Property Taxes and Pooling

[The Mississauga Muse]

I read somewhere that there's no such thing as a stupid question. Stand back because I have this feeling that I'm about to toss out two.

There's this big thrust both in Mississauga and at the regional level to get social costs off the property taxes and gear it more to income.

Here's the question.

Why in the world would voters with income go/(work) for that when they can syphon and bleed fixed income seniors dry?

All that money Mississauga sends ever-so-grudgingly into Toronto every year.

Question:

When Mississaugans use Sick Kids or Princess Margaret, isn't some of that pooling money for that kind of thing (services in TO)?

Another example, certainly some of the kids who grew up in Mississauga/Brampton and the system failed them, surely some of those street kids and other UnderServed gravitate to Toronto for social help and support, no?

I'm just trying to understand how things work. I mean there HAS to be some reason $$$ was sent over to TO in the first place.

Thanks,
The Mississauga Muse

 

[Tuscani01]

I read somewhere that there's no such thing as a stupid question. Stand back because I have this feeling that I'm about to toss out two.

There's this big thrust both in Mississauga and at the regional level to get social costs off the property taxes and gear it more to income.

Here's the question.

Why in the world would voters with income go/(work) for that when they can syphon and bleed fixed income seniors dry?

All that money Mississauga sends ever-so-grudgingly into Toronto every year.

Question:

When Mississaugans use Sick Kids or Princess Margaret, isn't some of that pooling money for that kind of thing (services in TO)?

Another example, certainly some of the kids who grew up in Mississauga/Brampton and the system failed them, surely some of those street kids and other UnderServed gravitate to Toronto for social help and support, no?

I'm just trying to understand how things work. I mean there HAS to be some reason $$$ was sent over to TO in the first place.

Thanks,
The Mississauga Muse

In response to question #2, our money is pooled and sent to Toronto to fund the social services which many people from the region use and have used in the past.

So yes, we do pay for the social programs we use...so whats the problem?

Well the problem with this is we shouldn't be paying for it. Social programs should be a provincial responsibility, not municipal. It is unfair for us to be paying for social programs in Toronto, and it is also unfair for Toronto to be paying for social programs which non-Torontonians also use.

This whole problem happened thanks to downloading.

 

[doady]

The only reason that Toronto needs to be sent money for health and social services is because those costs used to be completely subsidized by the province, but then Progressive Conservatives came along and now the province only cover 66% of the costs, a loss of 3 billion each year for Ontario municipalities that now must be funded by property taxes. That's how I understand it.

So the main issue that everyone is complaining about is downloading, not pooling. Pooling is just the result of downloading.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Taxation is by definition the pooling of resources. One can tax appropriately or strategically but I'm not sure if there is such thing as "fair" taxation. It could be argued that 905 residential property taxes shouldn't be pooled to cover 416 social programs, just as it could be argued that 416 commercial property taxes shouldn't be pooled to cover 905 educational funding. It depends what strategic concern you are trying to address.

 

[JasonParis]

It could be argued that 905 residential property taxes shouldn't be pooled to cover 416 social programs, just as it could be argued that 416 commercial property taxes shouldn't be pooled to cover 905 educational funding.

Toronto's needs are a bit unique and in a rare show of sense from the Harrisites at Queen's Park, region-wide pooling was done as a way of, yes, easing their f*#@-up of downloading health and social services onto the city in the first place. Many 905'ers had a problem with it as they were paying for taxes that they weren't being represented for (fair concern) and also because they didn't like seeing their money go towards "Toronto's problems" (unfair concern).

I think the latest provincial budget got rid of this anyway.

 

[ShonTron]

The region-wide pooling will be slowly phased out over a few years. This helps places like Peel, York and Durham, but does nothing for Toronto. My sense is this is was to eliminate one issue that Tory and the Tories could use to gain the ripe 905 vote.

The province could have started paying its own mandated share - that would have helped Toronto. The NDP is resurging in the 416- witness York South-Weston, Parkdale-High Park. Why the Liberals chose to extend its middle finger to the city, I really don't know.

 

[Hydrogen]

Why the Liberals chose to extend its middle finger to the city, I really don't know.

Probably because there are more voters in the 905.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Keep in mind that the last budget recipricated the phasing out of social services pooling with the phasing out of educational tax pooling. So residential tax payers benefit in 905 but 416 businesses (who subsidize 905 schools) also benefit so long as the city doesn't just shift the tax room back to business (in which case 416 residential tax payers would also benefit).

The big issue here is the uploading of social services by the province and off property tax. There is no intrinsic reason why one level of government should pay for social services except this, whoever sets the rules should pay the bill. If the province sets the rules but makes the municipalities pay this makes no sense.

Most of us pay property tax and income tax, if you rent you're property tax payment is indirect but you still pay. So what we are speaking about here is shifting social services costs from property tax pooling to income tax pooling. 905 income tax will still find its way to 416 social services where most of the costs are when and if the province uploads. So the 905 tax payer will still be subsidizing 416 social services as before just in a more appropriate manner.

 

[EnviroTO]

The big issue here is the uploading of social services by the province and off property tax. There is no intrinsic reason why one level of government should pay for social services except this, whoever sets the rules should pay the bill. If the province sets the rules but makes the municipalities pay this makes no sense.

I almost agree with that except for that to be true I would argue that the city would require equal taxation powers to the province and federal government. I'm all for that but what the province delivered comes short of that. If the city could set sales taxes, income taxes, and its own gas tax, then I would agree that the city would have no right to complain about not having enough money to fulfill its own priorities. It would only have the right to complain about the programs it is forced to fund out of its own pocket.