All County, All the Time Since 2010 MAKE THIS YOUR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY HOME...PAGE!  Thursday, May 23rd, 2024

Farm property assessments, on average, more than double

Farmers will see this week how property assessments have risen on average of 16 per cent per year.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) has begun mailing out notices that for some, starting in 2017, will show assessments more than double over the next four years.

MPAC says the price of farmland has increased upward of 50 per cent in some areas, since 2012, because demand has outweighed supply, low interest rates and buyers moving into eastern and northern Ontario.

Every four years MPAC conducts a province-wide assessment.

“Farm values reflect the local real estate market and farm property owners may be interested to know that all categories of agricultural land have increased over the last four years,” said Rose McLean, MPAC’s Vice-President and Chief Operating Officer.

MPAC’s analysis using only sales data of farmland sold to farmers, shows farmland in Ontario has increased an average of 16 per cent per year since 2012. Increases in farm values are due to a number of factors including high demand in some parts of the province. According to Farm Credit Canada, farm values have been increasing substantially since 1988.

“To determine farmland values MPAC collects and analyses information about sales of farmland to farmers,” said McLean. “Sales of farms to purchasers who intend to use them for other purposes are not included.”

MPAC’s province-wide Assessment Updates of property values have exceeded international standards of accuracy. MPAC’s property values and data are also used by banks, insurance companies and the real estate industry.

Farmers have until Feb. 8, 2017 to appeal their assessments.

Filed Under: Local News

About the Author:

RSSComments (18)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. BARNEY RUBBLE says:

    How come the usual suspects missed this news highlight. Leave the farm lands and once again jump on the power issues.

  2. Gary says:

    If your land is not Class 1 then assessment would not have doubled.

  3. MI says:

    The article is about MPAC rural property assessments. I know my rural property value (not waterfront), sure hasn’t doubled in value since 2012. Nor will it double in value by 2020. I suggest that if anyone can come up with some ideas on how to combat the BS coming out of MPAC, let’s hear it. It will take a united front to keep tax increases from being out of control. Let us not blur the property values and mill rate here. The County and MPAC must be individually accountable for their positions, rather than pointing fingers at each other. Yes there are 2 fronts to demand accountability from.

  4. Emily says:

    Actually from a pure demand – supply scenario, the urbanites under a costing crisis would be justified in charging a premium to rural users as opposed to providing a subsidy. Of course good neighbours don’t react that way. But each crisis requires consideration.

  5. Fred says:

    Thanks for making the point. You are A OK with subsidies for rural users. Where do you think that water comes from? That scenario works well for you. Reality?

  6. Dennis Fox says:

    I’m not going to get into a discussion about bulk water users. They are people who need water because they have a shortage problem and should not be subjected to nonsense comments. The fact is that they are still paying for their water at a reduced rate – but that doesn’t mean it is being subsidized by anyone. Even if it were, that difference would be picked up by all taxpayers – not just urban. What I am not prepared to do is to subsidize urban water users. When the plant was built it was made clear that the cost would be paid for by those who use it – sounds fair to me.

  7. Fred says:

    Hey Dennis; Rural bulk water with the fee reduction is presently being subsidized by the urban taxpayer. Are you OK with that financial assistance?

  8. Chuck says:

    I fortunately do not require financial assistance but many do. The Provincial government has introduced steps to protect our ground water. Ground water belongs to all. Urban centres support rural areas in many ways through services. Water costing will move forward.

  9. Dennis Fox says:

    Chuck – I face and know well my realities and pay for them everyday. Let’s hope you will do the same thing, without asking for financial assistance.

  10. Chris Keen says:

    Since the municipality sets the mill rate that is applied to the MPAC property valuations, it is within its power to apply a rate to farmland that insures a property tax increase no greater than that for non-farm dwellers.

  11. Chuck says:

    “Childish and out of touch with reality “. Thanks Dennis, really nice! Water is our most precious commodity. It will become the largest issue facing all continents soon. To think that governments will not have to look at costing and controls is just sticking your head in the sand and not facing reality. Mark my words on this one.

  12. Dennis Fox says:

    My comment about the “possibility” of seeing a charge for well water is not made without some foundation to it. Last May, I attended a Town Hall meting in Demorestville – the topic of urban water rates had somehow been introduced and the “idea” of finding financial assistance for urban users was floated by the audience. Those in attendance soon ended that conversation. But I for one have not forgotten that it took place.

    As far as the assessment for farmland more than doubling – does it surprise anyone? MPAC is a creation of the provincial government and now supported strongly by local government to do nothing but to raise more tax dollars and to protect them from the angry taxpayers. We have a taxation system in Ontario where no level of government takes direct responsibility for raising taxes – and we wonder why governments continually over spend. There was a time when a revolution took place over the concept of “taxation without representation.”

    MPAC at first went after water front properties for additional dollars, now after a few years of milking those people, the only ones left are the farmers! Maybe the time has come for all taxpayers to tell government to take a hike??

  13. Marnie says:

    Do you really think rural residents should kick in to lower your water rates Chuck? When will the rebate cheques for the installation of wells and septic systems arrive in the mail? Will the cost of pumping out septic tanks now be covered for rural dwellers? Will well water become chlorinated or will rural folks remain responsible for insuring they have safe drinking water? Stop looking for chumps to split the bill with you. We may not own the water table but we have paid to use it and maintain our systems.

  14. Jason says:

    Great. Just what we need, fewer farmers.

  15. Dennis Fox says:

    I paid about $10K for my well and another $10K for my septic system – that’s about 18-20 years worth of your urban water bills – plus I pay for the repairs and ongoing maintenance and I pay taxes. Your idea of rural people having no responsibility for water and its related costs is a childish outlook and totally out of touch with reality. As far as the water table goes – rural people take care it far better than anyone who doesn’t have to depend on it – and that includes any level of government. Just look at the mess your water rates are in – and now you want rural folks to bail you out because of local government screwing up. Yes Chuck, you fell right into their trap of having rural vs urban, while they fiddle!

  16. Chuck says:

    I was with you Dennis until you just had to close on well water. For some reason you feel rural folks have no responsibility for water costs and are totally isolated from such. Do you think the water table on rural land is solely the landowners and has no affect upon others?

  17. Dennis Fox says:

    Hold on and watch the money grab coming very soon – both the province and municipal governments need money, because they have basically mismanaged what they now have. The City of Ottawa is looking at taxing rural property owners for storm water management??? The province has reclassified all farmland in the province – to basically allow more development on agricultural land – why??? Take a guess – yup more tax dollars for them to waste! Now just watch our own PEC council and see what they will come up with at some point in time – is a tax on well water next?

  18. Mark says:

    Would it not make more sense to assess farmable land rather than the entire acreage. 100 acre farm may have 20 acres of wood lot or 50 acres and only 20 acres is farmed as the remainder is bush.

OPP reports
lottery winners
Elizabeth Crombie Janice-Lewandoski
Home Hardware Picton Sharon Armitage

© Copyright Prince Edward County News 2024 • All rights reserved.