2011 Municipal Study - City of Brantford

Municipal Study 2011Comparison of Relative TaxesThe purpose of this section of the report is to undertake “like” property comparisons across eachmunicipality and across various property types. In total, 11 property types were defined based onthose property types that were of most interest to the participating municipalities and that representedall potential optional classes. The Residential, Multi-Residential, Commercial, and Industrial classesare represented in the study.In order to calculate the relative tax burden of “like” properties, every effort was made to hold constantthose factors deemed to be most critical in determining a property’s assessed value. However, giventhe number of factors used to calculate the assessed value for each property, and the inability toquantify each of these factors, the results should be used to provide the reader with overall trendsrather than exact differences in relative tax burdens between municipalities. By selecting multipleproperty types within each taxing class (Residential, Multi-Residential, Commercial, and Industrial),and by selecting multiple properties from within each municipality and property subtype, whereavailable, the likelihood of anomalies in the database has been reduced. However, it is recommendedthat focus should be on the trends rather than the absolutes.Given that the selection process of properties is random based on properties meeting the outlinedcriteria, it would not be appropriate to use the selected property’s capped rate in the Multi-Residential,Industrial and Commercial classes. Using a property’s capped rates on a small sample could result incomparisons of properties in one municipality contributing to the cap while in another municipalitybenefiting from the cap. This would not provide a reasonable representation of the relative taxburdens in each jurisdiction for a typical property. As such, to provide a true indication of the relativetax burden, the tax liability on sample properties will be used in the comparisons. The tax liability wascalculated using the property’s most current assessment and the 2010 tax rates for each municipality.NotesUrban rates were used in each municipality. In the case of the Hamilton, Ottawa, Greater Sudbury,Kawartha Lakes and Chatham-Kent, where amalgamations occurred and there continues to be arearating, the analysis was undertaken by selecting properties from within the urban centres and applyingthe respective urban rates. The City of Toronto, due to the size and current value assessmentdifferentials across the City, has been divided into four areas; North, South, East and West.For some property types, municipalities are not represented due to the lack of comparable propertiesavailable or a decision by the municipality not to include a particular category in the analysis.Comparison of Relative Taxes184