Housing Prices Dip in Region
Prince George, B.C. – The latest report from the BC Real Estate Association says home prices in the Northern Region have slipped by 3.9% .
The data indicates that in October, the average home price in the Northern Region ( which includes Prince George) was $265,459. That’s down from the $276,137 average price recorded in the same month a year ago.
The year to date average price also showed a slight decline, as the January to end of October average price in the region was $263,617, down less than 1% from the average price of $265,852 recording in the same ten months a year ago.
“Housing demand remained mixed across the province in October,” said Cameron Muir, BCREA Chief Economist . “Home sales across the Lower Mainland were down from the elevated levels of one year ago, but stabilized on a month to month basis. In contrast, home sales on Vancouver Island and in the interior of the province continue to post strong year-over-year gains.”
Now will this show up in our next assessment from BC Assessment? I would say “Not Likely”. They are in the business of comparing apples and oranges and equate to each other even tho different individuals have done each. A very flawed system, but the only one we have!
I agree. BC Assessment will probably do what they always do,. Leave most prices the same. (The will change a few to give the impression that they are involved in the process) and then state if you have a concern about your assessment you can ask for a review.
This is vintage Government smoke and mirrors designed to give the impression they are concerned and involved while all the while increasing their revenues, and of course salaries, and benefits.
If you follow this topic, you should know by now that the assessment is based on comparable prices in you neighourhood on July 1 of the year prior to the assessment release.
So, the January 2017 assessment notices are based on July 1, 2016 comparable sales.
The article includes the northern region which includes Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Chetwynd, etc. where prices have been dropping so will impact the average.
No need for conspiracy theories or other digs at the process.
So the January 2018 assessment notices are based on July 1, 2017 comparable sales, and that would be when the smoke and mirrors kicks in.
Either way you cut it the system is geared to generate maximum revenue for the Government (Municipalities) at the expense of the taxpayer. The value of your property means absolutely nothing unless you sell it, and of course if you were to buy somewhere else you would pay the higher price. So taxing people on an inflated price of property is in may opinion **dirty pool** .
Municipal taxes should be based on the square footage of your house, the area in which it is located, and the amount of infrastructure the City has put into that area, this would be a much fairer system. As it now stands you can have people living in an older area, with less or older infrastructure and they pay the same taxes as those in newer areas because of the value of the property.
Government smoke and mirrors? Since when did the BC Real Estate Association become government? Are licensed realtors now government employees?
You either don’t own your home or simply fail to understand the mechanics of assessment and taxation. For the most part, it’s not the assessment that drives your tax bill up, but rather the amount the local government raises tax rates. If your assessment rises higher in relation to other homes, yes, you will pay more even if the tax rate didn’t go up at all.
That’s why it’s important to examine your assessment and if you think it’s incorrect you should challenge the assessment authority. Think of it like this, if every single rate payer’s assessment rose exactly 100%, but the municipality did not raise rates at all (a highly unlikely situation) you would pay the exact amount of tax you did in the previous year even though on paper the value of your home doubled. Get it now? It’s all about the municipality and the rate your assessment goes up relative to comparable properties.
Market Valuation is a fair tax load distribution method, assuming the Authority assesses it correctly. They don’t most of the time, but it’s a tricky thing to guess.
So sad you guys should sold and come to Abby. Our townhome has gone up in price $10,000.00 in the two years we have owned it. So sorry.
Retired. Once you give them the 10% manure smell discount, you have not gained anything. :)
Guess have never been in Abbotsford to make such a dumb statement
Crapitsford? I don’t think so as I do not fit in either demographic for that area…..newly wed or nearly dead:D
You also need to attend church each Sunday. You missed that one. And don’t you get tired of you bs.
Church….nope. Far better ways to spend Sundays in our house than listening to a perve on a pulpit. If you want to hedge your bets with wine and crackers fill your boots.
Wow a whole $10,000. Good luck with that. Your home is only worth what someone else will pay for it so to pull 10 grand out of the air is total BS.
Living in George I guess you know all about BS. How is it you people are so smart in PG when you need to wear a gas mask outside.
Retired 02, if Abby is so wonderful, why do you bother hanging out on this website!
You should get off of you arse and get outside to enjoy some of Abby’s pungent fresh air! Aaaahhh!
Not going to take any chances getting caught in the crossfire.
You folks should fallow the house market for a bit and maybe you will be babel to make an intelligent argument … You are all way off base …
I had to look them up, but yes, fallow and babel are actually words.
As far as I know the Cities tax for General Municipal Purposes is the value of the property times the mill rate.
So if the value remains the same but the mill rate goes up you pay more taxes. If the value goes up and the mill rate remains the same you pay more taxes., If the value and mill rate goes up you pay again.
The only way you can avoid an increase is if the mill rate, and value remain the same, or the mill rate goes up but your value goes down,.
In any event you get my drift.
To be paying taxes based on how much other people in the area sell their houses for is far from scientific and in fact makes no sense at all.
Furthermore having a high value on houses is in the best interest of the City as it provides more revenue.
Palopu. Joe Blow explained it to you and then tried again.
I will try to add some more info for you since you obviously still did not understand it.
First I want to tell you that probably most residential property owners do not understand how the actual mil rate is calculated. This has become obvious to me by reading 250NEWS for many years. You are in good company.
You make 4 statements:
1. if the value remains the same but the mill rate goes up you pay more taxes (true statement)
2. If the value goes up and the mill rate remains the same you pay more taxes. (true statement)
3. If the value and mill rate goes up you pay again. (true statement)
4. only way you can avoid an increase is if the mill rate, and value remain the same, or the mill rate goes up but your value goes down. (untrue statement – it is not the only way one can avoid an increase.)
In all your statements, you assume that the only thing that can happen to a mil rate is that it stays the same or goes up. Mil rates also go down.
You also do not account for property assessments going down. That was definitely the case in Prince George post 1981.
Mill rates can go down, for instance, when the need for the net income of the municipality, after all other incomes are accounted for, goes up by say 3% and the property assessment for residential class, for instance, goes up by 6+%, as it does in some of the faster growing cities in Canada.
Look at the Surrey web site at surrey.ca/city-services/593.aspx for instance.
The 2016 property tax rate (aka “mil rate”) is 2.26262 for residential general. You can look up all the tax rates back to 2006. For that year, the property tax rate for the same class was 2.70972. That is a reduction in the mil rate of 16.5%.
Look at Whistler if you want to see an even more extreme case.
Without having to look it up, I am relatively sure that most houses which existed in 2006 and were relatively new at that time had assessments which increased significantly more than the 16.5% over the 10 years. The component which most likely went up significantly would be the property value rather than the value of the improvements if no additions were made to the house. In either case, the total tax paid now over 10 years ago is likely significantly higher.
So, you did not tell us how the mil rate is calculated.
It is quite simple. The municipality sets an expenditure budget. After deducting other sources of income, it determines the total amount to be raised through property taxes. It them divides the total amount to be raised by the total taxable assessment and multiplies that fraction by 1,000 which results in a mil rate.
Thus if the total amount required increases less than the total assessment has increased, the mill rate will go down. If the two increase (or decrease) by the same amount, the rate stays the same.
Now that you know how it is done (I hope) you can probably figure out some of the other scenarios. I will also let you figure out how the calculation is done if the various assessment/property classes have different weightings.
In case it has still not sunk in, one of many internet sources which explain mill rates, especially how they are calculated in the first place is: maa.ca/property/millrate.html
By the way, the proper way of writing mill in this case is mil.
No, you still don’t get it, Palopu. The amount of money the municipality tries to collect is independent from the assessments. The assessments are just a framework through which the local government extracts the tax it needs for the year. Try reading my example again, I can’t lay it out any simpler than that.
Comments for this article are closed.