Tribunals Ontario / Tribunaux décisionnels Ontario

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

ISSUE DATE: July 16, 2021

FILE NO.: WR 172148

Assessed Person(s): V.R. and N.P.R.

Applicant(s): V.R. and N.P.R.

Respondent(s): City of Mississauga

Property Location(s): Address Withheld

Municipality(ies): City of Mississauga

Roll Number(s): Roll Number Withheld

Appeal Number(s): 3451981

Taxation Year(s): 2020

Hearing Event No.: 747671

Legislative Authority: Section 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Representative
V.R. and N.P.R.	Self-represented
City of Mississauga	Sean Doyle

HEARD: July 6, 2021 by video conference

ADJUDICATOR(S): Dan Weagant, Member

DECISION

OVERVIEW

1V.R. and N.P.R. (the "Applicants") filed an application with the City of Mississauga ("City") to have their 2020 property taxes cancelled, reduced or refunded because they were unable to pay, due either to sickness or extreme poverty, under s. 357(1)(d1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 ("Act").

2The City of Mississauga 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 for the Hearing

3At issue in this proceeding is whether the Applicants' 2020 property taxes should be cancelled, reduced or refunded because of their inability to pay, due to sickness or extreme poverty. This requires the Board to determine:

1. If the Applicants were unable to pay their 2020 property taxes;
2. If the Board determines they were unable to pay their property taxes, the Board must then determine if the reason they were unable to pay was either sickness or extreme poverty; and
3. If the Board determines they were unable to pay due to sickness or extreme poverty, the Board must then decide the amount of the property taxes levied in 2020 to be cancelled, reduced or refunded.

Result

4The Board finds that the Applicants were unable to pay their 2020 property taxes in full, due to extreme poverty. Accordingly, the property taxes levied in 2020 are reduced from $3,112.41 to $1,896.

ANALYSIS

Issue 1 – Were the Applicants able to pay their property taxes in 2020?

5V.R. testified on his own behalf and on behalf of his spouse N.P.R. V.R. testified that the Applicants share the subject property with their adult son who is unable to work and has been unable to do so for several years. N.P.R. acts as the sole caregiver to their son and does not work outside of the family home.

6V.R. testified that he became unemployed in 2019 and was unable to find work throughout 2020.

7V.R.'s testimony and documents provided at the hearing indicated that the household had income in the amount of approximately $3,908 per month in 2020. This total was comprised of Employment Insurance benefits, the Canada Emergency Recovery Benefit, a GST rebate, a 2019 Income Tax refund, a one-time pension payment, personal loans from family and other deposits of unspecified origin.

8The household income and expenses are managed through a single joint bank account held by the Applicants. The balance on that account was $1,343 on January 1, 2020 and $659.91 on December 31, 2020.

9Monthly expenses incurred by the household in 2020 averaged $3,750. These expenses are summarized as follows (all rounded to the nearest dollar):

• Mortgage: $544
• Utilities: $220
• Groceries and personal care items; $1,100
• House and car insurance: $283
• Life and health insurance: $250
• Cell phone, television and internet: $136
• Car Loan: $393
• Car operating expenses and maintenance; $200
• House repairs and maintenance: $397
• Credit card payments on outstanding balances: $75
• Out of country expenses for N.P.R. to attend a family funeral: $152

10To further explain some of these amounts, V.R. testified that in 2020 N.P.R. travelled to her Mother's funeral, the roof of the subject property was replaced and that six mortgaged payments were deferred by the mortgage lender. He also testified that $12,000 of the household income was in the form of a personal loan from his daughter and that it is to be repaid when he is able.

11The City did not take a position on the application as it has delegated its authority to the Board. The City noted that no payments were made on the 2020 property tax account, and that the property taxes levied in 2020 totaled $3,112.41.

Findings on Issue 1

12The Board must determine if the Applicants were able to pay their property taxes, based on the evidence available at the hearing. The evidence shows that the expenses attributed to basic family needs were $158 per month less than the family income, on a monthly average basis. This amounts to a total of $1,896 for the 2020 taxation year.

13The Board has widely held that property taxes must hold a place of priority with respect to the money spent by a household over the course of a given taxation year. The Board has also held that, in order to determine if applicants are able to pay taxes, those payments are to be made once all costs associated with the reasonable necessities of life and care of those resident at the subject property are covered.

14If, after meeting the necessities of life and care, applicants are not able to pay some or all of their taxes, the Board has frequently held that all or some of the property taxes should be reduced, refunded or cancelled in the year for which the application is made.

15In this case, the Applicants' necessary household expenses were slightly less than the total household income during 2020. The Board finds therefore that the Applicants' were able to pay a portion of the property taxes levied in 2020. After necessary expenses were accounted for, the Applicants had $1,896 available to pay property taxes.

Issue 2 – Was the reason the Applicants were unable to fully pay their property taxes in 2020 either sickness or extreme poverty?

16Neither 'sickness' nor 'extreme poverty' are defined terms in the legislation. The Applicants did not present a case that the reason for their inability to pay was sickness. Accordingly, the only consideration for the Board is whether the Applicants have met the test for 'extreme poverty'.

17The Board considers the term 'extreme poverty' in the context of the evidence adduced at the hearing. In this case the Applicants were able to meet the necessities and care of the three people living at the subject property. For this family, in 2020, necessary expenditures also included a return flight for one of them to attend a funeral overseas and the expenditure necessary to replace a leaky roof. In this case, the Board views both of these expenditures to be necessary in context.

18The evidence clearly shows the Applicants responded to their financial challenges in 2020 by taking reasonable steps to reduce and mitigate costs while V.R. was out of work.

Findings on Issue 2

19Having taken steps to reduce costs and having put off other expenses to the future, the Board finds that the Applicants were in a state of extreme poverty in 2020.

Issue 3 – By what amount should the 2020 property taxes be reduced owing to extreme poverty.

20The Applicants' condition of extreme poverty lead to their being unable to pay a portion of the property taxes in 2020. When the difference between income and necessary expenses is considered, the Board finds that the Applicants had $1,896 available to them in 2020 for the payment of property taxes.

21Accordingly, the 2020 property taxes levied are reduced from $3,112.41 to $1,896.

ORDER

22The Board orders that the property taxes levied at the subject property be reduced to $1,896 for the 2020 taxation year.