January 29, 2017
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
For Robbie Burns Day: The Haggis Poem by Monty Python.
Much to his dad and mum's dismay
Horace ate himself one day
He didn't stop to say his grace
He just sat down and ate his face
"We can't have this!" his dad declared
"If that lad's ate he should be shared"
But even as he spoke they saw
Horace eating more and more:
First his legs and then his thighs,
His arms, his nose, his hair, his eyes
"Stop him someone!" Mother cried
"Those eyeballs would be better fried!"
But all too late for they were gone,
And he had started on his dong...
"Oh foolish child!" the father mourned
"You could have deep-fried those with prawns,
Some parsely and some tartar sauce..."
But H was on his second course;
His liver and his lights and lung,
His ears, his neck, his chin, his tongue
"To think I raised him from the cot
And now he's gone to scoff the lot!"
His mother cried what shall we do?
What's left won't even make a stew..."
And as she wept her son was seen
To eat his head his heart his spleen
And there he lay, a boy no more
Just a stomach on the floor...
None the less since it was his
They ate it - and that's what haggis is
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Another West Vancouver heritage house saved from the wrecking ball
Now that construction on Vinson House Cottages www.vinsonhousecottages.com is underway, and about to go to market, I am pleased to report on another piece of West Vancouver's history.
The Major Rush house, built in 1923 was once situated on a two-acre parcel of land on Inglewood Ave. In subsequent years, the property was subdivided and today it sits on a 11,800+ sq.ft. lot at the corner of Jefferson and 12th Street. But it's a beautiful corner lot and I'm pleased to report that I have been able to purchase it with the intention of undertaking another heritage revitalization project/
I also want to thank Tom Hassan, a realtor at Royal LePage Sussex, http://www.tomhassan.com/ who appreciates the importance of saving West Vancouver's history, for showing me the property, and Elaine Biggan, the realtor who has worked with me over the past few years, for doing everything she could to encourage me to buy it!
I'll have much more to write about this shortly, but in the meanwhile, here is a link that describes this beautiful house and property. http://www.tomhassan.com/real-estate/1195-12th-street/
The Major Rush house, built in 1923 was once situated on a two-acre parcel of land on Inglewood Ave. In subsequent years, the property was subdivided and today it sits on a 11,800+ sq.ft. lot at the corner of Jefferson and 12th Street. But it's a beautiful corner lot and I'm pleased to report that I have been able to purchase it with the intention of undertaking another heritage revitalization project/
I also want to thank Tom Hassan, a realtor at Royal LePage Sussex, http://www.tomhassan.com/ who appreciates the importance of saving West Vancouver's history, for showing me the property, and Elaine Biggan, the realtor who has worked with me over the past few years, for doing everything she could to encourage me to buy it!
I'll have much more to write about this shortly, but in the meanwhile, here is a link that describes this beautiful house and property. http://www.tomhassan.com/real-estate/1195-12th-street/
Opinion Homeowner's grant program and property tax system due for overhaul Vancouver Courier January 19, 2017
I have
been both amused, and disturbed, by homeowners’ responses to the 2017 B.C.
property assessments. I am sure I am not alone.
I can’t
help but wonder what those struggling to afford a one-bedroom apartment must be
thinking when they read about homeowners complaining that their homes increased
in value by hundreds of thousands of dollars last year.
Yes, some
may be losing their homeowner grants. But when you stop and think about it,
given the number of renters who can’t find an affordable home, why is the
provincial government still offering $800 million in grants to 91 per cent of BC
homeowners?
Many
homeowners are concerned because they cannot afford to pay their property
taxes. But they refuse to avail themselves of the Property Tax Deferral
Program, which was created precisely to help people like them.
Which
brings me to another complaint. Why does this program offer extremely low
interest rate loans to anyone 55+, regardless of their financial situation?
Surely the program should be means-tested, as it is in most other
jurisdictions.
The
property assessment notices raise some other issues.
Our
property taxation system is based on the market value of a property,
considering its location, size, zoning, and improvements. Other jurisdictions
use different approaches.
In
Vietnam, I was surprised to see many tall, skinny buildings, often in the
middle of nowhere. I was told this was because property taxes were not based on
value, but rather on the quality of a street and the width of the property.
Since narrow properties required shorter roads and services, they were taxed
less.
I think it
is time for our governments to reconsider how they calculate property taxes.
I first
thought about this 20 years ago when I owned a suburban house on a large lot
and a Coal Harbour condominium apartment assessed at a similar value. My house,
on the southern boundary of the city, required significantly longer roads,
sewers and water pipes, compared to the downtown apartment.
There
were also more children in my single-family neighbourhood compared to Coal
Harbour.
However,
I paid a similar amount of taxes on each property.
At a time
when governments are encouraging us to live more sustainable lifestyles in
multi-family housing, why aren’t there separate assessment classes and mill
rates for single-family and multi-family properties?
Some of
you will respond that most apartments are less valuable than houses, and
consequently owners pay lower taxes. This is true.
However,
owners of high-density apartments and low-density houses of the same value, pay
the same taxes.
Why
doesn’t our property tax system better reflect the cost of providing services,
and reward apartment owners with lower taxes?
The
dramatic increase in some single-family property assessments highlights another
issue that needs to be addressed.
These
properties increased in value because the neighbourhood Official Community Plan
(OCP) or zoning was changed to allow multi-family development.
Some
might say, “aren’t these people lucky?” Yes, they are, especially if they are
ready to sell to a developer and move away.
However,
if they want to remain in their house for the foreseeable future, they will be
forced to pay much higher taxes, and many will not be eligible for the Tax
Deferral Program.
As a
planner who would like to see large swaths of single-family zoned land designated
for multi-family development, I am more sympathetic to their plight.Why? I
know that neighbourhood residents will forcefully oppose any density increases
if they will result in higher taxes for those who don’t want to move.
Consequently, politicians will be less likely to approve OCP and zoning
changes.
One
solution could be to modify the way properties are assessed and taxed. The goal
would be to allow single-family properties designated multi-family in an OCP,
or zoned for higher density, to continue to pay lower taxes until a development
permit is taken out for a new development.
This
would likely result in more land zoned for affordable, multi-family housing,
without penalizing those owners who want to remain in their homes.
While
this column looks at residential properties, there is another important
taxation issue that needs further discussion, namely the unfair taxation of
non-residential properties. But that is another topic for another day.
geller@sfu.ca
@michaelgeller
© 2017 Vancouver Courier
- See
more at:
http://www.vancourier.com/opinion/homeowner-s-grant-program-and-property-tax-system-due-for-overhaul-1.7978912#sthash.fwFSmoiR.73QTyg6E.dpuf
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
Opinion: Outlook does not look good for Vancouver renters in 2017 - Vancouver Courier January 5, 2017
Will
Vancouver’s housing become more affordable in 2017? This is
the question on the minds of many, especially as we open our 2017 Property
Assessments.
I have
been reviewing forecasts from the B.C. Real Estate Association, economists,
bankers and real estate experts. The consensus seems to be that given the rapid
price escalation in recent years, and the province’s 15 per cent Foreign
Buyers’ Tax, house prices will go down this year.
UBC
economist Tom Davidoff is even predicting rents will also go down, in large
part because of the mayor’s Empty Homes Tax.
I am not
so sure.
While
there’s no doubt single-family house prices have softened since the 15 per cent
Foreign Buyers’ Tax was introduced, they are not likely to drop dramatically.
Moreover, condominium prices have not gone down. In many cases, they have gone up
since Aug. 2.
Given the
difficulties obtaining approvals in most Vancouver neighbourhoods, there is
limited supply coming onto the market. At the same time, demand from migration
and downsizing baby-boomers is increasing. Furthermore, if air quality in China
continues to get worse, expect more demand from Chinese buyers.
As for
rental housing, by the end of 2017, I predict rental rates will rise even more
than the 3.7 per cent allowed by provincial legislation.
While the
mayor rightfully boasts Vancouver has witnessed construction of thousands of
new rental units, rents for new apartments are higher than expected. Moreover,
unlike Davidoff and city politicians, I do not expect the Empty Homes Tax to
result in thousands of new rental units coming to market.
Let me
explain why with a personal anecdote.
Last
month, I received an email from the Floridian who purchased an apartment I once
owned at Bayshore. He and his wife spend four to five months here during the
summer and had just received the mayor’s letter about the proposed tax.
"Is your government nuts?’ he asked. “Do they really expect me to rent it out when I'm not here, or pay the tax?” adding it would be $40,000-plus a year.
"Is your government nuts?’ he asked. “Do they really expect me to rent it out when I'm not here, or pay the tax?” adding it would be $40,000-plus a year.
He told
me he once tried to rent the apartment, but it is very difficult to find
someone who wanted it for precisely the period when he was not here, at an
appropriate rent.
When he
reviewed his situation with city officials, he was advised in writing that if
apartments in his building can be rented for six months or more, the tax would
apply, even if it was listed for rent.
When I
tweeted out his predicament, I received some interesting responses. Many
questioned why he should be unwilling to pay the tax if he could afford a
$4-million-plus second home. Others pointed out the injustice of him having two
homes when they didn't have even one.
To my
mind, this is the essence of the tax. It just doesn't seem right to some people
that others keep homes empty for whatever reason, when there is a shortage of
rental housing.
One
clever soul, who understood why my friend might not want to rent his beautiful,
furnished waterfront home, asked why he didn't rent it to someone on the
understanding they would keep it vacant. This way
he would be complying with the requirement to rent it. City lawyers might have
to go after the tenant.
I posted
this on Twitter. "Attention lawyers. If someone rents an empty home to
someone who keeps it vacant, would the tax penalty still apply?"
My tweet
was shared around at least one downtown law firm where the matter was
discussed. The consensus seemed to be that the city would have a hard time
prosecuting either the owner or tenant, provided there was a lease in place.
More
importantly, lawyers questioned the legality of this empty home tax in its
entirety, and expected it to be challenged in court. They also believed those
who wanted to get around it would easily find a way.
I suspect
the Empty Homes Tax will result in some properties rented out, and others sold
to owner-occupiers or investors who will rent them out.
But
ultimately, it will be administratively expensive and not make rental housing
more affordable in 2017.
geller@sfu.ca
@michaelgeller
© 2017 Vancouver Courier
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)