Quote:
Originally Posted by Changing City
I'm not sure what that word salad means. BC Assessment determines the classification of land for taxation. The City sets the tax rate for each class. Class 8, Recreation, has a lower tax rate than other uses. If the City charged a higher tax rate for Class 8 land, then all the parks and open spaces would be taxed at a higher rate. That would have significant tax implications for the privately owned Class 8 sites.
The City has been trying to find a way to change land classification for years, so that they can encourage vacant sites to be developed, but none of the changes that would be required are within their jurisdiction. So far no provincial government has made any changes that would be necessary. Without something like a land classification of 'vacant site', that could then be taxed at a higher rate, there's nothing obvious that the City can do.
There's a federal initiative to consider taxing vacant land, but it's not likely to be considered before an election, and I have no idea whether a conservative government would introduce the necessary legislation. Developers are understandably opposed to the idea.
|
I'll help you catch up.
The City of Vancouver charges less property tax for Class 8 land. Developers are thus given incentive to convert their land to class 8 land to pay less property tax. Rather than incentivizing developers to utilize the land, the City incentivizes developers to have less of a rush to develop land and in fact leave land vacant for years. We do not want this, though it is incentivized.
Unless you can give me a compelling argument for all the class 8 land that we need to protect with tax incentives, you're out of luck here kid. Where are all the class 8 sites we want to give tax breaks to? Don't tell me you think the parks board pays property tax to the city.
Threaded Mode