|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Strata fees are low I BC because depreciation reports aren't mandatory so EVERYTHING is FINE until it isn't and you get a $20,000 special assessment for roofing (or one building I visited that had one for $100,000). There are a few complexes that have realized this is stupid and now charge a real strata fee but many that haven't. As long as you know that this is a 'feature' of BC stratas and plan for it you will be fine. Now at least depreciation reports are sort of required in that you have to have a AGM vote to NOT have a depreciation report done. Obviously if you're looking into buying into a building and you spot that on their AGM minutes then that's a huge red flag. The problem remains though that in many of these buildings the fees were set artificially low. Now a strata has a report that suggests a few fee options, with the one that fully covers all depreciation likely well, well above what the building is currently paying in fees. Tacking on a substantial fee increase is an exhausting, uphill battle that's not really worth fighting at an AGM. It's a lot easier to accept the minimum recommendation of the depreciation report and try to increase fees by some tiny percent each year with the excuse of inflation and try to slowly crawl to where the fees should have been in the first place.
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Now at least depreciation reports are sort of required in that you have to have a AGM vote to NOT have a depreciation report done. Obviously if you're looking into buying into a building and you spot that on their AGM minutes then that's a huge red flag. Yeesh, there's so much bullshit to deal with in owning a condo, I think I'd rather just buy a chateau in France and save the money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Now at least depreciation reports are sort of required in that you have to have a AGM vote to NOT have a depreciation report done. Obviously if you're looking into buying into a building and you spot that on their AGM minutes then that's a huge red flag. If you treated it as a red flag you couldn't buy in 80%+ of the places I've looked at. Way too many stratas are still deferring the report, so you just need to treat the assessment risk as a diligence item. ie, what is the risk that the roof, parking structure, drainage, painting, windows, deck, walls etc etc need to be dealt with in the next 2, 5, 10 years and so on. Just like a normal house, except your inspector needs to walk the whole property.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
I don't know if this is the right thread for it, but I'll ask anyways: do we Canadians pay taxes on inheritance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:I don't know if this is the right thread for it, but I'll ask anyways: do we Canadians pay taxes on inheritance? No, but an inheritance is a deemed sale, so the estate may owe taxes on previously-unrealized gains.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
The estate will owe certain taxes, but there is no explicit death or inheritance tax and if you inherit none of what you receive is taxable. https://turbotax.intuit.ca/tips/canada-inheritance-tax-laws-information-463
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:The estate will owe certain taxes, but there is no explicit death or inheritance tax and if you inherit none of what you receive is taxable. This is what makes the local radio ad here for some finance guy where he goes "imagine my surprise when the biggest benefactor to my mother's estate when she died was the CRA!!!!!!!" absolutely laughable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Well, it's possible that the estate will pay more in taxes than any single inheritor will receive. With a bunch of inheriting relatives and a lot of unrealized gains, it probably isn't that outlandish.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Well, it's possible that the estate will pay more in taxes than any single inheritor will receive. With a bunch of inheriting relatives and a lot of unrealized gains, it probably isn't that outlandish. Well yeah but the implication from the ad is heavily "INHERITANCE TAXES WILL STEAL ALL YOUR FAMILY MONEY" as opposed to "your dead relative has to pay the same taxes as the living on the same earnings because that's how taxes work"
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Well, it's possible that the estate will pay more in taxes than any single inheritor will receive. With a bunch of inheriting relatives and a lot of unrealized gains, it probably isn't that outlandish. Yeah - the estate pays regular tax rate on any money in rrsp or rrif and cap gains tax on any difference between ACB and current price st time of death. It's just capturing the gains that would have otherwise been realized if those investments were sold, and that's why the beneficiaries are left with a clean tax situation and use the value at time of death for their own acb for any inherited non-cash assets HookShot posted:Well yeah but the implication from the ad is heavily "INHERITANCE TAXES WILL STEAL ALL YOUR FAMILY MONEY" as opposed to "your dead relative has to pay the same taxes as the living on the same earnings because that's how taxes work" Yeah this stuff is just wrong in Canada, although you can potentially defer those taxes by putting assets in trusts or gifting them in certain structures before death
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
In the case of an unexpected or early death the tax bill on RRSPs can be pretty big as the tax rate on withdrawing them all at once will often be substantially higher than the tax brackets that the deceased was in for most of their life. End of life estate structuring can make a substantial difference in terms of how much tax is actually owed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:In the case of an unexpected or early death the tax bill on RRSPs can be pretty big as the tax rate on withdrawing them all at once will often be substantially higher than the tax brackets that the deceased was in for most of their life. End of life estate structuring can make a substantial difference in terms of how much tax is actually owed. So if you're going to die in a car crash, preferably it would happen on NYE, before midnight?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
The main thing that can be done with rrsps is to name your spouse and dependent children as beneficiaries. They then receive their share tax free should you die before conversion. Not sure if you can do the same thing with rrifs
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:So if you're going to die in a car crash, preferably it would happen on NYE, before midnight? Nah, NYE is the worst case, as it gets tacked on to all your income from that year, leaving even more of it in your highest marginal bracket -- New Year's Day is the best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:Nah, NYE is the worst case, as it gets tacked on to all your income from that year, leaving even more of it in your highest marginal bracket -- New Year's Day is the best. Oh geez, right. Hangover brain fart. My bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Tax inheritance 100% IMO
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Uh what
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
Inheritance massively benefits the rich and the richer a family is the bigger the benefit. Obviously 100% tax is hyperbole, but not having any official estate tax or law in place allows the richest to sit on their piles of money generation after generation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
Saving money and planning for the future benefits the rich. Why would you want to penalize someone for being successful and or prudent enough to leave some behind for their kids
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Kids tend to spend all the money in general who cares
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
I too hope that one day I will be successful and prudent enough to leave 50k behind in RRSPs so my kids can pay off their HELOCs. Maybe in enough generations my family will have built up enough wealth to buy a house in Vancouver.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Saving money and planning for the future benefits the rich. Why would you want to penalize someone for being successful and or prudent enough to leave some behind for their kids I mean, this is like the most fundamental philosophical question of capitalism. How do you reward hard work without hampering social mobility? This is becoming more and more of a problem over time due to the devaluation of labour in comparison to capital. As with all things, a balance can be had. An inheritance tax of some kind is probably a good idea in an attempt to strike that balance. Make it too high though and people will just move more assets off-shore. Rick Rickshaw fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Apr 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:As with all things, a balance can be had. An inheritance tax of some kind is probably a good idea in an attempt to strike that balance. Make it too high though and people will just move more assets off-shore. I'd be fine with this if we move the rich people offshore with their paper assets, comrade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Eat some but not all rich. Many wars including the class war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend a cross-border tax professional who can advise me and my spouse what to do with a Canadian TD mutual fund now that we're US taxpayers, or finding one online? The filing requirements for PFICs look challenging, and I'm guessing we're not the first dumb Canadians who moved to the US without thinking about the tax implications of our overpriced investments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Yeah - the estate pays regular tax rate on any money in rrsp or rrif and cap gains tax on any difference between ACB and current price st time of death. It's just capturing the gains that would have otherwise been realized if those investments were sold, and that's why the beneficiaries are left with a clean tax situation and use the value at time of death for their own acb for any inherited non-cash assets It ain't that simple. -Most registered funds (RRSP, RRIF, TFSA, LIRF) will roll over tax-free to a spouse, a dependent adult child, or dependent grandchild. -$200,000 of an RDSP's value can be rolled over to a beneficiary's RDSP tax-free. -The principle residence exemption still applies to the home of the deceased. -Funds from Life Insurance are paid out tax free, unless the Life Insurance contract is considered non-exempt (Universal Life Policy with a savings portion where the savings is greater than the face value). -Non-registered accounts or assets without shared ownership are subject to Probate, and the fees vary by Province/Territory DariusLikewise posted:Inheritance massively benefits the rich and the richer a family is the bigger the benefit. Obviously 100% tax is hyperbole, but not having any official estate tax or law in place allows the richest to sit on their piles of money generation after generation. Instead of bitching learn how to invest. Nobody is stopping you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
grack posted:Instead of bitching learn how to invest. Nobody is stopping you. Being opposed to dynastic wealth is not incompatible with participation in markets, investing etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Being opposed to dynastic wealth is not incompatible with participation in markets, investing etc. Y'all read the rest of his posts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
The posts from 3 years ago where I was first asking about re-allocating my investments?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
I found out today that the lawyer expects things to be settled in 6 months, which seems standard from what I've read online. What takes place during that time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:I found out today that the lawyer expects things to be settled in 6 months, which seems standard from what I've read online. What takes place during that time? -Accounting of estate assets/obligations -Final tax return/Rights and Things -Discovering/notifying beneficiaries -Probate -Legal challenges (if any) -Paying off debts/obligations -Distributing assets (Residue) For most estates discovering and notifying beneficiaries tends to take the most time, and then Probate. However, if there are any legal challenges to the will that can take a long-rear end time but they're fairly rare.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Square Peg posted:I wanna say thanks to this thread for letting me know how incredibly expensive Canadian mutual fund fees could be. I had my meager assets set up with Questrade already, but reading the thread spurred me into action on unfucking my parent's retirement savings. They're both looking to retire in the next year or two, so it's definitely time. My dad recently passed away and my mom was debating what was a better option for his pension, a 307k lump sum or 1200 a month for the rest of her life. She's 56. After talking to my accountant uncle she finally agreed with me that the lump sum would be a better choice. Not looking forward to going through the rest of their investments and seeing just how many stupid choices they've made the last couple decades
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 23:13
|
|
The rest were all in the high 1.X% to mid 2.X%. She thought she was doing ok, but when we compared the return rate I got last year with passive index ETFs to what little scraps her mutual funds passed on to her, she was pretty willing to switch. We're gonna see how Questrade's 
|
Is the $1200 indexed to inflation?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:My dad recently passed away and my mom was debating what was a better option for his pension, a 307k lump sum or 1200 a month for the rest of her life. She's 56. After talking to my accountant uncle she finally agreed with me that the lump sum would be a better choice. Not looking forward to going through the rest of their investments and seeing just how many stupid choices they've made the last couple decades How do you figure the lumpsum is better? She'll likely live another 25 years. Lump sum means tax implications and probably blowing it on real estate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:How do you figure the lumpsum is better? She'll likely live another 25 years. Lump sum means tax implications and probably blowing it on real estate. 1200 x 12 x 25 = 360K. You're espousing a big bet against market returns, I think. E: by my reading, most pension plans can be flipped into registered plans, meaning that she could control the tax consequences of drawdown while compounding the full amount Subjunctive fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Apr 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
I'd have voted for the trickle drip if you think your mother cannot handle financial decisions. You would also be hands off and care free during those years. Worth considering. OTOH taking the lump sum sets you up for an inheritance in case of living a shorter life, a morbid take on the situation. Risky Bisquick fucked around with this message at 00:47 on Apr 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:1200 x 12 x 25 = 360K. You're espousing a big bet against market returns, I think. What about indexing over that 25 years? My napkin calculation is that conservatively 4% of 307k is less than $1200/mo, so the monthly payments are worth more, unless there are some factors in play that change the valuation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
If average market returns over a 25 year span hit 4%, then yeah, things are not good for her.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
Risky Bisquick posted:OTOH taking the lump sum sets you up for an inheritance in case of living a shorter life, a morbid take on the situation. This is where my mind went.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
Um a lump sum payment of $307k would trigger a > $80k in tax liability would it not? Whatever, I guarantee you that all that money will be gone in less than ten years and you'll be supporting her.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 02:07
|
|