2016 BC Property Assessment

Just announced on Global news… threshold for the homeowner grant is up to $1.6M. :fruit:

We deserve everything coming to us. Trump included.

The home owner grant is great news

Although an official announcement isn’t expected until tomorrow, it’s anticipated homeowners could apply for a $570 tax break if their property is valued somewhere under that figure.

It’s great news for anyone above the current threshold but struggling to pay their property taxes.

I may be a little slow, but I have trouble reconciling the above with the below:

It appears a threshold to claim BC’s homeowner grant may be bumped up to $1.6 million from the current $1.2 million cap

Sooooo… $500 is make-or-break for people sitting on million dollar properties.

What a time to be alive.

Although an official announcement isn’t expected until tomorrow, it’s anticipated homeowners could apply for a $570 tax break if their property is valued somewhere under that figure.

It’s great news for anyone above the current threshold but struggling to pay their property taxes.

I may be a little slow, but I have trouble reconciling the above with the below:

It appears a threshold to claim BC’s homeowner grant may be bumped up to $1.6 million from the current $1.2 million cap

Sooooo… $500 is make-or-break for people sitting on million dollar properties.

What a time to be alive.

lol - quoted for epicness

I may be a little slow, but I have trouble reconciling the above with the below:

Sooooo… $500 is make-or-break for people sitting on million dollar properties.

What a time to be alive.

if you owned a property for 20 or 30 years in Point grey that you bought for what is now chicken feed or maybe you inherited it ?

the lot can now be easily worth 3 or 4 million

if you owned a property for 20 or 30 years in Point grey that you bought for what is now chicken feed or maybe you inherited it ?

the lot can now be easily worth 3 or 4 million

the point is that the break on property taxes is typically $570 and that shouldn't be a make or break situation for someone in an expensive house. for the outliers, they can just defer their taxes until they sell or otherwise.

think of it this way, it represents about an extra $48/month that someone has to come up with if they no longer qualify for the grant. prudent fiscal responsibility would say that if you own a home and an extra $50 in monthly expenses is a make or break situation for you then maybe owning that home is not such a good idea.

the lot can now be easily worth 3 or 4 million

Profit and move Narth. You'll be able to afford property taxes.

the point is that the break on property taxes is typically $570 and that shouldn't be a make or break situation for someone in an expensive house. for the outliers, they can just defer their taxes until they sell or otherwise.

What about the pensioners that built their houses 40 years ago and now are burdened with a huge tax bill?

What about the pensioners that built their houses 40 years ago and now are burdened with a huge tax bill?

That's what tax deferment is intended for. Not a low interest loan for investing.

What about the pensioners that built their houses 40 years ago and now are burdened with a huge tax bill?

those people still had a tax bill to pay before, they just didn't qualify for the grant. it that situation if they need to they can defer the taxes untill they sell or will the property on to someone else.

those people still had a tax bill to pay before, they just didn't qualify for the grant. it that situation if they need to they can defer the taxes untill they sell or will the property on to someone else.

The problem with the system is that a 200000 dollar 3 bdrm house doesn't cost less to service than a million dollar house . Just because the perceived value of a house has gone up doesn't mean the homeowner should foot a higher tax bill.

The problem with the system is that a 200000 dollar 3 bdrm house doesn't cost less to service than a million dollar house . Just because the perceived value of a house has gone up doesn't mean the homeowner should foot a higher tax bill.

The issue discussed in this thread is not about a higher tax bill. It's a threshold passed in which you aren't getting a free ride from the government any further.

Regarding the comment, "Won't anyone think of the grizzled van-westsiders who've been there for thirty years and can't stomach $500 extra year"… I think we should first ask how much they're paying in taxes. If it's $2,000 a year, you might have grounds to argue from.

The problem with the system is that a 200000 dollar 3 bdrm house doesn't cost less to service than a million dollar house . Just because the perceived value of a house has gone up doesn't mean the homeowner should foot a higher tax bill.

you can't say that for sure unless you do a direct comparison between the two houses as the million dollar house may cost more to service or it may actually cost less. considering that we don't pay any tax on the value/profits of our primary residences when we sell them, i think it's entirely fair that the property tax we pay is based on the current value of the home.

again, if someone is in a situation where they can't afford to pay their property taxes then there are measures available if one qualifies - over age 55. in the case you're proposing, pensioners would qualify for that tax relief and they don't have to pay property tax at all. for those who don't qualify and find that extra $570 per year - $48/month - in taxes to be too much to handle then maybe they shouldn't be owning a home if $50/month is going to sink them as that's horribly poor financial management.

if there was no option for deferment then i would agree with you, but as it stands i think you have no basis for your argument.

I don't think people are going to be financially ruined by a $570 increase but it's just a bummer when that means $570 of what used to be play money, or investment money or whatever, is now going to taxes instead.