2026 Property Tax Relief and Averaging
Motion 23 · Council Meeting, March 10, 2026
Summary
- Council approved in principle two property tax relief programs for 2026: the Pilot Development Potential Relief Program (Pilot DPRP) for eligible Light Industry (Class 5) and Business and Other (Class 6) properties, and Targeted 5-Year Land Assessment Averaging for Class 1, 5, and 6 properties.
- The Pilot DPRP reduces the City's general purpose tax rate on a portion of assessed land value for commercial properties where land value makes up 95% or more of total assessed value — targeting independent businesses and neighbourhood retail along high streets — with the DPRP tax rate set at 50% of the blended Class 5/6 rate and relief capped at $6.5 million per property.
- Targeted Averaging smooths out sharp year-over-year assessment increases for properties rising more than 10% above the class average change, preventing sudden large tax burden shifts between individual properties without reducing the City's overall tax revenue.
- Neither program reduces total taxes collected; any relief granted to eligible properties is redistributed across remaining properties in the same tax class, resulting in an estimated rate premium of approximately 0.1% for Class 1 and 0.6% for the blended Class 5/6 rate.
- Fewer properties qualify for DPRP in 2026 compared to prior years due to current commercial real estate market conditions reducing the number of properties meeting provincial eligibility criteria.
- Staff were directed to bring forward the necessary by-laws to enact both programs, consistent with authority granted under Sections 374.4 and 374.6 of the Vancouver Charter.
Report Images
Vote
Transcript
29 segments
So the next item on the docket is item number six, report number six, the 2026 property tax, development, potential relief, and land assessment averaging. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to disclose it. Seeing no one in the queue and no one's hands up, this item does not have a team member presentation. Councillor Fry, you held the item, so you have about five minutes to ask questions.
On the policy around permissive tax exemptions, I know it's not covered immediately in this, but I'm just curious. I've been doing a little bit of research into permissive tax exemptions, and do we have a standing policy going back about 20 years that prevents us from pursuing permissive tax exemptions beyond heritage?
There is a standing council policy to not pursue permissive tax exemptions and instead to focus on grants as a way of supporting community organizations. We are coming back with a different report in April reporting on the exemption policy and the historical application of exemptions for information to council. And so that content will all be a part of that report.
Okay, yeah, because the gist of my curiosity is that this seems like a dated policy that may be an opportunity for revisiting the idea of permissive tax exemptions that were allowed under the Vancouver Charter.
Yeah, the policy, which was reaffirmed by council multiple times, has been to instead focus on grants as a tool because it's essentially the same impact of whether you fund things through a grant or whether you fund it through an exemption. It provides the same, it's the same cost to the other taxpayers. It's just a more transparent and more, you know, it's considered to be a better approach. And council has agreed with that. YOU KNOW, OVER HISTORY.
JUST TO ECHO THAT THERE WILL BE, WE'VE GOT A SERIES OF COUNCIL REPORTS THAT WILL BE COMING FORWARD, INCLUDING THE ONE ROB MENTIONED IN APRIL, WHERE SOME OF THESE DECISIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS WILL BE PRESENTED IN MORE DETAIL TO COUNCIL. FOR TODAY, SPECIFICALLY, COUNCIL'S DIRECTION IS THOUGHT AROUND CONTINUING DPRP relief program as well as assessment averaging. So that's in question today, but as Rob pointed out, there will be additional information coming back.
Okay, and on the development relief program, I know it's a five-year limit, and we probably are getting pretty close to that five-year limit on a few of the exemptions. Do we anticipate what that looks like when suddenly we go from subsidy to no subsidy for some of these? Are those conversations active with?
Stakeholders so this is the fourth year so like so there's obviously no implication yet the first program was in 2023 and so we'll be following up with communications and Advancing that with people to turn sure but we're a couple years away before that that becomes an issue and it'll it There's been change in the population about who is affected by DPRP, by development viability. As you noticed in the report, there's a lot less people that are eligible for the program this year as a result of conditions in the market. And so it's unclear what the direction will be. But it's important to recognize that it was always seen as a time-limited relief program, both fundamentally from... the province, so it's unclear what, if anything, we can do to advocate around that.
Yeah, I think mostly it's around allowing those rate payers to insulate themselves against the shock of what might be coming.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's important to, the communication will be there as part of the program and the DPRP. We've included information in the declarations that went out this year around the nature of the program and the time limited, and we will increase communications around those perspectives. Okay, thank you. Thanks very much, Councillor Zhou.
Yeah, thanks, man. Just a couple of quick questions. I saw the number of property has been decreasing since 2023. Eligible for the program has been decreasing consistently. So is there any plan in the future, the fifth year or whatever, we can expand the criteria so we allow more property to be eligible?
Sorry, I forgot to introduce myself before. Rob Evans, Director of Revenue Services and Tax Policy. The number of properties eligible for the program is primarily restricted by the provincial criteria.
Nothing can do.
Which is the 95% land value, and so that's the main driver. So, for example, like half as many, almost just over... just over half as many properties were eligible even under the provincial criteria. And that's primarily a reflection of changes in the development market. And so more properties are being valued on use rather than being valued as for their development potential. And so therefore, they're not hitting that provincial threshold of 95% land.
We can change to 90% or something. That's just a provincial requirement.
No, that's baked into the charter, so it would require a change to the Vancouver Charter.
Okay, thanks. Last question. So the program is to make sure that if the landlord received a... the discount for the property tax. They will transfer that to the renter for the business so there will be some decrease for their rent. Have we do any analysis to see if actually this pass on to the renter of the benefit?
As part of the declaration by a lot of people who apply for the DPRP take an undertaking that they will notify their tenant about the DPRP, but in terms of the contractual relationships and how various landowners pass through property tax to their tenants, we've seen all kinds of different mechanisms, and so it's really up to the tenants to engage with their landlord. All the properties that are listed that are eligible... selected and eligible for relief are listed in the bylaw every year. And like I said before, the landlord undertakes to communicate and tell their tenant that they've pursued the relief.
Do we know how many percentage actually passed out to their tenants?
We don't have any way of knowing and tracking that.
Okay. Yeah, okay.
So we got moved. Thank you very much. Councillor Dominato, seconded by Councillor Claston. Council, is there any discussion? Seeing no one in the queue. Any delays?
Okay.
I'm now going to call the vote. So.
Great. And that passes unanimously. Thank you very much.
Okay, moving right along. Item number seven, outstanding council motions update. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes that they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to disclose it. Seeing no one's hand is up, I'm just going to move along. This item does not have a team member presentation. Council, you'll have up to five minutes to ask team members questions.