M.M. and A.Z. v. City of Toronto, 2019 CanLII 72767

Assessment Review Board / Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: July 31, 2019

FILE NO.: WR 160542

Assessed Person(s): M.M. and A.Z.

Appellant(s): M.M. and A.Z.

Respondent(s): City of Toronto

Property Location(s): Withheld

Municipality(ies): City of Toronto

Roll Number(s): Withheld

Appeal Number(s): 3286083

Taxation Year(s): 2017

Hearing Event No.: 712871

Legislative Authority: Section 323.(1)(e) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c.11 Sched. A

Heard: February 27, 2019 and May 10, 2019 in Toronto, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel+/Representative
M.M.	Self-represented
City of Toronto	Graham Thomson+ and Luis Verastegui

DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY DAN WEAGANT

INTRODUCTION

1M.M. filed an application to the City of Toronto (“City”) to have his 2017 taxes reduced, cancelled or refunded because he was unable to pay due either to sickness or extreme poverty, under s. 323(1)(e) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c.11 Sched A (“Act”).

2The City has passed a by-law, delegating its authority to determine such applications to the Assessment Review Board (“Board”) under s. 323(11) of the Act.

ISSUE

3The issue before the Board is whether or not the Applicant’s 2017 property taxes should be cancelled, reduced or refunded because of the Applicant’s inability to pay for the reason of sickness or extreme poverty. This requires the Board to determine a number of things. First the Board must determine, based on the evidence at the hearing, if the Applicant was unable to pay his 2017 property taxes. If the Board determines he was unable to pay his property taxes, the Board must then determine if the reason he was unable to pay was either sickness or extreme poverty.

4If the Board determines that the reason he was unable to pay was sickness or extreme poverty, the Board must then decide on the amount of the taxes levied to be cancelled, reduced or refunded.

DECISION

5The Board finds that the Applicant did not demonstrate that he was unable to pay the property taxes levied in 2017. The Application is dismissed.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Was the Applicant able to pay the Property Taxes levied in 2017?

6The Applicant’s 2017 property taxes were approximately $4,194. The Applicant reported a total annual income for 2017 of $2,165. His spouse had an income in 2017 of $324. The Applicant and his spouse live at the subject property with their seven children. The household also receives various child tax credits and HST/GST refunds from the Government of Canada. The total of these payments in 2017 was $52,470.08 according to bank records submitted at the hearing. The total reported household monthly income plus these tax credits and refunds was $4,579.92.

7The Applicant reported that monthly financial activity for the household is transacted through a single checking account held by him and his spouse. The balance on that account on January 1, 2017 was $5,130.12. The balance on December 31, 2017 was $1,557.07.

8The Applicant testified that the subject property has a value of approximately $785,000 and that the family’s 2006 mini-van has a value of approximately $6,000. The family has no other tangible assets.

9Monthly expenses reported by the Applicant for 2017 totaled approximately $4,426 per month. These expenses are summarized as follows (all rounded to the nearest dollar):

• Mortgage payments - $1,451

• House and auto Insurance - $251

• Groceries - $1,104

• Household supplies - $23

• Clothing - $94

• Utilities (heat, hydro water and sewer) - $143

• Car expenses - $157

• Cell phone, telephone, cable and internet - $122

• Credit card and Line of Credit Interest - $109

• Appliance replacement - $167

• Roof Repair - $250

• Foundation and new driveway and grading - $205

• Property taxes - $350

10The Applicant reported that he and his spouse also had financial liabilities in 2016. These additional liabilities include:

• Applicant’s Personal Line of Credit—Balance on December 20, 2017: $15,888

• Applicant’s Spouse’s Personal Line of Credit—Balance on December 21, 2017: $11,130.

• First mortgage with a balance in 2017 of $369,727.

11The Appellant submitted that he and his family had a difficult time meeting their obligations in 2016 and that a refund of the taxes paid would allow them to improve their standard of living.

The City’s Submissions

12The City submitted that the evidence before the Board strongly suggested that the Applicant not only was able to pay his property taxes in 2017, the total family income clearly indicates that monthly commitments are being met and that the monthly expenses declared by the Applicant were approximately $ 154 less per month than the household income. The City noted the expenses for 2017 included three one-time costs for roof repair, foundation/landscaping work and appliance replacement.

13The City submitted that the monthly expenses also include $349.50 for the payment of property taxes. It submitted further that the property tax account in the City’s records indicated a balance owing of zero for the 2017 taxation year.

14Because the 2017 property taxes were fully paid and that there are monthly funds available each month in the household finances, including a closing year end bank balance of more than $1,557, the City submitted that the Applicant has proven he was able to pay his property taxes in 2017 and therefore is not eligible for a refund, cancellation or reduction of those taxes.

The Board’s Analysis

15The Applicant’s monthly family income, as compared to the monthly expenses, is higher by approximately $154. The comparison of monthly income and expense is a common measure used by the Board to calculate if basic household needs can be met, prior to determining if an Applicant can meet the property tax obligation.

16Monthly finances are not the only measure used by the Board to determine if an applicant was able to pay property taxes. The Board also does a contextual analysis of an applicant’s total financial picture to determine an inability to pay. The Board regularly reviews overall financial conditions, including mortgage and other debts owing, credit card debt and other loans or commitments, and the basic living conditions of the applicants.

17In this case, the Applicant testified that there are no outstanding car loans or credit card debts. The mortgage balance at the end of 2017 was $369,727 and the only other debts are personal lines of credit for both the Applicant and his spouse, totaling approximately $27,018. The payments on the mortgage and lines of credit were regularly made on time and are part of the monthly commitments testified to by the Applicant.

18The Board finds that the Applicant and his family are meeting their monthly obligations, including their property taxes. Accordingly, he has failed to demonstrate that he was unable to pay the property taxes levied in 2017.

19The application is therefore dismissed.