Including one other tax on your property just isn’t sensible politics

Article content material

There have been quite a lot of experiences final week concerning the prime minister and finance minister assembly with a government-funded suppose tank to debate quite a lot of points involving “generational equity,” one in all which was the introduction of a house fairness tax.

This specific suppose tank, Era Squeeze, appears to suppose that one of many methods to allow the youth to afford a brand new house is to go after older individuals who have labored onerous traditionally to avoid wasting sufficient to purchase a house and repay their mortgages. Such older individuals’s houses have typically benefited from many years of capital appreciation.

Article content material

“Gen Squeeze believes that it’s time to guard actual shelters, not tax shelters. It’s unfair to maintain a system by which the onerous work Canadians do day by day of their jobs is taxed greater than the wealth owners acquire from rising costs whereas they sleep and watch TV,” it says on its web site.

“Step one is placing a value on housing inequity by including a modest surtax on houses valued at greater than $1 million. This surtax will apply solely to the highest 12 per cent of high-value houses; the overwhelming majority of Canadians received’t pay a penny extra. However it’ll assist decelerate dwelling costs so earnings have an opportunity to catch up, demonstrating allegiance to the Canadian dream {that a} good dwelling ought to be in attain for what onerous work can earn.”

The suppose tank’s web site is stuffed with the standard left-wing victimhood messaging, however it’s fairly clear that older Canadians are the obvious drawback.

Ignoring that, is a house fairness tax a good suggestion? The brief reply isn’t any. Canadians already pay a protracted listing of taxes on their houses, similar to municipal property taxes, carbon taxes and GST/HST on new builds, renovations and utilities. As well as, if the eventual disposition of their dwelling or rental property doesn’t qualify for the principal residence exemption, they will even pay capital positive factors taxes to the extent the property has appreciated.

Article content material

Article content material

How a house fairness tax will remedy the issue of affordability is a thriller. Proposing new taxes is straightforward. Governments can actually cost a tax on just about something in the event that they suppose the coverage aligns with its meant income targets. What to do as soon as the tax revenues are raised is the robust half. And that’s the place many left-leaning fiscal insurance policies fail.

Within the current case, if a house fairness tax is imposed, the affected properties will presumably — because the above quote suggests — change into extra reasonably priced for kids to buy. That appears doubtful to me. Market worth goes again to fundamental supply-and-demand economics. If demand exceeds provide, costs will improve.

A house fairness tax proposal is per the bogeyman method to housing points that our present authorities, supported by left-leaning suppose tanks, has taken.

First, it was foreigners that had been the issue. Accordingly, Canada launched a ban on foreigners buying Canadian actual property (this ban was just lately prolonged to the top of 2026). As well as, it was these foreigners who had been “underutilizing” actual property, and so cities similar to Vancouver, Toronto and others launched a type of empty houses tax, and the federal authorities adopted swimsuit in 2022 with its Underused Housing Tax debacle.

Article content material

The second bogeyman was these flippers of actual property, so the federal government launched the ridiculous and duplicative flipping tax in 2023. The third bogeyman had been the evil short-term rental homeowners and operators who function in an space that bans short-term leases, so the federal government launched a ridiculous and harmful rule to deny expense deductions to such individuals.

And, now, it’s these darn older individuals who labored onerous all through their lives to accumulate and repay their houses and had the great fortune of capital appreciation.

Housing provide is a multi-faceted and complicated societal concern. Regularly introducing tax guidelines to go after people who find themselves the perceived drawback is just politics — and poor politics at that — on the expense of excellent coverage. For instance, our nation’s housing points are straight tied to elevated and uncontrolled immigration, so our immigration insurance policies must be amended.

That doesn’t imply, nonetheless, that sure present tax guidelines that impression housing, such because the principal residence exemption, shouldn’t be reviewed. I’ve lengthy said, together with in a current podcast episode of mine, that the principal residence exemption may be very beneficiant given the limitless quantity that may be claimed. Different international locations, similar to america, have limits on their principal residence exemption.

Article content material

Maybe within the context of total tax reform/assessment, the principal residence exemption could possibly be reviewed and higher focused. That might be very tough on condition that the exemption may be very cherished and enshrined. Any authorities that took a number of the present advantages away would possible pay a excessive political value.

Sir Winston Churchill famously said, “I contend that for a nation to attempt to tax itself into prosperity is sort of a man standing in a bucket and attempting to carry himself up by the deal with.”

Historical past is clearly a great information. For instance, regardless of the continual chatter that earnings inequality could possibly be solved with a wealth tax, the historical past of such an imposition is horrible and ineffective, so solely a handful of nations nonetheless have such a tax.

Within the current case, given how determined our present authorities is for tax revenues to prop up its bloated spending and political fortunes, nobody ought to be shocked at any new type of tax that’s floated.

Article content material

New taxes, nonetheless, usually are not the reply to our nation’s points. As an alternative, good governance, management and financial insurance policies would go a good distance towards uniting our divided nation.

Kim Moody, FCPA, FCA, TEP, is the founding father of Moodys Tax/Moodys Non-public Shopper, a former chair of the Canadian Tax Basis, former chair of the Society of Property Practitioners (Canada) and has held many different management positions within the Canadian tax neighborhood. He may be reached at kgcm@kimgcmoody.com and his LinkedIn profile is https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimmoody.

_____________________________________________________________

In the event you like this story, join the FP Investor Publication.

_____________________________________________________________

Bookmark our web site and assist our journalism: Don’t miss the enterprise information you should know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and join our newsletters right here.

Article content material