Toronto Condo Tax

 

Here it is the end of October, and we are ready to change the clocks back one hour and begin to prepare for Winter.

October was an interesting Month, I guess the most important issue was the The Land Transfer Tax initiated here in Toronto. I like to call it the Toronto Condo Tax as the majority of the revenues I am sure, will come from Condos.

This editorial in the Globe and Mail sums up what transpired and gives hope that the next city election should prove interesting and the Mayor and his cohorts will be in for a bumpy ride for re-election bids. 

Editorial Oct 24, 2007

People who clamour for higher taxes are few and far between. But on Monday, an army of scarf-clad Torontonians turned up outside City Hall to do just that. Then they flooded the council chamber’s public gallery, where they spent the rest of the day pressing for controversial new tax measures pushed by Mayor David Miller. When the taxes finally gained council approval in the early evening, the tax cheerleaders leapt from their seats to applaud for several minutes.

If everyone liked paying taxes as much as they apparently do, the day would have been an unqualified success for Mr. Miller. But most Torontonians did not greet the new levies with a standing ovation, and some who have supported Mr. Miller in the past two elections may be having second thoughts.

The centrepiece of Mr. Miller’s plan to boost revenues, a new land transfer tax, is particularly egregious. While softened by compromises made to gain council’s approval, it remains a punitive policy that arbitrarily forces certain Torontonians — home-buyers — to shoulder the load by paying thousands of extra dollars. It is both unfair and economically short-sighted, increasing the risk that the city’s thriving real-estate market might crash.

But it is not just the tax that reflects poorly on Mr. Miller; it is the associated melodrama. After councillors struck a blow against him in July by voting to defer their decision on his tax plan, Torontonians saw a different side of their mayor. Accustomed to getting his way, he responded petulantly. Not only did he announce cutbacks to city services, but he played them for maximum effect, darkly warning of the “continued erosion of our quality of life.” The most prominent of those cuts, the closing of community centres on Mondays, would have saved just $500,000; its only apparent purpose was to punish the city for failing to embrace his taxes, and in the end Mr. Miller was forced to back off it.

Meanwhile, he persistently griped about those standing in the way of his plan and cast aspersions on local real-estate agents. But when a little noise would have been useful during Ontario’s election — a chance to lobby for increased provincial funding still needed even with the Miller taxes — he was inexplicably silent.

“He won the vote, but he lost the city,” a councillor who opposed the new taxes said on Monday. Indeed, Mr. Miller’s success in forcing his measures through may prove a Pyrrhic victory. For nearly four years, he had a smooth ride – including a re-election bid in which he faced no real opposition. His behaviour in recent months suggests that next time it won’t be quite so easy.

A very good editorial…