July 28th, 2007
And then there were 24?
By Matthew Blackett // 12 Comments
First Brian Ashton and now Gloria Lindsay-Luby?
Lindsay-Luby, a member of City Council's executive committee, discussed her angst about the land transfer tax in today's Toronto Star. Unlike Ashton, who is also a member of the exec committee, Lindsay-Luby voted with Mayor Miller and 21 other councillors to implement the land transfer tax and an additional $60 vehicle registration. A mix-bag of 23 councillors voted to defer the decision to implement the taxes until council meets in October after the provincial election.
Now Lindsay-Luby is having second thoughts and is trying to find a compromise. Personally, what I find a tad rich is her concern for her ward residents (and potential residents) who may be put off from buying an $800,000 house because it would result in $25,000 in land transfer taxes. I recognize 25Gs is nothing to scoff at -- but I suggest the councillor choose her words more carefully when she starts talking to the press and public about how this could be an "additional hardship" for these homeowners.
Imagine -- some of these resident may have to settle for -- gasp! -- a $700,000 house.
Here's the choice passage from the Star article:
Yesterday, Lindsay Luby revealed that though she voted not to defer last week, she had in fact been wavering on both taxes, especially the one involving land transfers.
The city's plan calls for a 1.5 per cent tax on homes sold for more than $250,000 and an additional .5 per cent tax for homes more than $400,000. The amount would match the provincial tax already levied on home buyers.
Lindsay Luby voiced concerns to the mayor during last week's debate. Her anxiety grew during the meeting, she says, as she had finance staff look into the impact the tax would have on people buying expensive homes like the many $800,000 properties in her ward.
"I thought, they'll pay $25,000 in land transfer taxes, on top of all the other closing fees of a lawyer and of course a real estate person collecting 5 per cent of that $800,000. That's quite big dollars. I could see why it would start to stall the market,'' she said, adding the tax will be an additional hardship for people who want to live in Toronto.
photo by Anne Adams
Interact
Sorry, comments are
closed at this time.
Rate this post
Loading ...
Comments
Neither the author nor Spacing necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Spacing reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. See our Comment Policy.
If you don't think she means the voters in her ward you're quite naive. This whole debate has been about politics, not policy. Many of the councillors are making decisions based on what's best for them personally and not what's best for the city.
She's on the exec committee and knows how desperate the city is for cash. She is doing this so that her constituents know she's not walking in 100% lock-step with Miller. Anyone following city hall knows Lindsay-Luby's allegiances come and go like the seasons.
The housing market is going to crash soon anyhow. When it does, these councilors will get the blame whether they deserve it or not.
I would be naive if i believed that the purpose of your article was to raise awareness of the politcal maneuvering going on at city hall. Everyone in City Hall is politiking right now - but that includes Miller and his following - not just the councillors that you disagree with. If the political maneuvering worries you (and it should) then shine a light on all of it. Finger pointing and biased coverage of this crucial debate gets us nowhere.
OK Lee -- help us shine a light -- please shine the light.
Just want to say thanks for keeping me informed on what is going on at city hall. It is good to have a bit of a twist in the posts. Your bias is transparent and it adds some fun to the reporting on issues some take far too seriously! After all, it's only Toronto.
Please keep it up.
Lee, I could post 101 rumours that flew around City Hall last week. Twenty of those rumours might have some semblance of truth attached to them and less than five will be at least 80% true. It's the nature of the beast. But when Lindsay Luby goes to the Star about her cold feet (clearly an attempt to get Miller and Carroll to the bargaining table) then it becomes a legitimate discussion to have in a forum like this.
And to be fair to Lindsay Luby, even though I think her position is asinine, her assistant was telling me about how unfair she thinks the scaled LTT is to the $800k home owners/buyers before the deferral vote. So this isn't just a last minute thing for her.
The verb in the headline should be plural.
Nicking the richer and the speculatively richer (as most everyone who's bought/buying is presuming that the price always goes up, the asset always appreciates (inflates - though we never talk about housing inflation as being worthy of controlling vs. wages), is more fair than boosting the property taxes as much as is "needed" to stabilize the city.
And yes, what happens when the house prices come down a bit or a lot, as there will be some ripple effect somehow from the U.S. "softness".
I guess we'll really need to build the Front St. Extension then eh?
Sorry Hamish. That was a reach even for you.
It might not be 24 - Augimeri is looking like going the other way, and to get a vote to reopen in September I understand it needs to be one of the 23 to bring it forward.
It was never actually 23 votes against the taxes. It was 23 votes against doing the responsible thing and considering the taxes in July.
Ashton, Hall and Perruzza voted to defer but have said they'll eventually support the taxes. That group may include Saundercook but he's been pretty coy about which way he'll go in the end. Augimeri can also join that group now but at the start she had absolutely no intention of supporting the taxes at any point in time until she looked at the consequences of her vote.
However, even though Ainslie voted against the deferral, he's declared time and again that he'll vote against the taxes.
And I would guess that Lindsay Luby could be brought back in line by giving her a flimsy half-measure like a report on the impact of increasing the top bracket of the LTT scale so as not to include $800k homes. Eventually it'll be killed but in the months it takes to bring the report back to Council, residents will calm down because least Lindsay Luby can tell them that she's doing something.
So that brings the numbers about 26-19 in favour of the taxes, which is how most close votes shape up on Council. Unfortunately, however, that's not even close to the 2/3 majority required to re-open in September.
The article says she thought the tax would be "an additional hardship for people who want to live in Toronto." ... not just for people buying $800,000 homes like you suggest.
You're way too hungry to find fault in everyone opposing this land transfer tax.
Comment by lee
July 28, 2007 | 4:48 pm