To Gary Mason and Christy Clark: eg. A UBC professor on a sabbatical to China is still a TAXPAYER, here

Does Premier Christy Clark actually read the local newspapers and understand the words?  Does she listen to her Constituents in Kelowna?  Does she ever step off her soap box to make a logical comment such as foreigners snapping up local property as tax havens in the form of bungalows which are left to rot?

Two examples that Christy Clark and her handlers dreamed up, and Journalist Gary Mason accepts at face value without a comment, he just nods off and hits SEND button to the Globe and Mail editors.

Gary says / writes:

Now, it’s not a perfect solution, admittedly. And as B.C. Premier Christy Clark indicated on Monday, there could be problems implementing it. As an example, she cited a university professor who goes on sabbatical for a year in China and isn’t using her house. Is she going to be taxed? Or a senior citizen who finds himself in hospital for a long stretch of time. Would he be taxed, too?

First Example

A university professor from Northern BC, UBC, SFU, goes on a sabbatical to China for a year leaving her house intact but vacant.   Her insurance company would have a word or two to say about that, the last bit, such as the property and premises have to be looked in on every four days by a third party to ensure that nothing is happening that would increase the possibility of damages, claims being made  by the professor a year later.  The professor, even though she is in China or Australia or anywhere on planet Earth or joy riding on a Russian Rocket to the international space station is still a taxpayer here in Canada, here in British Columbia, here as a property owner paying tax assessments.

There is an escape clause for Christy Clark's example.  The professor is on a sabbatical from China first, who happens to have purchased property locally AND has acquired her current tenure at UBC and is on her sabbatical from UBC to her homeland for a year.......


Second example

A senior citizen, and for clarification for Gary and Christy's benefit, a senior, or any aged 'citizen, is a legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either native or naturalized' who finds themselves in hospital, for a long time, is STILL a taxpayer, is still a Canadian, living in British Columbia, residing in Metro Vancouver, and is still a registered voter.  NOTE: Health Minister Terry Lake may want to confiscate the senior citizen's property to cover MSP bills.


Gary Mason, Globe and Mail

Snip .....On Monday, a group of economists from the University of B.C. and Simon Fraser University – frustrated over the inability of the provincial government to do something to address what has become a festering public-policy issue – unveiled a plan of its own.

Under the proposal devised by the 10 economists from the universities’ business schools, a property surtax of 1.5 per cent would be levied on vacant properties whose owners have no or limited taxable earnings in Canada.

The academics estimated the surtax could generate as much as $90-million in Vancouver alone, a sum they suggested could be redistributed to tax-paying residents of the city.

What many like about the idea is that it would target non-resident foreign owners, tax evaders and others who are using the proceeds of crime to buy homes in Greater Vancouver and laundering their dirty money in the process.

Now, it’s not a perfect solution, admittedly. And as B.C. Premier Christy Clark indicated on Monday, there could be problems implementing it. As an example, she cited a university professor who goes on sabbatical for a year in China and isn’t using her house. Is she going to be taxed? Or a senior citizen who finds himself in hospital for a long stretch of time. Would he be taxed, too?

It’s certainly fair enough for the Premier to flag these potential issues. But I still think the plan has a lot of merit. And I’m sure there are enough smart people in the province’s ministry of finance to come up with plausible solutions to some of these impediments.

Personally, I’m not sure about the idea of redistributing the surtax money to residents. Why not use it to build rental stock or help first-time home buyers some way?


In Canada, we hear the federal government is trying to learn more about the issue. But we haven’t seen anything from Ottawa or the B.C. government that suggests they’re prepared to go to the same kind of lengths the U.S. Treasury Department is, for example, to try to identify, and penalize, those largely responsible for what is happening.

The surtax that the university economists are recommending would not be a panacea. It is doubtful it would do much to stem the tide of foreign money pouring into Greater Vancouver real estate.

But at least it begins to acknowledge we have a problem and that it needs to be addressed somehow. And if governments in this country don’t have time to think of ways to address the situation, maybe they can listen to others who do.  .....Snip

****************************************

Home Insurance Questions and Answers:

#5
What things could happen to my property that won’t be covered unless I make special arrangements?
Here’s one example: damage arising from the freezing of indoor plumbing is seen as preventable. So, if you are away from home for more than three consecutive days (be sure to verify your insurer’s stipulations) during the normal heating season, you must drain the plumbing or arrange to have your home checked daily by a knowledgeable person to ensure that heat is maintained. If you do not make these arrangements and your pipes burst, you may end up covering the clean-up bill.