Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

Speak Up

An unfair tax system was one factor which led Bruce Hoyt to sell his house near Perth-Andover.

The place he sold, Hoyt explained to a panel of politicians in Woodstock last Thursday, July 10, was "the home I built and raised my family in."

He was speaking at a meeting to gauge people's reaction to the provincial Finance Department's Discussion Paper on New Brunswick's Tax System.

Hoyt said changes to the current property tax system are "welcome and long overdue."

Nearly two decades ago he inherited the family cottage in Fosterville.

Hoyt said when that happened, he effectively started paying three separate property taxes.

"People with cottages pay an extra tax because it's not their primary place of residence," Hoyt said.

"I was really paying three taxes. One on my house and two on the camp."

Last year he decided to sell his home in Tobique Narrows, a place rich with sentiment, partly because the tax burden was too much.

Lorne Drake, who lives near Fosterville, also gave a presentation last Thursday to the select committee.

He, too, took issue with the additional tax people with cottages have to pay.

"Having a cottage or camp is a lifestyle decision," Drake told the legislators.

He said whether someone invests $50,000 in a cottage away from home or in a swimming pool in their own backyard, the taxes they pay on that investment should be equal.

The current system would tax the person who bought a cottage considerably more than the other, said Drake.

"Why does the location of my property investment affect my taxes?" he asked.

The province's Discussion Paper presents two options for reforming the current property tax system.

The first would lower the provincial non-residential tax rate, but add another tax to all local service district (LSD) properties.

The government claims this option would help businesses and encourage growth. The burden seems to fall on homeowners, who would pay more taxes under this system.

The second option would cut out the provincial residential rate, lower the non-residential rate and add another tax to all properties in a LSD.

Drake said the first option is unacceptable because it would place an even greater tax burden on homeowners.

He supported option two, saying it would eliminate differential tax treatment between owner-occupied and non owner-occupied properties.

That means, to use Drake's example, the taxes on both the swimming pool and cottage would be the same.

Linwood Lawrence, another Fosterville resident, wonders where all the taxes he and his neighbours pay are going.

"The government's sending all these taxes somewhere, but they certainly aren't sending them here," said Lawrence.

He told the select committee he's tired of paying high property taxes and getting nothing in return.

"A lot of homes here are worth three-quarters of a million dollars," he said, "and we've just got a cow path down here.

"I live in a lane where the government does nothing. I have to plough and do road work. There's no street lights."

His main complaint, however, is with spikes in property assessments.

Lawrence's home used to be assessed around $45,000. It was that way for years, he said.

Then one year, in the early 90s, his property assessment jumped to $108,000.

Lawrence couldn't understand why his property value would raise $60,000 basically overnight.

He challenged the assessment, and lost.

"I didn't get any justification. I kept asking how they came to that," said Lawrence. "They couldn't break it down, how they came to that figure. It was so frustrating."

He told the committee a fair assessment system should be developed.

The Discussion Paper proposed determining a property's value by averaging the assessment values from the last three years.

Lawrence was doubtful that change would make a big difference in what he pays.

"I think they're going the wrong way there," he said.

Drake was more optimistic and told the committee the proposal should be put in force immediately.

He also suggested the province create a tax credit system to reduce the harmful effects of assessment spikes and unequal tax formulas.