Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: March 16, 2018 FILE NO.: WR 151443

Assessed Person(s): Wenguang Li Appellant(s): Wenguang Li Respondent(s): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) Region 14 Respondent(s): City of Vaughan

Property Location(s): 47 Mainland Crescent Municipality(ies): City of Vaughan Roll Number(s): 1928-000-271-96700-0000 Appeal Number(s): 3238245 Taxation Year(s): 2017 Hearing Event No. 693967

Legislative Authority: Section 40 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31, as amended

Heard: March 5, 2017

APPEARANCES:

Parties Representative

Wenguang Li Mandy (Mengjia) Luo

MPAC Baljit K. Dhinsa

City of Vaughn No one appeared

DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY MARCELLE BOURASSA

BACKGROUND

1Wenguang (Lee) Li (“Appellant”) is the owner of 47 Mainland Crescent (“Subject Property”) in the City of Vaughan. It is a two-storey semi-detached family home located on a lot with a total effective site area of 3,066 square feet (“sq. ft.”) or 0.07 acres. It has a 1,658 sq. ft. of total building area and a basement garage. The property was built in 2000 and MPAC has assigned it a quality of construction rating of 6.5. The Appellant purchased the Subject Property in August 2015 for $609,500.

2For the 2017 taxation year under appeal, MPAC returned the assessment for the Subject Property at $630,000.

3The Appellant has appealed the assessment for the 2017 taxation year to the Assessment Review Board (“Board”), pursuant to s. 40 of the Assessment Act (“Act”). He was represented at the hearing by his authorized representative, Mandy (Mengjia) Luo. It is the Appellant’s position that MPAC’s assessment is too high. Ms. Luo initially stated the Subject Property sold for $609,500 and that the fair assessment is $604,438 based on the average assessment to time adjusted sale ratio of 0.99 for the properties at 41, 35 and 94 Mainland Crescent and 25 Canvas Road. However, it was pointed out to the representative that the Appellant’s analysis was based on an August 1, 2015 valuation date whereas the Act legislates a January 1, 2016 valuation date. Ms. Luo was provided with an opportunity to consult the Appellant. She advised it is the Appellant’s revised position that the current value should be the time adjusted sale value of $645,000 (that is based on the January 1, 2016 valuation date and MPAC’s time adjustment factor) and that the fair assessment is $600,000 based on the average assessment to time adjusted sale ratio of 0.93 for the four properties.

4Pursuant to the Act, the burden of proof as to the correctness of the current value of the Subject Property rests with MPAC. For the period consisting of the four taxation years from 2017- 2020, the Subject Property is valued as of the legisl