A letter to the mayor
Voir’s Simon Jodoin links his anger at the Tremblay administration with his anger at the 3.3% tax increase in the 2013 budget tabled Tuesday in a letter to Gérald Tremblay. He’s not the only person to link the tax bump and the latest commission news – just saw a relevant Andrew Coyne tweet typical of how the situation’s being seen, with the opposition parties at city hall maintaining that the tax increase is linked to the cost of corruption.
Meanwhile, Frank Zampino is denying everything.
david m 01:34 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
i’m beside myself at how corrupt this is. top 5 highest tax increases by borough:
1. Plateau-Mont-Royal 5,7 %
2. Mercier -H.-Maisonneuve 4,9 %
3. Sud-Ouest 4,6 %
4. Rosemont -La Petite-Patrie 4,1%
5. Villeray -Saint-Michel -P.-Extension 4,1 %
not sure which is worse, that these jokers want to punish the opposition boroughs or that they’re operating under the delusion that team tremblay has a prayer in the next election. at any rate, unbelievably cynical.
Jack 07:36 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
I just looked at mine 5.3%, I am an extremely happy taxpayer. My tenants also apparently will share my joy. 3.3% more than inflation, fairly easy to justify political.My only happiness Rotrand, Applebaum et al will definitely be sharpening up their CV’s.
Ian 08:23 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
It did cross my mind that the tax hike was punitive but given the fairness and transparency of our political system, how could I bear to be so suspicious?
Dave M 08:45 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
I didn’t understand last year, and I don’t understand this year: how can the city set different tax rates for different boroughs? I could see the boroughs setting different taxes for themselves, but the way that it works with the EC setting different tax rates for different boroughs, and then if they feel like giving some to the boroughs to use for services just doesn’t make sense to me. I can’t figure out how it’s even supposed to work.
It’s like if the federal government got to set the income tax rates for each province instead of the province doing it. The only thing it could possibly do is encourage corruption.
paul 08:51 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
Kudos Dave M.
Given how dense the Plateau is (not to mention the other ‘hoods mentioned), any infrastructure costs are less per capita there than elsewhere in the City. If we want to discourage a car-dependent suburban exodus, we need to reward high densities with lower taxes, not the opposite.
Mathieu 11:45 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
Did they really raise the tax rate or it’s simply that buildings gained more value and are taxed accordingly?
Kevin 13:48 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
@Mathieu
They raised the mill rate.
Chris 16:58 on 2012/10/31 Permalink
David, I too noticed that the highest increases are in opposition-held boroughs. But maybe the tax rates are already lower there and the uneven *increases* are actually moving every borough’s rate more towards a single rate? There’s a little web calculator here and it looks like Anjou’s new rate is actually higher than the Plateau’s new rate.