What happens when a municipal government decides that how you use your own property is grounds for financial punishment? In Canmore, a radical new tax policy threatens to transform property ownership from a well-earned right to a highly-regulated privilege — potentially driving some owners to sell, threatening investors and turning a once-strong community spirit into a corrosive, adversarial relationship. Read More
What happens when a municipal government decides that how you use your own property is grounds for financial punishment? In Canmore, a radical new tax policy threatens to transform property ownership from a well-earned right to a highly-regulated privilege — potentially driving some owners to sell, threatening investors and turning a once-strong community spirit into
Article content
What happens when a municipal government decides that how you use your own property is grounds for financial punishment? In Canmore, a radical new tax policy threatens to transform property ownership from a well-earned right to a highly-regulated privilege — potentially driving some owners to sell, threatening investors and turning a once-strong community spirit into a corrosive, adversarial relationship.
Article content
Story continues below
Article content
Article content
These actions risk fundamentally reshaping Alberta’s real estate landscape.
Article content
Noon News Roundup
Article content
Canmore passed a “vacancy tax” bylaw in 2024 that will impose a 300 per cent municipal tax increase on those who do not meet council’s definition of a “primary resident.” The median residential owner in Canmore will pay $2,136 in property taxes, while a “non-primary resident” will pay $6,308.
Article content
To qualify as a primary resident, owners had to declare by Dec. 31, 2024, that they spend at least 60 consecutive days in their home and 183 days annually. Approximately 26 per cent of Canmore homeowners fall into this category. Many have homes in Canmore while living throughout Alberta, with work, health or family commitments preventing them from meeting the arbitrary residency requirements.
Article content
More affordable housing is critical: but this is inequitable, unjust and bad policy.
Article content
As in British Columbia, Canmore’s vacancy tax was designed to increase the amount of affordable housing in the community. The idea — though unfounded — is that non-residents will rent their properties on a long-term basis rather than pay the tax.
Article content
Story continues below
Article content
Addressing the need for more housing — especially affordable housing — is a critical goal that everyone shares. However, effective solutions require collaboration with all stakeholders.
Article content
Research has shown this type of tax does not work — causing no effect on home pricing or affordability, a reduction in the building of new residential supply and statistically insignificant increases in affordable housing.
Article content
Instead of a divisive vacancy tax, Canmore could explore more constructive solutions: partnering with developers to create diverse housing options (including staff housing), working with the federal and provincial governments to access affordable housing programming and engaging a broad range of stakeholders to develop solutions that balance the needs of all.
Article content
Yet, the Town of Canmore concluded, without fact-based research or citizen engagement, that secondary home ownership causes housing unaffordability.
Article content
The tax violates Section 289(2) of Alberta’s Municipal Government Act (MGA), which allows municipal tax subclasses only based on a property’s physical characteristics, not the owner’s behaviour or time spent at the property.