TVA cites a greedy landlord representative today who says:
1. Tenants should not get any reductions from the CAQ cut in school taxes
2. Rents in Quebec should rise 37% – an average of $437 – to equal other Canadian towns
3. The Régie du logement should be gutted and turned into an instrument of the landlord organization, which will unilaterally dictate increases.
In fact, the Régie has posted modest increase outlines assuming a sort of universal cost‑of‑living hike of 0.5% plus an average tax bump, the example given being from $800 up to $810. No mention of the decrease in school tax.
Bill Binns 13:00 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
I’m sure if we asked FRAPRU what should be done about the housing situation, we would get similarly ridiculous and unworkable suggestions.
The whole “greedy landlords are raking it in hand over fist” trope is undercut by the fact that, in Montreal, they all seem to be doing everything in their power to get out of that business. You don’t eat a goose that lays golden eggs.
Blork 14:29 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
I’m not sure which is worse; this crackpot landlord and his nutty ideas, or TVA deeming it necessary to put him on the news, as if he represents anything other than crackpottery.
Blork 14:30 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
@Bill Binns, one could make the argument that landlords are trying to get out of the landlordery business BECAUSE they don’t get the crazy wishes that this greedy guy is asking for.
Bill Binns 15:27 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
@Blork – I don’t know anyone in this business here so can’t say for sure. I do know that I am paying almost $700 bucks a month in property taxes for my 1000 sq ft home + school taxes. I am also about to drop 25k+ on a simple porch replacement that I assumed would be around 5k. The thought of problems like foundation repair or a new roof keep me up at night. I really can’t see how anyone can make any sort of regular profit renting apartments for less than $1000 a month and that’s assuming you actually get your $1000 a month.
Best case scenario, the margins are really tight. Worst case, you end up with a tenant that refuses to pay anything at all and it takes over a year to pry them out. We wouldn’t allow someone to walk out of the IGA once a month with $1000 worth of food because “they need it” but we have chosen landlords to be the one business that is compelled to give their product away for free with no recourse whatsoever. It’s a weird business that appears extremely risky.
Blork 16:21 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
Hey, I’m not arguing with you. I get that landlording is tough. A few times in the past I toyed with the idea of doing the classic “buy a triplex, live in one, rent two” thing but I’m glad I didn’t.
That worked well in the past when there was less at stake (triplexes were cheaper, rent was cheaper, renos were cheaper, etc.) and I know of a number of people who did really well doing that (all people who bought in the 80s). But not now. No way.
Blork 16:33 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
…and a few that bought in the 90s.
dwgs 16:53 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
We bought a duplex in the late 90’s, rented the upper for one year and had such a nightmare experience that as soon as we could get the tenants out ( who still owe us a large amount of money) we converted it to a uniplex and have never regretted it.
Raymond Lutz 17:14 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
@Bill Binns, your “(…) undercut by the fact that, in Montreal, they all seem to (…)” is weak. “fact” et “seem” forment un oxymore.
Rent control is a litmus test. Are you drinking the Chicago boys Kool Aid or Marx and Ricardo’s ? What about facts? and metrics? A quick search (with the relevant keywords to dig through the Fraser Institute et al. bullshit) gave me those few links.
Raymond Lutz 17:21 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
Here’s a snippet (from Peter Dorman’s “The Infamous Example of Rent Control in Introductory Economics”):
“The most compelling argument for rent control is neighborhood stabilization, the idea that social capital in an urban environment requires stable residence patterns. If prices are volatile, and this leads to a lot of residential turnover, the result can be a less desirable neighborhood for everyone. … not a single textbook treatment of rent control mentions stabilization as an objective, even though this is a standard element in the real-world rhetoric surrounding this issue.”
Kevin 19:04 on 2019-01-18 Permalink
@Bill Binns
I thought you lived in the Village?
Because that tax rate is insane. It is more than twice what I pay in NDG.
JaneyB 11:43 on 2019-01-19 Permalink
@Bill Binns
That is indeed a very insane tax rate. A nice two-storey detached house from the 60s or 70s with yard etc has taxes of about 3-4k.
Ephraim 12:13 on 2019-01-19 Permalink
City tax rates are highest in the parts of the city where the land is expensive. So you can have a shanty on a plot of land in the Plateau and still be paying about $4K in taxes per year.
dhomas 13:10 on 2019-01-19 Permalink
It all depends on how you frame it. I own a triplex that I live in. I wanted to live on the island but I couldn’t afford to buy a single dwelling house and condos were not interesting to me at the time. With my triplex, my rents cover a portion of my mortgage/municipal taxes. My out of pocket regular expenses (mortgage and taxes) are less than I would pay in rent for a similarly sized place. Sure, I needed to put down a 10% deposit, but that came from my RRSP as at tax free loan from myself as part of the HBP. The biggest problem was that my first two tenants were problematic (one drug dealer and one delinquent payer), but once I found good tenants I’ve been doing ok. There are occasional repairs, but I’m pretty handy so I take care of those. But the main takeaway is that my mortgage is less than I’d pay in rent and I gain equity as my property increases in value.
Jonathan 21:12 on 2019-01-21 Permalink
@ephraim, @janey @kevin… Tax rates are the same across the city. There is no difference in tax rates, the amount of muni tax paid is based on the value of the home.
I own a triplex and rent out two of the units. The rent combined covers over half of the mortgage payments and the rents are what I would consider average for the area. A lot of people around me in my age category (mid-thirties) are also happily buying triplexes and enjoying the extra revenue and the new vocation as a housing provider (the word landlord sounds too medieval to me and not exactly gender neutral).