this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
129 points (93.9% liked)

Canada

7218 readers
374 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Agreed. Pretty much any property a person owns past the first single-family home or equivalent should be treated as income and business expense and should be taxed as such. There should be a bigger incentive when you move homes to buy a new home and sell your previous. Rather than buying a home when you move and putting the previous up for rent, slowly accumulating properties to be used as passive income and denying homeownership to younger people.

I'm not 100% sure we should even allow corporations to own housing property at all, but that's a bigger question.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Unfortunately, in the case of housing a lot of the abuses of tenants' rights tends to be caused by amateur landlords (who don't know how to properly plan ahead). There are a lot of laws to know and unexpected costs involved, so having a larger building management entity makes sense here. It would be cool if non-profit renters' co-ops (like the people in Hamilton trying to buy their apartment building) could be successfully formed.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I much prefer corporations owning rental housing than individuals. They at least have staff and somewhat understand the laws. The idea that all sorts of individuals will choose to be landlords of one or two properties and deal with all the toxic shit that comes with it is incredibly naive in my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

On the other hand, making it expensive to be a landlord also drives up what people need to pay for rent to cover those costs. There should be options for people to get housing without having to commit to owning it themselves. Income from rental properties is subject to income taxes, and there's lots of subsidies/incentives that reduce housing costs that only apply to a primary dwelling, not rental properties.

Personally, I'd like to see a crown corp that does housing. Set reasonable pricing and a base standard of what people should expect from a rental property and the private industry has to compete with that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Any property that you put up for rent is actually treated as a business by the CRA.

  • You pay higher property taxes on a rental.
  • If you sell, and the property isn't your primary residence, you pay capital gains taxes.
  • All rental income is taxed and you can't claim that rental income... you can claim interest paid one the mortgage, but it's not that much.
  • There are incentives to maintain a single home when you're buying and selling... If you buy/sell your primary residence you don't pay capital gains taxes.

Should there be more taxing on second and more properties that are investment... maybe. If you increase the cost of ownership, that cost is placed on the renter. A property owner isn't in the game for fun and they aren't going to be willing to take a lot just for the benefit of a renter. It might put pressure on speculators to increase the taxes, but... It's not as 1:1 as people like to think.