Assessment Review Board
Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière
ISSUE DATE: March 06, 2020
Assessed Person(s): B.B.
Applicant(s): B.B.
Respondent(s): City of Mississauga
Property Location(s): Withheld
Municipality(ies): City of Mississauga
Roll Number(s): Withheld
Appeal Number(s): 3323457
Taxation Year(s): 2016
Hearing Event No.: 725628
Legislative Authority: Section 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25
APPEARANCES:
Parties / Representative
B.B. / P.B.
City of Mississauga / Sean Doyle
HEARD: January 3, 2020, in person
ADJUDICATOR: Dan Weagant, Member
DECISION
OVERVIEW
1B.B. (the “Applicant”) filed an application to the City of Mississauga (“City”) to have her 2016 taxes reduced, cancelled or refunded because she was unable to pay due either to sickness or extreme poverty, under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 (“Act”).
2The City has passed a by-law, delegating its authority to determine such applications to the Assessment Review Board (“Board”) under s. 357(11) of the Act.
Issues
3The main issue before the Board is whether or not the Applicant’s 2016 property taxes should be cancelled, reduced or refunded due to her inability to pay because of sickness or extreme poverty. This requires the Board to determine:
a. whether the Applicant was unable to pay her 2016 property taxes; and,
b. if the Board determines she was unable to pay her property taxes, whether she was unable to pay due to either sickness or extreme poverty.
4Finally, if the Board determines that she was unable to pay because of sickness or extreme poverty, the Board must then decide on the amount of the property taxes levied in 2016 to be cancelled, reduced or refunded.
Result
5The Board finds that the Applicant failed to demonstrate that she was unable to pay the property taxes levied in 2016. The application is denied.
ANALYSIS
Issue 1a – Was the Applicant able to pay the property taxes levied in 2016?
6P.B. represented the Applicant in this application. He testified that the Applicant receives an average monthly income of approximately $1,365. This income is derived from Ontario Disability Support Payments (ODSB) and transfers from friends to assist in meeting monthly obligations. Documents reviewed at the hearing confirmed this monthly average income.
7The combined balance on those accounts on January 1, 2016 was $7,664. The combined balance on December 31, 2016 was $6,400.
8Monthly expenses reported by the Applicant for 2016 totaled approximately $1,750. These expenses are summarized as follows (all rounded to the nearest dollar):
- Mortgage: $902;
- Utilities: $126;
- Groceries and household supplies and clothing: $350;
- Bank charges and fees: $15;
- Cell phone, telephone and internet: $160;
- Tax payments to Revenue Canada: $4; and,
- Property taxes: $193.
9The Applicant did not testify to any other financial liabilities or assets.
10The City did not take a position on whether or not the Applicant was unable to pay property taxes, as the City has delegated its authority of that decision to the Board.
11The City noted that the monthly expenses also include total property tax payments of $2,315 in 2016.
Findings on Ability to Pay
12The monthly income as reported is approximately $450 less that the total monthly expenses incurred by the Applicant in 2016. The discrepancy includes an average of $193 per month toward property taxes.
13The Applicant’s documentary evidence showed significant balances in both of her current chequing accounts. The total balance of the two accounts was approximately $6,400 at the end of 2016, after primary life and household expenses had been accounted for. The balance owing on the taxes levied in 2016 remained at $2,231.90. The accounts would still have shown a balance exceeding $4,000 if the taxes had been paid entirely. This is clear evidence that the Applicant was able to pay all of her property taxes in 2016.
Remaining Issues
14P.B., testifying on behalf of the Applicant, indicated that B.B. met the test of “sickness” is stipulated in the Act and that she has taken all steps available to her to reduce costs to a bare minimum, including the cancellation of internet and cable service and taking advantage of programs at utilities where costs can be reduced for low income individuals. The City did not take a position on the question of sickness.
15While the Board recognizes the financial challenges experienced by the Applicant, without evidence of inability to pay, the Board has no reason to consider whether the Applicant is in a condition of sickness or extreme poverty.
CONCLUSION
16The Board finds that the Applicant is meeting her monthly obligations, with additional financial resources available, after accounting for the full payment of property taxes. Accordingly, she has failed to demonstrate she was unable to pay the property taxes in 2016.
17The application is denied.
“Dan Weagant”
DAN WEAGANT MEMBER Assessment Review Board
A constituent tribunal of Tribunals Ontario - Environment and Land Division Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248