Not honest about spec tax

Whether you support this tax or not it is both misleading and outright deceitful for the government to use the “speculation" label. It has almost nothing to do with speculation and almost everything to do with “lifestyle”. Whether it’s a recreational property or a vacation home it’s about lifestyle. The vast majority of the property owners affected by this tax are not real estate speculators or “flippers” of properties. Be they single family or condominiums, most have been owned for years, perhaps decades, as an investment in family. 

In good times and bad our Alberta neighbours paid for goods and services, supporting our economy. Many purchased a secondary property for lifestyle, not speculative purposes, proven by the fact that most retained their presence and ownership in our area. If their focus was on speculation they could have chosen less risky environments. Thanks, but you're no longer welcome here is not an appropriate response.

Rationalizing this tax by saying: "the tax is not paid by people who put their homes on the rental market"  is also misleading: 

Firstly, these properties have a history, a pattern, of being left vacant, further proof that they are not speculative investments. They would not be left vacant if the focus was on maximizing the economic gain. They bought it to use it (family lifestyle).  

Secondly, the vast majority of these properties have values in the upper half of the market. Thus higher monthly rents ruling out many of the renters that the NDP seem focused on supporting. So, since the tax is focused on Canadians who can afford a second home or recreational property maybe it’s just a “wealth tax”. 

Regardless, why can’t you just be honest and call it what it is rather than deceitfully label it strictly for political purposes.

Al Kleinfelder