Home EDITORIALS EDITORIAL: Unintended consequences of the BC speculation tax

EDITORIAL: Unintended consequences of the BC speculation tax

Friday, March 2, 2018 ~ EDITORIAL ~ by Mary P Brooke: Unintended consequences of the BC speculation tax

There are all types of people in this world. Some like their comfort zone big and soft. Others don’t mind taking risk to the edge no matter what it takes. Most folks fall somewhere in the middle — requiring a baseline of security and then with that not minding a bit of personal contribution in order to facilitate some overall social gain.

Such is the mix that any government — in this case the BC NDP Government — needs to balance right in order to get the best results. Helping people in need? Most people are all for that. But grabbing pieces of financial flesh here and there from people who fly high at the top of the financial food chain comes with political risk.

The buzz-phrase in business and politics nowadays is to shrug and deal with those after-the-fact “unintended consequences”. The phrase might be new, but that’s always how it’s been. In the string theory that is life, no one can foresee all the implications of any decision they make, including the well-intentioned ones. Determine your best shot, take it.

The new housing taxes in BC that are intended to ‘curb speculation’ may shore up general government coffers to help support new social program initiatives. But there could be negative effects, that on balance will produce less-than-zero benefits.

People who come to their second home in resort areas of BC spend what most of us call ‘tourism dollars’, and most BC resort and rural areas are hungry for that. When resort or tourism goals fall within areas that are not fully remote or technically rural (e.g. Bear Mountain in Langford, and the economically hopeful municipality of Sooke) that will impact owners of getaway and vacation homes.

To avoid the speculative tax these owners of second homes (who leave those properties vacant in between visits) may start pulling up stakes. In which case the spin-off effects of their spending becomes lost to surrounding communities. And those freed-up homes are not necessarily even in the normal affordability bracket for others. ~ MPB

***

AND some LETTERS from readers: American who lives on the west side of Vancouver Island  | Alberta resident with property in Langford, BC

Back to Editorials page