Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Rob Ketteman.
Thank you for allowing me to address the committee on the subject of the underused housing tax.
I'm an American whose family has owned a cottage in Crystal Beach, near Fort Erie, Ontario, since 1913. Fort Erie is located directly across the Niagara River from Buffalo, New York. The identity of these two communities has been defined by the extensive populations of families who have deep roots on both sides of the border—so deep in fact, that the bike trail that runs 20 miles from Port Colborne, Ontario to the Peace Bridge border crossing is called the Friendship Trail. “Friendship” refers to the relationship between our two countries.
My wife, Gloria, and I still own one of the cottages that were purchased by my great-great-grandmother in 1927. We live in our cottage for about four months during the summer and use it extensively on weekends throughout the year. My family has been an integral part of the Crystal Beach community for six generations. Each time the cottage has been transferred to the next generation, we have paid a significant capital gains tax to the CRA, and we continue to contribute tens of thousands of dollars every year to the local economy.
Despite this, we have now become a target of the underused housing tax, which has been publicly touted as designed to “take steps to ensure that foreign, non-residents, who simply use Canada as a place to passively store their wealth and housing, pay their fair share.”
Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland said, “We will prevent foreign buyers from parking their money in Canada by buying up homes. We will make sure that houses are being used as homes, rather than as commodities to be traded.”
Certainly, we support the Canadian government's efforts to address the problem of foreign investors exploiting the Canadian real estate market exclusively for financial gain. However, this legislation is carelessly and unfairly including American cottage owners like us, who actively use their properties and were not cited as the reason for this new law. Honestly, this feels discriminatory, punitive and abusive. Our cottage is a home for us. It's arguably more of a home to my family than any home we've ever owned in the U.S. Applying this tax to us is not in the spirit of the relationship that our two countries have enjoyed for well over a century.
The problem is the exemptions. They're short-sighted and inequitable. They offer an exemption only for a portion of property owners, who should not even be subject to this tax in the first place. More specifically, vacation properties that are located in certain postal codes that have a higher population density than others are not exempt from paying this tax. Whether the property is located in a certain postal code has no bearing on how the owner actually uses their residence.
Why should we be required to pay this tax, when we actively stay on our property for 120 days each year, while someone whose property is not used nearly as much but is located two miles in a different postal code is exempt? Honestly, this sounds absurd.
Further, the house immediately next door to me is owned by a Canadian couple who live in Niagara Falls, Ontario, which is just 15 miles away. They rarely stay there. They have openly told me that they own the property only because they view it as investment that will increase in value. That's a true example of property that is underused and not lived in.
With regard to Crystal Beach, any reasonable person would not consider it as urban, despite the population density in this tiny area of only 4.4 square miles. Certainly, the property values have increased substantially here over the past few years, especially during COVID. This has been almost entirely driven by Canadian buyers from the greater Toronto area who have migrated, speculated and become absentee Airbnb landlords. The situation has not been caused by American cottage owners who have been here for many years.
We have submitted the required UHT tax form and claimed the exemption that our property is not suitable as a year-round residence. However, there's no clear definition of what this means or of the specific requirements. While our house has heat, there's no basement. There's just a crawl space over sand, where much of the plumbing is exposed to freezing temperatures, so we must shut off the water for parts of the winter. We are hopeful that this will not be scrutinized and rejected.
Being forced to pay this tax would significantly increase the cost of owning our Canadian property. In fact, the next property assessment is completed. Our annual costs will nearly triple, which will likely force us to make the heartbreaking decision to sell something that has been a central part of my family's life for over a century. It will simply become unaffordable to keep. My story is just one of hundreds in the Fort Erie area and, I would guess, thousands across Canada.
If the law does in fact continue as it is, this will be a very sad chapter in the history of this town and of our two great countries. It's likely a final chapter for many Americans, who would reluctantly choose to sell and never set foot in Canada again.
In closing, we are thankful that the committee is taking action to reconsider the impacts of this tax on border communities, and hopeful that your efforts will result in either repealing this tax on Americans, or fixing the issues that are unfairly impacting Americans who are not supposed to be the intended target. Finally, somebody is listening.
Thank you for your consideration.