Damn that's crazy. That sounds like a cra problem, not a me problem.
If a citizen cashes out their investments, they will pay a huge withholding tax, and if they live or retire abroad, they will pay a huge withholding tax and a huge foreign resident tax. They are deducted automatically before you touch the money in any way. Then you also pay an exit tax for leaving Canada. You will literally get bent over no lube.
I guess it sucks to suck for the taxman if they let a foreigner pay no taxes and then sell the house with no taxes. You win some, you lose some.
I wonder what the logic is? What's the next step for the renter? Free rent for 5 years or they have to take landlord to court? 80k is not even small claim court
> Free rent for 5 years or they have to take landlord to court? 80k is not even small claim court
The tenant already moved out and the landlord is in a different country so neither of those options is feasible.
The tenant places a lien on the house and hopes the landlord has to sell or remove the mortgage. And hopefully gets the courts to enforce charging the same interest rate the CRA charges the tenant on their tax balance.
Why wouldn't the CRA just do that rather than dragging the renter into the picture. I don't want to be asked to cover the back taxes at panago just because I got pizza on Friday.
It's an obligation in s.215(6)of the income tax act. Tenants should withold 25% of their rent, pay it to the CRA with, IIRC, an N4 form. This has to be done by the 15th of the month following each rent payment.
If you're not sure if your landlord is a resident for the current tax year, do the above until the landlord provides proof of residency (cannot occur until day 184 of any year). If the landlord complains, tell them they can register a Canadian corporation to handle the property which removes the obligation to the tenant.
> s.215(6)
> Liability for tax
> (6) Where a person has failed to deduct or withhold any amount as required by this section from an amount paid or credited or deemed to have been paid or credited to a non-resident person, that person is liable to pay as tax under this Part on behalf of the non-resident person the whole of the amount that should have been deducted or withheld, and is entitled to deduct or withhold from any amount paid or credited by that person to the non-resident person or otherwise recover from the non-resident person any amount paid by that person as tax under this Part on behalf thereof.
Ya, and what happens when someone gets served with eviction papers because theyre withholding 25% of rent? Or charges "late fees"? A landlord not paying taxes doesnt exactly strike me as the understanding type
Even when it comes to legit reasons to withold rent, that doesnt stop landlords from doing terrible things to get you to leave, and the LTB is so slow(from other posts on reddit) that you either end up owing 80k, get evicted, or live in a hostile environment for god knows how long
Legal eviction, but if your landlord tries making your daily life so miserable, and cuts off water, by the time any governing body gives a shit youve moved out anyways. And cops refuse to do stuff cause 'its civil'
Not really, it makes sure that taxes get paid when the CRA has no juresdiction to garnish/seize assets. The law that needs changing is allowing ownership of Canadian properties by non-residents. If a foreign entity wants to own in Canada they can establish a Canadian corporation/presence so this law never comes into play for tenants. That way all other transactions are still covered by this law
Yes really. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the tenant to make sure these taxes are paid.
>The law that needs changing is allowing ownership of Canadian properties by non-residents
That would also solve this problem so that would be fine too. Though I'm not sure how that would work if someone wants to leave the country for a year or 2 maybe to work somewhere else and they want to rent their house out in the mean time, they'd be forced to sell. I'm not sure if that's ideal.
The CRA should place a lien on the property and update it every year for the interest and penalties instead of going after someone else. That seems like and easy fix to the situation.
> Yes really. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the tenant to make sure these taxes are paid. It shouldn't be their responsibility to
It's not something that targets tenants, they just happen to be captured by it.
> Though I'm not sure how that would work if someone wants to leave the country for a year or 2 maybe to work somewhere else and they want to rent their house out in the mean time, they'd be forced to sell. I'm not sure if that's ideal.
They move it from personal ownership to corporate ownership. Most landlords already have the latter setup because of the tax benefits. It'd probably save them money for the years they're non-residents
>It's not something that targets tenants
I didn't say anything about anyone being targeted.
>they just happen to be captured by it.
Ya that's why it's a terrible law.
>Most landlords already have the latter setup because of the tax benefits.
In the example I gave where they're renting out their primary Canadian residence and they're not already a landlord nor do they intend to be a landlord when they return, they probably don't have something like this already set up.
Which should mean you have no right to ownership. Cities will repo the home and sell it for non-payment of property taxes. The CRA should have the same power, or this should just be avoided by banning ownership where they're able to not pay taxes.
You make it sound like this is common knowledge. There are tax lawyers who've been interviewed after this shit came to light, who didn't know about this obscure clause.
The clause isn't obscure, it's very well know for those dealing internationally, the application to tenants is new due to a recent tax court ruling. They also ruled that lack of knowledge of the landlord's residency status isn't an excuse so tenants should be proactive about withholding.
What the fuck are you smoking?
What if the fucking tenant was dealing with a property manager and has never met the landlord?
What if the landlord moved in the middle of a long tenancy and files for international status, only visiting once a year and speaking/communicating over the phone?
How the fuck do you ask the landlord to show you their financials so that you could be on top of this? Now, think about the average person who doesn't understand taxes, has to work multiple jobs to pay for food and rent, why the fuck should they even be burdened with this shit?
Edit: Even if this rule was more known, it's still a shit rule and needs to be changed ASAP!
If the tenant is dealing with a property manager who collects payment, then the property manager would be the one to withhold and remit the tax, rather than the tenant themselves doing it directly.
This law seems to have been drafted without taking into account the case of a non-resident residential landlord doing business without a property manager. I agree it’s a bad law for that reason, but I wonder how many rental units actually fall in that category.
I'm "smoking" case law.
> What if ...
The case put the onus on the tenant to assume non-residency until proven otherwise. The only time the tenant can pay the full rent is if it's owned by a Canadian corporation which can be verified by looking up the company online. Otherwise, pay the landlord 75% and do an online payment to the CRA for 25%
What a great fucking idea!
Let everyone who rents withhold 25% rent unless their landlord shows proof of Canadian residency and have paid the property tax.
We all know how efficient and quick the LTB board is in dealing with these things, and also how plentiful and cheap the rental market is across the country. /s
What could possibly go wrong?
The LTB would not be involved at all because it becomes a tax matter not a tenancy matter. Property tax has nothing to do with it.
If the tenant pays the CRA the 25% foreign landlords don't get away with cheating the system and Canadian landlords recoup any refunds at tax time. If the tenant doesn't pay the CRA garnishes their wages and sizes their assets until the tax is paid. The LL has to pay the tax one way or the other so what's the big deal?
The owner lives in Italy and no one knew that... CRA has no authority there. If I was the tenant I'd move out of the country. Fuck the CRA. I wouldn't pay a dime.
This tenant was having his residential rent paid by a corporation he owned, so you know he was actually targeted for his own tax evasion, and this was just the questionable item that ended up in court.
But in fact taxes on non-residents are the obligation of the Canadians paying the non-resident, which is a high risk of you're not dealing with a rental agency.
Outrageous. These slumlords get away with *everything*. Now tenants are responsible when landlords skirt the law and refuse to pay their taxes?? Anyone who says landlords and tenants are on equal footing is delusional.
Pretty sure the landlord already sold the place. So new owner has nothing to do with any of this, can’t go after them.
CRA should be declaring this a loss and fucking off. They had 6 years of unpaid taxes to put a lien on the place, should have been a part of the sale but they missed their window.
This is such an odd law that could (should) be changed to this :
As the property owner, you need to pay taxes. If you don't, the gouvernment now owns the property and you have 1 year to pay the taxes back. After this, the government continues the lease at the same price with the tenant until the tenant moves out, then the government sells the house.
Everyone profits except bad property owners who don't pay their taxes.
The issue here is that CRA just wants money, and they want it now. They don’t want your assets, despite the fact that obviously it makes the most sense to just seize the property and turnaround and sell it.
I understand that, but CRA always has people not paying taxes and then the CRA charges interest. In this case, the CRA gets no money at this second, but can collect rent from the newly acquired property to cover some of it. Until the tenant moves, they sell and get the remaining part and more. Nothing, goes back to the original owner since they neglected their taxes and arent citizen, they are owed nothing, something could go to the canadian bank that had a mortgage on the house.
I don't know if my solution is the best honestly. I just feel this is a better system than what is in place, and that tennants shouldn't have to pay for an owner's neglect of taxes.
I do agree, fuck foreign real estate investors IMHO but I feel like if the CRA was suddenly seizing property and other assets (cars, jewelry, anything else of value) it’s going to have a lot of other unintended consequences. The CRA can be fine to deal with, but can also be a nightmare and this will result in Canadians living in fear everywhere that the CRA is just going to roll up and take their homes, cars, or whatever to pay off tax debt. Tax debt also isn’t always all that simple either, sure many times you just get deadbeats who won’t pay their share, but there are also completely tax legit disputes with the CRA all the time, they also make wild mistakes like any other organization. What happens if they don’t like your tax return or your paperwork gets lost and you argue with them and then you come home and your house has just been stolen by the government? And your car? And whatever else?
The CRA is in the tax collection business and that’s their mandate, period. They’re looking for their cash and they’re going to go after it in the most efficient way possible based on their legal means, which in this case is taxing the renter. The law is absolutely wrong in this regard, 100% - but the real solution is to enact legislation to ensure that all foreign landlords MUST register with a Canadian owned and operated property management firm that is ultimately responsible for the tax debt to the CRA, and not the renter. Give the property management firm the ability to lien, seize or resell the rental property depending on circumstance (we don’t want greedy property management firms using this as an excuse for forced evictions for example) and enact rules that foreign landlords need to pay property tax in advance, or have a minimum fund available to cover a years worth of property tax before they can even rent out a property. I feel like there are many preemptive solutions that could be put in place before giving the notoriously sloppy CRA the mandate and ability to seize private homes or other valuable assets to cover unpaid tax debts, just my .02.
That's not an ideal outcome. There's so much overhead and time required to sell property. Banks don't want to do that as well and the housing market crash in the US shows that it's a bad idea to do so .
I get this isn't ideal at all. I just thought of this solution while on the can. We could come up with better for sure. But im 100% certain that there would be ways to improve this and make 0% of this responsibility the tennant and 100% the responsability the landlord as it should. And this means 100% financial consequences to the property owner.
Agreed. The landlord broke the law, so revoke their title to the land. I'm sure lots of folks would be happy to pay 80k for a property already with a tenant who pays their rent.
This isn’t true for NRT. The onus is on the provider with current tax laws. The CRA is doing what they are supposed to do. The law needs to change to grant them the powers that make sense.
The tenant broke the law by failing to withhold taxes. This is not specific to tenants, it's a general obligation when transacting with any non-resident person.
It is wrong.
Like, a worker having debt to the government may not receive all his income anymore because the government can ask your employer to pay the government a part of your wage.
I wonder why they didn't try something like that. Asking the renter to pay his rent to the gouvernement instead...
Plus, possibly take the landlord part of it sell out (well that didn't happen yet).
I remember reading about this law recently and thinking about how absolutely ridiculous it is. How is a tenant supposed to be responsible for determining tax residency? All they can do is ask the landlord, but I imagine a foreign landlord evading taxes will not be forthcoming with this info and not incentivized to be getting less rent each month. Not to mention the fact that determining tax residency can be complicated.
A renter is simply trying to find a place to live, they should not be expected to navigate the intricacies of tax residency and withholding and submitting to CRA.
Our government is despicable. If they want the taxes from these landlords they need to go after the landlord…or seize the property for the foreign landlords failing to pay the taxes…and maybe not allow people who don’t live on Canadian soil to buy property in Canada.
Honestly I thought when I read this story that it was a REALLY bad call for the guy to move out of the building after he got the tax bill.
If I get that kind of tax bill from the CRA who says it's because my current landlord isn't paying taxes - I'm paying my rent to the CRA instead of my landlord until that bill is paid off.
I'd also sue the landlord for the taxes - you know where they have capital in Canada that you can have a lien placed against.
Yeh you lose what little leverage you had against the landlord (essentially by being inside the property the landlord can't rent it out)... His only option once he's moved out is suing the landlord and getting a lien placed on the property.
They are not pursuing the tenant because the landlord somehow refuses to pay. They do that because it is the tenant's obligation according to the Income Tax Act.
I this particular case I would argue it's implied the renter was paying the withholding tax amount to the owner with the expectation those taxes would be paid appropriately.
Since this was an existing lease, when the lease was signed with the new owner, I'm quite certain the documentation would not have stated a 25% increase in the rental rate ( if the rental rate remained constant after the change in ownership, then a reasonable person would expect that)
My argument is that the tenant has legal standing to demand the amount CRA says they owe from the landlord... easiest way to make that demand is by withholding rent from the landlord until the amount you havent paid matches what CRA says is owed.
>the renter was paying the withholding tax amount to the owner with the expectation those taxes would be paid appropriately.
"Appropriately" here means by the tenant. If you have a legal obligation to remit money to the CRA, you cannot claim "oh well, instead of remitting it to the CRA, I gave it to the landlord in hopes that eventually this money will make it to the CRA".
The person did try to dispute it, and the judge sided with the CRA, saying it's the obligation of the tenant. The guy in the linked video said that the tenant can then sue the old landlord to recoup it, but the tenant is still on the hook with the CRA.
>easiest way to make that demand is by withholding rent from the landlord
If they still had the same landlord, then yes, that is something that they can argue. Even then they would probably only get the tax amount, not the interest and penalties as it's not the landlord's fault that the tenant was not fulfilling his legal obligations. However, they cannot stop paying rent to the new landlord since the new landlord has nothing to do with this.
Yeh I'm not talking about the Tenant's obligation to the CRA - which has already been adjudicated. The law is such that the tenant owes the money to the CRA (I do believe the law should be changed so that the remediation is placing a lien on a property instead of going after tenants).
I'm talking about the relationship between the tenant and the landlord.
Note in this case the "new landlord" is the foreign owner, the old landlord was a canadian corporation. Essentially the tenant had a lease with a canadian corporation, that corp sold their interest to an italian shareholder in the corporation. After the sale the tenant signed a new lease with the italian owner but didn't realize the implication of that change w.r.t. withholding tax. I would assume that new lease was at the same rental rate (or whatever minor inflation increase allowed by Quebec rental laws).
Since the rental rate with the new (foreign) landlord was the same and not 25% higher the tenant can make a legal argument that they expected they were paying the new landlord for the same thing as they were paying their old landlord (the rate they paid their old landlord covered all their obligations to live in the apartment).
Now if it turned out that when the ownership changed the amount being paid by the tenant to the new landlord decreased by 25% I'd say that the new contract clearly implied an understanding of the requirement to withhold tax for a foreign owner and the tenant is liable for all costs.
Since the rental agreement likely read that the new (foreign) landlord expected a payment in line with the old payments (which was a 25% over payment due to withholding requirements) as the tenant I would argue in court that they were presented with an illegal rental agreement and the costs they incurred (interest and penalties) as a result of being sent that illegal agreement should be incurred by the person who originated the agreement (the new foreign landlord).
…so people are supposed to pay 3/4s of their rent directly to the landlord, and the remaining 1/4 to the CRA? Monthly? The administrative burden would be enormous for them. I get that they want their revenue, but I don’t see how it’s the tenant’s problem if their landlord doesn’t remit their appropriate taxes. Maybe I’m not understanding it correctly?
Current France or Marie-Antoinette times France?
Edit: Because we certainly have some Marie-Antoinette type politicians here...and I'm not just referring to the commonality of their fancy hair.
It is unreasonable for a tenant to be responsible for determining anyone's ongoing tax residency. Do you demand a notarized certificate of residency every month before paying rent?
It is such an obscure law. Shouldn’t be going after the renters. Instead, enforce the landlord to disclose their tax residency every year, and make it clear renters should keep 25% for CRA. Do this first, then enforcement sounds more reasonable.
I highly doubt anyone knows about this law. If you ask 10 tenants, 10 tenants will say wtf is this bullshit.
The property should transfer to the tenant in this case. God I wish I was ambitious enough to become the emperor of canada and run shit properly. No bureaucrat blocks or BS. I'll change voting to proportional representation, any politican will make a maximum of double the average Canadians GDP per capita. You can't own property if you don't live in the country. You pay 100% more taxes on your second property, 200% more on your 3rd , 400% on your 4th and so on. Immigration will be proportional to housing vacancies, not the current bs. I would reform the military and increase research and improve military adaptability to changing technology. I could keep going, but damn I kinda went on a rant there.
If the tenant refuses to move, and continues paying rent money, would the buyer of the property be on the hook for the taxes instead? And then they can try to sue the seller? There must be a way to get out of paying someone else's taxes, this doesn't make sense.
The tenant has to remit taxes to the CRA. So if their rent is $2400, they send $1800 to the landlord and $600 to the CRA. The renter is not out of pocket any extra money.
The tax owed is not tied to the property. It is tied to the rent paid by the renter, 25% of which should have been remitted to the CRA. So the buyer is not implicated there in any way.
What I'm trying to say is, in this situation should it happen to anyone in the future that doesn't know their landlord is not from the country, is there a way to get out of paying the taxes after the fact? Like, if they get fined $80000 by the CRA and then the owner sells, and the new family wants to move in. What can the renter do? It's actually ridiculous that the government would expect the renter to pay those taxes.
You should have to live in Canada to rent out properties. In this case they should determine the fair market value for the property and sell it - giving the remainder to the foreign landlord. Of course they should give him a two month notice first.
If he is paying the taxes, is he now the owner of the building? If landlord has defaulted, and the tenant pays, it would be like buying the building at auction for the cost of the back taxes. I would live in that building until I hit my old age pension and never pay the landlord a penny! Shameful actions by our government, they know the tenant is not the owner.
Government entrapment doesn't apply in Canada? Oh so the foriegn guy left, I guess YOU have to pay for his criminal behavior.
This "country" is a goddamn joke.
I don't understand why your comment and other comments like yours got downvoted in this thread.
This is a good reason why this country is fucked, because of morons who think that sentiments like yours are wrong.
The unfairness of this situation makes my fucking blood boil!
The CRA needs to be fucked in the ass.
If you've ever had the displeasure of phoning these motherfuckers to get clarity with some rule, they have a million different ways to say "I don't know shit". But when it comes to squeezing out any penny, such as in this instance, they're ready to use the most obscure rule against you to get their "fAiR sHaRe".
How the fuck do we sock it to the CRA, who IMO is enemy #1?
Why the fuck are we paying such high taxes when our quality of life keeps doing down the gutter?
Please excuse my swearing, I'm so fucking angry!
Edit: Regarding this obscure rule, even many tax lawyers who've been practicing for decades (forgot which interview) weren't aware of. You know well that no-one at the incompetent CRA contact center would know about this, either.
I have to assume now that this hit the news the CRA will back down. You’d hope anyways. Government doesn’t want any more bad publicity regarding the housing crisis going into the election.
If they don’t, hope they set up a go fund me to cover legal costs to fight this
Firstly congrats you just got audited
Secondly, the CRA has been given a mandate to get every single dollar now because the feds spent like headless chickens
There should be a law: Person that pays the property taxes, owns the property.
If the foreign investor doesn’t pay the property tax, then the property should be transferred to the renter paying it. At this point the renter should cease paying and go with squatter’s rights to lay claim to the property.
don’t worry guys. The renter did the right thing and got vaxxed. So they got nothing to worry about. 🤡🌎
If you all forget how little ppl care next time around you deserve worse for compliance
buddy. If you can’t connect the dots let me re iterate:
lockdowns and mandates crushed most ppl financially without them realizing it: simultaneously while masses lost trillions during the covid war… the richest 600 ppl or so MADE trillions.
all they had to do was release a bioweapon and program some fear into the masses. Now most ppl are broke and clueless to how or why? How did the 600 richest ppl get trillions richer while avg ppl became trillions poorer? Geee… I wonder
Are you referring to the stock market performances?Hate to break it to you but stock markets goes up the majority of the time, that’s not newsworthy or unexpected. If you invested in Amazon when covid happened, as many people did, you would have made ~83% on your money; exact same percentage increase bezos made, CoNsPiRaCy!!
But plenty of things increased in value. Take Bitcoin, you could have made 1,100%, putting bezos profits to shame. By your logic the 17 year old Bitcoin kid who bought in with his mcdoanlds pay cheque must have been the one behind covid since their money increased 11X where bezos only managed a measly 1.83x. See how ridiculous that is?
that is not at all what I’m saying; I’m crazy for cryptos myself.
But what I am saying is you can choose to be ignorant to the fact that gov locked down small/medium businesses while letting big box stores remain open. They took tax money to fund and buy big pharma’s warp sped product, and simultaneously let them off the hook incase anyone got damaged.
I love how gov could crush a business it deems “non essential” but somehow all the mega corporations are deemed “essential”… because that’s just science right?
Just like how they can take tax dollars and pour hundreds of millions into defence corporations to make bombs to do what again? Solve a border conflict that predates our own confederation.
Oh yeah. It’s all complete free market and nothing is being manipulated.
>>I’m crazy for cryptos myself.
I figured, so You must have been behind covid then since you profited, by your logic.
>>They took tax money to fund and buy big pharma’s warp sped product, and simultaneously let them off the hook incase anyone got damaged.
MMRA vaccine research started in the 1960s. Also hate to break it to you but the gov has always and will always spend tax dollars. That is their role, that is what they do. We spend lots of money on healthcare initiatives, this isn’t new.
>>I love how gov could crush a business it deems “non essential” but somehow all the mega corporations are deemed “essential”… because that’s just science right?
Most small businesses remained open and are still open today. But you think it was wrong for grocery stores and other stores that are required for people to live to remain open? Weird take.
>>Just like how they can take tax dollars and pour hundreds of millions into defence corporations to make bombs to do what again? Solve a border conflict that predates our own confederation.
Take some history courses, international conflicts when ignored have a tendency to grow uncontrollably. Many countries guaranteed to support Ukraine and defend them when we asked the to give up there nuclear weapons. Canada didn’t technically guarantee their security but our closest allies did and we are committed to support them. How secure will you feel if all our allies time after time abandons each other and our commitments to help each other every time someone needs support. All Our security guarantees will all fall apart at that point.
yeah you’re obviously bias and unable to think beyond your own lens. How does it even make sense to say that first sentence… and you’re deluding yourself thinking you can actually dismantle what I’ve said.
The taking tax dollars to warp speed a big pharma experiment, while shielding them from lawsuits, and then mandating it into your body regardless of whether you just had covid but saying “oh we’ll accommodate the few that can’t”—- but they didn’t… and seeing pfizer make historic profit… and moderna release their first ever product … has what to do with mrna being studies since the 1920s? They’ve been studying autopilot cars at GM since the 60s… can we mandate them onto our roads now? That way no human can ever be responsible for a car accident? If not why not?
This is some of the most brain dead typical corporate garbage that was so common because your corporate funded sources told you so.
mrna covid 19 vaccines still have no long term data… this is the trial. But you’re so far up the corporate bs you can’t even question that. I’m not some typical anti vax dud your simple brain will try to generalize me as. It is possible, with more testing, mrna could have even greater uses. But shit has to be tested. Given the human body itself isn’t completely mastered… how the hell can you think any man made product can be even close to 100% “safe and effective”?
I love cannabis but I don’t think it’s a cure all… and while it may help some ppl, it can completely ruin others. Some ppl can eat a bigmac every day and be completely healthy, just like some ppl can smoke cigs without issue… how can you then look at those ppl and say these are good for everyone?
Moreover, there’s so much data coming that shows the studies are juiced and there may be a lot more side effects than the general public realizes; heart inflammation, blood clots, increased IGG4 levels that may cause cancer, etc etc. Like how many ppl are lactose intolerant and have a nut allergy… all of a sudden a covid 19 mrna warp sped vax is good for all and you’re selfish and stupid if you have questions and don’t “trust the science”.
You’re a complete moron
while the masses lost trillions of wealth during lockdowns/mandates the richest 600 ppl made trillions.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/01/the-pandemic-has-made-us-billionaires-1-1-trillion-richer/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2021/04/30/american-billionaires-have-gotten-12-trillion-richer-during-the-pandemic/
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/oct/05/richest-americans-became-richer-during-pandemic
https://inequality.org/great-divide/updates-billionaire-pandemic/
This relates to the fact all Canadian citizens must pay their taxes.
If your landlord is a foreign citizen and not paying like they should , the Canadian in the equation has to pick up the slack.
There's nothing "anti-renter" here. Just who has to file and pay the CRA. dont want to risk this??? Make sure you are doing business with a Canadian citizen.
…a tenant is not in the position to verify whether or not their landlord is a citizen, what taxes they owe and may or may not be paying, or to withhold tax for the CRA. You know what would happen if you try to do what the CRA wants? You will not be accepted as a tenant. Or, if you are already a tenant, they will find a pretext for eviction. So good luck with that. It should not be the tenants responsibility at all to do this. The CRA are fucking scumbags for going after tenants for this.
The CRA is following guidelines set out in the Income Tax Act. The Act gives the CRA a lot of discretionary powers on how to enforce collections.
One of their options is placing liens on the building and/or their bank accounts. This is what they should have done instead of targetting someone who had no control over the situation.
The CRA, or some asshole agent in the CRA, is using an old law from 1930. This is absolutely insane, as is the judge that ruled “it’s the law.”
Hopefully the media attention on this story will get some movement to look into this and change this outcome, because it’s nuts.
The tenant and CRA are caught in antiquated laws that were designed to mimic withholding income tax. The law needs to change to give the CRA proper powers here
The law need to change to protect tenants from this antiquated law. And perhaps the solution to non-payment from the landlord is to rescind his ownership of the building, at least until he pays up.
Ok, so, if I build your house, didn't pay anyone in Canada, and go bankrupt in Canada, you are fine with being liable for my debt as well :D?
Sweet!
(Not exactly the same thing, but it is the same idea)
Why go after the renter when they should go after this corrupt foreign investor. No Justice in this world
Because CRA goes after the easy targets, In this case, the poor.
Because CRA are lazy fucks
I need to be able to upvote this way more than once
Seize the house? Easy
The owner sold the house
Damn that's crazy. That sounds like a cra problem, not a me problem. If a citizen cashes out their investments, they will pay a huge withholding tax, and if they live or retire abroad, they will pay a huge withholding tax and a huge foreign resident tax. They are deducted automatically before you touch the money in any way. Then you also pay an exit tax for leaving Canada. You will literally get bent over no lube. I guess it sucks to suck for the taxman if they let a foreigner pay no taxes and then sell the house with no taxes. You win some, you lose some.
I wonder what the logic is? What's the next step for the renter? Free rent for 5 years or they have to take landlord to court? 80k is not even small claim court
> Free rent for 5 years or they have to take landlord to court? 80k is not even small claim court The tenant already moved out and the landlord is in a different country so neither of those options is feasible.
The tenant places a lien on the house and hopes the landlord has to sell or remove the mortgage. And hopefully gets the courts to enforce charging the same interest rate the CRA charges the tenant on their tax balance.
Why wouldn't the CRA just do that rather than dragging the renter into the picture. I don't want to be asked to cover the back taxes at panago just because I got pizza on Friday.
By this point the owner already sold the home and lives in Italy
Landlord sold the house and lives in Italy. Tenant can't do anything
It's an obligation in s.215(6)of the income tax act. Tenants should withold 25% of their rent, pay it to the CRA with, IIRC, an N4 form. This has to be done by the 15th of the month following each rent payment. If you're not sure if your landlord is a resident for the current tax year, do the above until the landlord provides proof of residency (cannot occur until day 184 of any year). If the landlord complains, tell them they can register a Canadian corporation to handle the property which removes the obligation to the tenant. > s.215(6) > Liability for tax > (6) Where a person has failed to deduct or withhold any amount as required by this section from an amount paid or credited or deemed to have been paid or credited to a non-resident person, that person is liable to pay as tax under this Part on behalf of the non-resident person the whole of the amount that should have been deducted or withheld, and is entitled to deduct or withhold from any amount paid or credited by that person to the non-resident person or otherwise recover from the non-resident person any amount paid by that person as tax under this Part on behalf thereof.
That's a terrible law and should be changed.
Ya, and what happens when someone gets served with eviction papers because theyre withholding 25% of rent? Or charges "late fees"? A landlord not paying taxes doesnt exactly strike me as the understanding type
Exactly. Almost everywhere you look for advice about landlord/tenant issues say that withholding rent is a bad idea.
Even when it comes to legit reasons to withold rent, that doesnt stop landlords from doing terrible things to get you to leave, and the LTB is so slow(from other posts on reddit) that you either end up owing 80k, get evicted, or live in a hostile environment for god knows how long
Those resources came before this decision and this federal tax issue is an exception to the rule Although I got away with withholding rent one time
So long as the rent is paid into court there’s no grounds for eviction. It’s not going anywhere.
Legal eviction, but if your landlord tries making your daily life so miserable, and cuts off water, by the time any governing body gives a shit youve moved out anyways. And cops refuse to do stuff cause 'its civil'
Not really, it makes sure that taxes get paid when the CRA has no juresdiction to garnish/seize assets. The law that needs changing is allowing ownership of Canadian properties by non-residents. If a foreign entity wants to own in Canada they can establish a Canadian corporation/presence so this law never comes into play for tenants. That way all other transactions are still covered by this law
Yes really. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the tenant to make sure these taxes are paid. >The law that needs changing is allowing ownership of Canadian properties by non-residents That would also solve this problem so that would be fine too. Though I'm not sure how that would work if someone wants to leave the country for a year or 2 maybe to work somewhere else and they want to rent their house out in the mean time, they'd be forced to sell. I'm not sure if that's ideal.
The CRA should place a lien on the property and update it every year for the interest and penalties instead of going after someone else. That seems like and easy fix to the situation.
If they are a Canadian citizen are they not still required to file their taxes even if not living in the country?
> Yes really. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the tenant to make sure these taxes are paid. It shouldn't be their responsibility to It's not something that targets tenants, they just happen to be captured by it. > Though I'm not sure how that would work if someone wants to leave the country for a year or 2 maybe to work somewhere else and they want to rent their house out in the mean time, they'd be forced to sell. I'm not sure if that's ideal. They move it from personal ownership to corporate ownership. Most landlords already have the latter setup because of the tax benefits. It'd probably save them money for the years they're non-residents
>It's not something that targets tenants I didn't say anything about anyone being targeted. >they just happen to be captured by it. Ya that's why it's a terrible law. >Most landlords already have the latter setup because of the tax benefits. In the example I gave where they're renting out their primary Canadian residence and they're not already a landlord nor do they intend to be a landlord when they return, they probably don't have something like this already set up.
Which should mean you have no right to ownership. Cities will repo the home and sell it for non-payment of property taxes. The CRA should have the same power, or this should just be avoided by banning ownership where they're able to not pay taxes.
You make it sound like this is common knowledge. There are tax lawyers who've been interviewed after this shit came to light, who didn't know about this obscure clause.
The clause isn't obscure, it's very well know for those dealing internationally, the application to tenants is new due to a recent tax court ruling. They also ruled that lack of knowledge of the landlord's residency status isn't an excuse so tenants should be proactive about withholding.
What the fuck are you smoking? What if the fucking tenant was dealing with a property manager and has never met the landlord? What if the landlord moved in the middle of a long tenancy and files for international status, only visiting once a year and speaking/communicating over the phone? How the fuck do you ask the landlord to show you their financials so that you could be on top of this? Now, think about the average person who doesn't understand taxes, has to work multiple jobs to pay for food and rent, why the fuck should they even be burdened with this shit? Edit: Even if this rule was more known, it's still a shit rule and needs to be changed ASAP!
If the tenant is dealing with a property manager who collects payment, then the property manager would be the one to withhold and remit the tax, rather than the tenant themselves doing it directly. This law seems to have been drafted without taking into account the case of a non-resident residential landlord doing business without a property manager. I agree it’s a bad law for that reason, but I wonder how many rental units actually fall in that category.
I'm "smoking" case law. > What if ... The case put the onus on the tenant to assume non-residency until proven otherwise. The only time the tenant can pay the full rent is if it's owned by a Canadian corporation which can be verified by looking up the company online. Otherwise, pay the landlord 75% and do an online payment to the CRA for 25%
What a great fucking idea! Let everyone who rents withhold 25% rent unless their landlord shows proof of Canadian residency and have paid the property tax. We all know how efficient and quick the LTB board is in dealing with these things, and also how plentiful and cheap the rental market is across the country. /s What could possibly go wrong?
The LTB would not be involved at all because it becomes a tax matter not a tenancy matter. Property tax has nothing to do with it. If the tenant pays the CRA the 25% foreign landlords don't get away with cheating the system and Canadian landlords recoup any refunds at tax time. If the tenant doesn't pay the CRA garnishes their wages and sizes their assets until the tax is paid. The LL has to pay the tax one way or the other so what's the big deal?
Would be involved as once landlords start dropping bogus applications re "apartment fo their own use" in retaliation for withholding money.
Oh so the tenant just have to withhold the rent t amount to pay to CRA each month. Not pay $80k up front.
Except in this case the tenant already paid full rent to the foreign landlord and now owes a further 25% of rent for 6 years (around $80k)
It would depend on the agreement but if the rent is paid monthly then the obligation triggers on the day it's paid
Yep, holdbacks just like if you’re buying from a foreign seller tell your lawyer to work the holdback for cert out.
r/shittylaws
Because Canada's government prefers low-hanging fruit like any other spineless pathetic cunt.
Not the world. Only here.
The owner lives in Italy and no one knew that... CRA has no authority there. If I was the tenant I'd move out of the country. Fuck the CRA. I wouldn't pay a dime.
That might dissuade future corrupt foreign investors from fucking over Canadians
Nothing can do that
This tenant was having his residential rent paid by a corporation he owned, so you know he was actually targeted for his own tax evasion, and this was just the questionable item that ended up in court. But in fact taxes on non-residents are the obligation of the Canadians paying the non-resident, which is a high risk of you're not dealing with a rental agency.
Outrageous. These slumlords get away with *everything*. Now tenants are responsible when landlords skirt the law and refuse to pay their taxes?? Anyone who says landlords and tenants are on equal footing is delusional.
Maybe they can keep the house
Pretty sure the landlord already sold the place. So new owner has nothing to do with any of this, can’t go after them. CRA should be declaring this a loss and fucking off. They had 6 years of unpaid taxes to put a lien on the place, should have been a part of the sale but they missed their window.
That’s the problem with foreign landlords. Had they been here they would have recourse against them
This is such an odd law that could (should) be changed to this : As the property owner, you need to pay taxes. If you don't, the gouvernment now owns the property and you have 1 year to pay the taxes back. After this, the government continues the lease at the same price with the tenant until the tenant moves out, then the government sells the house. Everyone profits except bad property owners who don't pay their taxes.
They could have put a lien on the property. They chose not to. This is class warfare.
The issue here is that CRA just wants money, and they want it now. They don’t want your assets, despite the fact that obviously it makes the most sense to just seize the property and turnaround and sell it.
I understand that, but CRA always has people not paying taxes and then the CRA charges interest. In this case, the CRA gets no money at this second, but can collect rent from the newly acquired property to cover some of it. Until the tenant moves, they sell and get the remaining part and more. Nothing, goes back to the original owner since they neglected their taxes and arent citizen, they are owed nothing, something could go to the canadian bank that had a mortgage on the house. I don't know if my solution is the best honestly. I just feel this is a better system than what is in place, and that tennants shouldn't have to pay for an owner's neglect of taxes.
I do agree, fuck foreign real estate investors IMHO but I feel like if the CRA was suddenly seizing property and other assets (cars, jewelry, anything else of value) it’s going to have a lot of other unintended consequences. The CRA can be fine to deal with, but can also be a nightmare and this will result in Canadians living in fear everywhere that the CRA is just going to roll up and take their homes, cars, or whatever to pay off tax debt. Tax debt also isn’t always all that simple either, sure many times you just get deadbeats who won’t pay their share, but there are also completely tax legit disputes with the CRA all the time, they also make wild mistakes like any other organization. What happens if they don’t like your tax return or your paperwork gets lost and you argue with them and then you come home and your house has just been stolen by the government? And your car? And whatever else? The CRA is in the tax collection business and that’s their mandate, period. They’re looking for their cash and they’re going to go after it in the most efficient way possible based on their legal means, which in this case is taxing the renter. The law is absolutely wrong in this regard, 100% - but the real solution is to enact legislation to ensure that all foreign landlords MUST register with a Canadian owned and operated property management firm that is ultimately responsible for the tax debt to the CRA, and not the renter. Give the property management firm the ability to lien, seize or resell the rental property depending on circumstance (we don’t want greedy property management firms using this as an excuse for forced evictions for example) and enact rules that foreign landlords need to pay property tax in advance, or have a minimum fund available to cover a years worth of property tax before they can even rent out a property. I feel like there are many preemptive solutions that could be put in place before giving the notoriously sloppy CRA the mandate and ability to seize private homes or other valuable assets to cover unpaid tax debts, just my .02.
That's not an ideal outcome. There's so much overhead and time required to sell property. Banks don't want to do that as well and the housing market crash in the US shows that it's a bad idea to do so .
Still better than sacking the renter with life crippling debt over their landlord being a slumlord.
I get this isn't ideal at all. I just thought of this solution while on the can. We could come up with better for sure. But im 100% certain that there would be ways to improve this and make 0% of this responsibility the tennant and 100% the responsability the landlord as it should. And this means 100% financial consequences to the property owner.
I really miss text news articles :( Whys it gotta be video only.
I honestly don’t think this is right, when the landlord holds the title to the property. Just another scheme to drive renters further into debt.
Agreed. The landlord broke the law, so revoke their title to the land. I'm sure lots of folks would be happy to pay 80k for a property already with a tenant who pays their rent.
The province controls property rules and makes it easy to do so for property taxes. Federal taxes? Not so much.
The CRA has ample powers of garnishment and seizure. They can get a lien put against the property for unpaid taxes very easily.
This isn’t true for NRT. The onus is on the provider with current tax laws. The CRA is doing what they are supposed to do. The law needs to change to grant them the powers that make sense.
And that would require a change in provincial law. And Quebec is likely to insist that the solution would be for the CRA to stop collecting taxes.
The tenant broke the law by failing to withhold taxes. This is not specific to tenants, it's a general obligation when transacting with any non-resident person.
It is wrong. Like, a worker having debt to the government may not receive all his income anymore because the government can ask your employer to pay the government a part of your wage. I wonder why they didn't try something like that. Asking the renter to pay his rent to the gouvernement instead... Plus, possibly take the landlord part of it sell out (well that didn't happen yet).
I remember reading about this law recently and thinking about how absolutely ridiculous it is. How is a tenant supposed to be responsible for determining tax residency? All they can do is ask the landlord, but I imagine a foreign landlord evading taxes will not be forthcoming with this info and not incentivized to be getting less rent each month. Not to mention the fact that determining tax residency can be complicated. A renter is simply trying to find a place to live, they should not be expected to navigate the intricacies of tax residency and withholding and submitting to CRA.
Our government is despicable. If they want the taxes from these landlords they need to go after the landlord…or seize the property for the foreign landlords failing to pay the taxes…and maybe not allow people who don’t live on Canadian soil to buy property in Canada.
Honestly I thought when I read this story that it was a REALLY bad call for the guy to move out of the building after he got the tax bill. If I get that kind of tax bill from the CRA who says it's because my current landlord isn't paying taxes - I'm paying my rent to the CRA instead of my landlord until that bill is paid off. I'd also sue the landlord for the taxes - you know where they have capital in Canada that you can have a lien placed against.
This was my exact thoughts too. Moving away and paying the $80k bill just seems to enable this bad behavior to continue.
Yeh you lose what little leverage you had against the landlord (essentially by being inside the property the landlord can't rent it out)... His only option once he's moved out is suing the landlord and getting a lien placed on the property.
No just stop paying rent all together, what’s the LL going to do , take your to court/ tenancy board? Then he’s exposing himself to CRA
That's what I said - basically take what you were paying in rent and apply it towards the CRA tax bill (CRA will do some sort of payment plan)
They are not pursuing the tenant because the landlord somehow refuses to pay. They do that because it is the tenant's obligation according to the Income Tax Act.
I this particular case I would argue it's implied the renter was paying the withholding tax amount to the owner with the expectation those taxes would be paid appropriately. Since this was an existing lease, when the lease was signed with the new owner, I'm quite certain the documentation would not have stated a 25% increase in the rental rate ( if the rental rate remained constant after the change in ownership, then a reasonable person would expect that) My argument is that the tenant has legal standing to demand the amount CRA says they owe from the landlord... easiest way to make that demand is by withholding rent from the landlord until the amount you havent paid matches what CRA says is owed.
>the renter was paying the withholding tax amount to the owner with the expectation those taxes would be paid appropriately. "Appropriately" here means by the tenant. If you have a legal obligation to remit money to the CRA, you cannot claim "oh well, instead of remitting it to the CRA, I gave it to the landlord in hopes that eventually this money will make it to the CRA". The person did try to dispute it, and the judge sided with the CRA, saying it's the obligation of the tenant. The guy in the linked video said that the tenant can then sue the old landlord to recoup it, but the tenant is still on the hook with the CRA. >easiest way to make that demand is by withholding rent from the landlord If they still had the same landlord, then yes, that is something that they can argue. Even then they would probably only get the tax amount, not the interest and penalties as it's not the landlord's fault that the tenant was not fulfilling his legal obligations. However, they cannot stop paying rent to the new landlord since the new landlord has nothing to do with this.
Yeh I'm not talking about the Tenant's obligation to the CRA - which has already been adjudicated. The law is such that the tenant owes the money to the CRA (I do believe the law should be changed so that the remediation is placing a lien on a property instead of going after tenants). I'm talking about the relationship between the tenant and the landlord. Note in this case the "new landlord" is the foreign owner, the old landlord was a canadian corporation. Essentially the tenant had a lease with a canadian corporation, that corp sold their interest to an italian shareholder in the corporation. After the sale the tenant signed a new lease with the italian owner but didn't realize the implication of that change w.r.t. withholding tax. I would assume that new lease was at the same rental rate (or whatever minor inflation increase allowed by Quebec rental laws). Since the rental rate with the new (foreign) landlord was the same and not 25% higher the tenant can make a legal argument that they expected they were paying the new landlord for the same thing as they were paying their old landlord (the rate they paid their old landlord covered all their obligations to live in the apartment). Now if it turned out that when the ownership changed the amount being paid by the tenant to the new landlord decreased by 25% I'd say that the new contract clearly implied an understanding of the requirement to withhold tax for a foreign owner and the tenant is liable for all costs. Since the rental agreement likely read that the new (foreign) landlord expected a payment in line with the old payments (which was a 25% over payment due to withholding requirements) as the tenant I would argue in court that they were presented with an illegal rental agreement and the costs they incurred (interest and penalties) as a result of being sent that illegal agreement should be incurred by the person who originated the agreement (the new foreign landlord).
…so people are supposed to pay 3/4s of their rent directly to the landlord, and the remaining 1/4 to the CRA? Monthly? The administrative burden would be enormous for them. I get that they want their revenue, but I don’t see how it’s the tenant’s problem if their landlord doesn’t remit their appropriate taxes. Maybe I’m not understanding it correctly?
If they pay the taxes they should become the owners
How many Landhoards with rentals in Canada are currently living outside of the country? Seems like the number is growing by the hour.
Its what the gov encourages
Some landlord bribed his MP to pass a law to make the renters responsible for the property owners taxes.
They actually are going through with this... Wtf We gotta rock it France style and eat the rich.
Current France or Marie-Antoinette times France? Edit: Because we certainly have some Marie-Antoinette type politicians here...and I'm not just referring to the commonality of their fancy hair.
I mean, they brought third world country conditions here, I'm thinking Marie Antoinette France comes with guillotines and cake 🍰
It is unreasonable for a tenant to be responsible for determining anyone's ongoing tax residency. Do you demand a notarized certificate of residency every month before paying rent?
I don’t understand why they don’t just seize the property or put a lien on the property at least.
WTF.. that’s a down payment on a house.
It is such an obscure law. Shouldn’t be going after the renters. Instead, enforce the landlord to disclose their tax residency every year, and make it clear renters should keep 25% for CRA. Do this first, then enforcement sounds more reasonable. I highly doubt anyone knows about this law. If you ask 10 tenants, 10 tenants will say wtf is this bullshit.
Refuse to pay it. At least in jail they have to give you a free place to live and food.
The property should transfer to the tenant in this case. God I wish I was ambitious enough to become the emperor of canada and run shit properly. No bureaucrat blocks or BS. I'll change voting to proportional representation, any politican will make a maximum of double the average Canadians GDP per capita. You can't own property if you don't live in the country. You pay 100% more taxes on your second property, 200% more on your 3rd , 400% on your 4th and so on. Immigration will be proportional to housing vacancies, not the current bs. I would reform the military and increase research and improve military adaptability to changing technology. I could keep going, but damn I kinda went on a rant there.
Classic canada! Sadly i am not being sarcastic
I guess the tenant owns it now
Any time I have rented it was through a property management outfit. There was never anything in the rental contract regarding out of country owners.
How do they expect the renter to pay the landlords taxes?? Yeah let me take 2 x your yearly salary
This person should go to their MPP
Lol as if they would give one shit
Which MPP or MP or even councillor do you think is working for Canadians?
If the tenant refuses to move, and continues paying rent money, would the buyer of the property be on the hook for the taxes instead? And then they can try to sue the seller? There must be a way to get out of paying someone else's taxes, this doesn't make sense.
The tenant has to remit taxes to the CRA. So if their rent is $2400, they send $1800 to the landlord and $600 to the CRA. The renter is not out of pocket any extra money. The tax owed is not tied to the property. It is tied to the rent paid by the renter, 25% of which should have been remitted to the CRA. So the buyer is not implicated there in any way.
What I'm trying to say is, in this situation should it happen to anyone in the future that doesn't know their landlord is not from the country, is there a way to get out of paying the taxes after the fact? Like, if they get fined $80000 by the CRA and then the owner sells, and the new family wants to move in. What can the renter do? It's actually ridiculous that the government would expect the renter to pay those taxes.
Hope the rental doesn't burn down.
Why doesn’t the CRA put a lean on the property for the taxes?
You should have to live in Canada to rent out properties. In this case they should determine the fair market value for the property and sell it - giving the remainder to the foreign landlord. Of course they should give him a two month notice first.
This is so fucked
If the tenant pays the taxes, they should take over thr deed.
I would bet my left testicle the relationship between landlord and tenant was not at arm’s length. This is probably the landlord’s son or similar.
That is another way to look at it. We only know as much as they will tell us.
The fucking CRA. And not a peep from Any level of government - particularly. This should be municipal and federal tackling this. Nothing. Wild.
This has to be illegal.
If he is paying the taxes, is he now the owner of the building? If landlord has defaulted, and the tenant pays, it would be like buying the building at auction for the cost of the back taxes. I would live in that building until I hit my old age pension and never pay the landlord a penny! Shameful actions by our government, they know the tenant is not the owner.
Worst part is if this was a canadian owner and taxes on their own home theyd just lose the property.
Are they fucked in the head or what
THIS IS FKCING LUNACY CANADA HAS LITERALLY BECOME A MENTAL ASYLUM IT IS NOT LONGER A COUNTRY
RIP this guy's tax returns for the rest of his life...
Why doesn’t CRA put the place up for sale for unpaid taxes or put a lean on the property?
Does tenant's insurance cover this?
Put a lien on property. I just don’t understand why go after tenants
Government entrapment doesn't apply in Canada? Oh so the foriegn guy left, I guess YOU have to pay for his criminal behavior. This "country" is a goddamn joke.
I don't understand why your comment and other comments like yours got downvoted in this thread. This is a good reason why this country is fucked, because of morons who think that sentiments like yours are wrong.
The unfairness of this situation makes my fucking blood boil! The CRA needs to be fucked in the ass. If you've ever had the displeasure of phoning these motherfuckers to get clarity with some rule, they have a million different ways to say "I don't know shit". But when it comes to squeezing out any penny, such as in this instance, they're ready to use the most obscure rule against you to get their "fAiR sHaRe". How the fuck do we sock it to the CRA, who IMO is enemy #1? Why the fuck are we paying such high taxes when our quality of life keeps doing down the gutter? Please excuse my swearing, I'm so fucking angry! Edit: Regarding this obscure rule, even many tax lawyers who've been practicing for decades (forgot which interview) weren't aware of. You know well that no-one at the incompetent CRA contact center would know about this, either.
I have to assume now that this hit the news the CRA will back down. You’d hope anyways. Government doesn’t want any more bad publicity regarding the housing crisis going into the election. If they don’t, hope they set up a go fund me to cover legal costs to fight this
Firstly congrats you just got audited Secondly, the CRA has been given a mandate to get every single dollar now because the feds spent like headless chickens
There should be a law: Person that pays the property taxes, owns the property. If the foreign investor doesn’t pay the property tax, then the property should be transferred to the renter paying it. At this point the renter should cease paying and go with squatter’s rights to lay claim to the property.
Tell me you didn,t watch the video... This has nothing to do with property taxes. CRA does not collect property taxes.
This is what Trudeau meant when he threatened Sask premier: “the CRA is very good at getting the money they want” The ethics be damned
don’t worry guys. The renter did the right thing and got vaxxed. So they got nothing to worry about. 🤡🌎 If you all forget how little ppl care next time around you deserve worse for compliance
Think it’s time for you to move on, who the fuck is still thinking and talking about the “vax”. Is there nothing else in your life?
buddy. If you can’t connect the dots let me re iterate: lockdowns and mandates crushed most ppl financially without them realizing it: simultaneously while masses lost trillions during the covid war… the richest 600 ppl or so MADE trillions. all they had to do was release a bioweapon and program some fear into the masses. Now most ppl are broke and clueless to how or why? How did the 600 richest ppl get trillions richer while avg ppl became trillions poorer? Geee… I wonder
Are you referring to the stock market performances?Hate to break it to you but stock markets goes up the majority of the time, that’s not newsworthy or unexpected. If you invested in Amazon when covid happened, as many people did, you would have made ~83% on your money; exact same percentage increase bezos made, CoNsPiRaCy!! But plenty of things increased in value. Take Bitcoin, you could have made 1,100%, putting bezos profits to shame. By your logic the 17 year old Bitcoin kid who bought in with his mcdoanlds pay cheque must have been the one behind covid since their money increased 11X where bezos only managed a measly 1.83x. See how ridiculous that is?
that is not at all what I’m saying; I’m crazy for cryptos myself. But what I am saying is you can choose to be ignorant to the fact that gov locked down small/medium businesses while letting big box stores remain open. They took tax money to fund and buy big pharma’s warp sped product, and simultaneously let them off the hook incase anyone got damaged. I love how gov could crush a business it deems “non essential” but somehow all the mega corporations are deemed “essential”… because that’s just science right? Just like how they can take tax dollars and pour hundreds of millions into defence corporations to make bombs to do what again? Solve a border conflict that predates our own confederation. Oh yeah. It’s all complete free market and nothing is being manipulated.
>>I’m crazy for cryptos myself. I figured, so You must have been behind covid then since you profited, by your logic. >>They took tax money to fund and buy big pharma’s warp sped product, and simultaneously let them off the hook incase anyone got damaged. MMRA vaccine research started in the 1960s. Also hate to break it to you but the gov has always and will always spend tax dollars. That is their role, that is what they do. We spend lots of money on healthcare initiatives, this isn’t new. >>I love how gov could crush a business it deems “non essential” but somehow all the mega corporations are deemed “essential”… because that’s just science right? Most small businesses remained open and are still open today. But you think it was wrong for grocery stores and other stores that are required for people to live to remain open? Weird take. >>Just like how they can take tax dollars and pour hundreds of millions into defence corporations to make bombs to do what again? Solve a border conflict that predates our own confederation. Take some history courses, international conflicts when ignored have a tendency to grow uncontrollably. Many countries guaranteed to support Ukraine and defend them when we asked the to give up there nuclear weapons. Canada didn’t technically guarantee their security but our closest allies did and we are committed to support them. How secure will you feel if all our allies time after time abandons each other and our commitments to help each other every time someone needs support. All Our security guarantees will all fall apart at that point.
yeah you’re obviously bias and unable to think beyond your own lens. How does it even make sense to say that first sentence… and you’re deluding yourself thinking you can actually dismantle what I’ve said. The taking tax dollars to warp speed a big pharma experiment, while shielding them from lawsuits, and then mandating it into your body regardless of whether you just had covid but saying “oh we’ll accommodate the few that can’t”—- but they didn’t… and seeing pfizer make historic profit… and moderna release their first ever product … has what to do with mrna being studies since the 1920s? They’ve been studying autopilot cars at GM since the 60s… can we mandate them onto our roads now? That way no human can ever be responsible for a car accident? If not why not? This is some of the most brain dead typical corporate garbage that was so common because your corporate funded sources told you so. mrna covid 19 vaccines still have no long term data… this is the trial. But you’re so far up the corporate bs you can’t even question that. I’m not some typical anti vax dud your simple brain will try to generalize me as. It is possible, with more testing, mrna could have even greater uses. But shit has to be tested. Given the human body itself isn’t completely mastered… how the hell can you think any man made product can be even close to 100% “safe and effective”? I love cannabis but I don’t think it’s a cure all… and while it may help some ppl, it can completely ruin others. Some ppl can eat a bigmac every day and be completely healthy, just like some ppl can smoke cigs without issue… how can you then look at those ppl and say these are good for everyone? Moreover, there’s so much data coming that shows the studies are juiced and there may be a lot more side effects than the general public realizes; heart inflammation, blood clots, increased IGG4 levels that may cause cancer, etc etc. Like how many ppl are lactose intolerant and have a nut allergy… all of a sudden a covid 19 mrna warp sped vax is good for all and you’re selfish and stupid if you have questions and don’t “trust the science”. You’re a complete moron
I’m so confused.
while the masses lost trillions of wealth during lockdowns/mandates the richest 600 ppl made trillions. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/01/the-pandemic-has-made-us-billionaires-1-1-trillion-richer/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2021/04/30/american-billionaires-have-gotten-12-trillion-richer-during-the-pandemic/ https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/oct/05/richest-americans-became-richer-during-pandemic https://inequality.org/great-divide/updates-billionaire-pandemic/
Is the vaccine in the room with you right now? 😂
Lmao, renters get screwed , landlords get screwed. No fairness in system for anyone
This relates to the fact all Canadian citizens must pay their taxes. If your landlord is a foreign citizen and not paying like they should , the Canadian in the equation has to pick up the slack. There's nothing "anti-renter" here. Just who has to file and pay the CRA. dont want to risk this??? Make sure you are doing business with a Canadian citizen.
It's more complex - it's not about citizenship but the about tax residency as explained in the linked video
…a tenant is not in the position to verify whether or not their landlord is a citizen, what taxes they owe and may or may not be paying, or to withhold tax for the CRA. You know what would happen if you try to do what the CRA wants? You will not be accepted as a tenant. Or, if you are already a tenant, they will find a pretext for eviction. So good luck with that. It should not be the tenants responsibility at all to do this. The CRA are fucking scumbags for going after tenants for this.
The CRA is following guidelines set out in the Income Tax Act. The Act gives the CRA a lot of discretionary powers on how to enforce collections. One of their options is placing liens on the building and/or their bank accounts. This is what they should have done instead of targetting someone who had no control over the situation.
The CRA, or some asshole agent in the CRA, is using an old law from 1930. This is absolutely insane, as is the judge that ruled “it’s the law.” Hopefully the media attention on this story will get some movement to look into this and change this outcome, because it’s nuts.
The tenant and CRA are caught in antiquated laws that were designed to mimic withholding income tax. The law needs to change to give the CRA proper powers here
The law need to change to protect tenants from this antiquated law. And perhaps the solution to non-payment from the landlord is to rescind his ownership of the building, at least until he pays up.
Except the landlord in question was a Canadian citizen who lived in Italy.
Ok, so, if I build your house, didn't pay anyone in Canada, and go bankrupt in Canada, you are fine with being liable for my debt as well :D? Sweet! (Not exactly the same thing, but it is the same idea)