• Login:
Welcome, Register Here
follow PropertyTalk on facebook follow PropertyTalk on twitter Newsletter follow PropertyTalk on LinkedIn follow PropertyTalk on facebook
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,722

    Default

    Don't forget the census is just a snapshot of one night.
    There are many reasons why a house might be vacant on that particular night - the occupant(s) may be on holiday, in hospital, away on business, shifted out to allow renovations, or a host of other quite legitimate reasons.

    They have a vacancy tax in Vancouver - and the running costs don't come cheap.
    I wrote about this in my August 'Life as a landlord':

    "The second move by the Vancouver authorities has been to propose a vacancy tax. In order to reduce the number of residential properties that sit empty for long periods of time (estimated to be 25,400) they have voted to impose a 1% tax on the assessed capital value of any such property that remains continually unoccupied for more than six months. The stated aim of such a tax is to coerce those owners to either rent out their property or to sell it to someone who will.
    Of course, setting up a system to identify and levy those properties does not come cheap. When the proposal was adopted, the setup cost was said to be C$4.7million. Now, just seven months later, this cost has blown out to C$7.4million. That’s an increase of $2.7 million in just a few months, and you can bet your bottom dollar that won’t be the end of it. Ongoing running costs have been estimated (yeah, right) at C$2million a year. Some of the opponents of the scheme have already pointed out that the city is building a whole new bureaucratic money-pit.

    Obviously there has been some negative feedback to such a scheme. Some Vancouver property owners split their time between that city and other places. Renting out their Vancouver accommodation is not viable because they want to use it themselves for several months each year. Some homeowners with expensive property will be paying out tens of thousands in the vacancy tax all while their strata bylaws actually prevents them from letting out the property to others.

    While the stated aim of the tax is to increase the renting pool, the leftish academics and politicians cannot resist the envy statements. When second-home owners cry poor, these ‘experts’ can never resist pointing to the large capital gains such properties have enjoyed recently, and suggest that the city offer the option of deferring their vacancy tax payments by means of a lien over the property which is then paid when they die or sell. Quite how this is meant to achieve an increase in the renting pool is unclear, it sounds more like an envy tax to me."

    https://www.propertytalk.com/forum/s...andlord/page81
    Last edited by flyernzl; 30-12-2017 at 11:42 PM.

  2. #22

    Default

    Now now, don't be rational.
    Free online Property Investment Course from iFindProperty, a residential investment property agency.

  3. #23

    Default

    ATO are only interested in Tax grab. They are complete bastards.

    Bob is on to it. It's not about homeless. Investors will take the hit as it's less painful than renting.

    No rent. No income. No tax return.


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •