Property taxes are one of the most visible and politically sensitive tools that cities use to pay for services, but they are also surprisingly poorly understood by many homeowners and renters. In Toronto, this is especially true, as residents face the prospect of larger than usual tax increases in the coming years. The city has faced a long list of structural challenges since amalgamation in 1998: aging infrastructure, rapid population growth, transit projects that have been debated for decades, and an ongoing tug‑of‑war with the provincial and federal governments over who should pay for what. Against that backdrop, Toronto property tax increase history is more than just a set of percentages. It is a kind of financial history of the city itself, revealing how successive mayors and councils have chosen to balance political promises, public expectations, and hard budget constraints. This article takes that long view, tracing Toronto’s residential property tax increases from 2000 through 2026, and visualizing how both base rates and dedicated levies have evolved.
Looking at a single year’s tax hike in isolation can be misleading. A 3% increase might feel modest or painful depending on what came before and what residents expect to receive in services and infrastructure in the upcoming year’s budget. However, when those annual decisions are lined up over a quarter‑century, clear patterns start to emerge. There are eras of restraint and eras of catch‑up, years where political promises to “hold the line” translate into freezes, and years where deep budget holes force council into very steep increases. Viewed over the long term, Toronto property tax increase history reveals how these short‑term choices accumulate into a structural trajectory for the city’s finances. The data assembled here focuses specifically on the residential municipal portion of the tax bill, excluding the provincial education tax. That is the component the City of Toronto actually controls, and therefore the one that best reflects local political and fiscal choices, particularly in light of the anticipated increases in Toronto. Within that municipal share, the article separates “base” increases from special levies such as the Scarborough Subway Levy and, later, the City Building Fund, then recombines them to show the total impact on homeowners.
To make these trends easier to grasp at a glance, two visualizations accompany the historical table. The first is a line chart that plots the total annual residential property tax increase (including both the base rate and dedicated levies) from 2000 to 2026. This chart highlights how relatively stable the early and mid‑2000s appear compared with the pronounced spikes seen after 2020. The second is a stacked bar chart that decomposes each year’s percentage increase into its two building blocks: the base rate hike and the dedicated levy component, impacting the property tax bill. Seen together, these charts help clarify an important nuance that often gets lost in budget debates: even when the “headline” number sounds modest, a growing share of the increase can be driven by special levies earmarked for transit and housing, rather than the core operating budget alone.
The narrative that follows is structured to serve different types of readers. For those who mainly want the numbers, a detailed table lists base increases, levies, and total hikes for each year from 2000 through 2026, with notes and references to budget reports and major news coverage. For readers more interested in context, subsequent sections walk through the political eras that shaped tax policy: the early post‑amalgamation years, the Miller period, the Rob Ford freeze and its aftermath, John Tory’s “inflation‑level” philosophy combined with the introduction of dedicated levies, and finally the pandemic and post‑pandemic years that saw some of the steepest increases in the city’s modern history. The article also includes a short discussion of data quality and gaps, explaining where figures come from and how to interpret small discrepancies between what the City lists as a rate change and what media sometimes report as the average impact on a typical home.
Homeowners, prospective buyers, and renters can all use this history in different ways. For a homeowner, it can help put a current tax bill into perspective: today’s rate is the product of two decades of incremental decisions, not a single council vote, and reflects the city building fund levy. For investors and analysts, the data provides a backdrop for assessing long‑term affordability and fiscal risk. For advocates and policy‑makers, it shows how heavily Toronto has come to rely on dedicated levies to fund capital priorities like transit and housing. Rather than argue that any particular level of taxation is “too high” or “too low,” this article aims to give readers the tools to make those judgments for themselves, grounded in clear, sourced numbers and transparent visuals. By the end, the hope is that Toronto’s property tax trajectory from 2000 to 2026 feels less like a collection of disconnected headlines and more like a coherent story about a growing city wrestling with the real cost of the services and infrastructure its residents demand.
Below is a consolidated, best‑available history of Toronto’s residential property tax increases from 2000–2026, based on City of Toronto budget documents and major news coverage.
A few important points before the numbers:
- The figures refer to municipal increases on the residential class only (not the provincial education tax).
- From 2014 onward, Toronto layered on special levies (Scarborough Subway, then City Building Fund). Those are shown separately and then added to the base increase.
- In several years there are additional small effects From assessment (CVA) and tax‑ratio “policy shifts,” so the residential property tax rate is affected by the municipal property assessment corporation. actual average bill increase is sometimes slightly higher than the simple “base + levy” total, particularly when considering property value fluctuations. Where this is material, it is noted, especially in the context of the education tax rate adjustments.
Visualization: total residential tax increases, 2000–2026
The following line chart shows the assessed value trends over the years. total annual residential property tax increase (base + dedicated levies) from 2000 to 2026.
X‑axis: Year; Y‑axis: total municipal percentage increase in property tax bills.
This visualization makes it easy to see how unusual the jumps in 2020 and especially 2022–2024 are compared with the early 2000s; the recent period stands out as clearly higher than the long‑run “normal” of roughly 2–4% per Property taxes are one of the most visible and politically sensitive tools that cities use to pay for services, but they are also surprisingly poorly understood by many homeowners and renters. In Toronto, this is especially true. The city has faced a long list of structural challenges since amalgamation in 1998: aging infrastructure, rapid population growth, transit projects that have been debated for decades, and an ongoing tug‑of‑war with the provincial and federal governments over who should pay for what. Against that backdrop, the pattern of residential property tax increases over time is more than just a set of percentages. It is a kind of financial history of the city itself, revealing how successive mayors and councils have chosen to balance political promises, public expectations, and hard budget constraints. This article takes that long view, tracing Toronto’s residential property tax increases from 2000 through 2026, and visualizing how both base rates and dedicated levies have evolved.
Looking at a single year’s tax hike in isolation can be misleading. A 3% increase might feel modest or painful depending on what came before and what residents expect to receive in services and infrastructure. However, when those annual decisions are lined up over a quarter‑century, clear patterns start to emerge. There are eras of restraint and eras of catch‑up, years where political promises to “hold the line” translate into freezes, and years where deep budget holes force council into very steep increases. The data assembled here focuses specifically on the residential municipal portion of the tax bill, excluding the provincial education tax. That is the component the City of Toronto actually controls, and therefore the one that best reflects local political and fiscal choices. Within that municipal share, the article separates “base” increases from special levies such as the Scarborough Subway Levy and, later, the City Building Fund, then recombines them to show the total impact on homeowners.
To make these trends easier to grasp at a glance, two visualizations accompany the historical table. The first is a line chart that plots the total annual residential property tax increase (including both the base rate and dedicated levies) from 2000 to 2026. This chart highlights how relatively stable the early and mid‑2000s appear compared with the pronounced spikes seen after 2020. The second is a stacked bar chart that decomposes each year’s percentage increase into its two building blocks: the base rate hike and the dedicated levy component. Seen together, these charts help clarify an important nuance that often gets lost in budget debates: even when the “headline” number sounds modest, a growing share of the increase can be driven by special levies earmarked for transit and housing, rather than the core operating budget alone.
The narrative that follows is structured to serve different types of readers. For those who mainly want the numbers, a detailed table lists base increases, levies, and total hikes for each year from 2000 through 2026, with notes and references to budget reports and major news coverage. For readers more interested in context, subsequent sections walk through the political eras that shaped tax policy: the early post‑amalgamation years, the Miller period, the Rob Ford freeze and its aftermath, John Tory’s “inflation‑level” philosophy combined with the introduction of dedicated levies, and finally the pandemic and post‑pandemic years that saw some of the steepest increases in the city’s modern history. The article also includes a short discussion of data quality and gaps, explaining where figures come from and how to interpret small discrepancies between what the City lists as a rate change and what media sometimes report as the average impact on a typical home.
Homeowners, prospective buyers, and renters can all use this history in different ways. For a homeowner, it can help put a current tax bill into perspective: today’s rate is the product of two decades of incremental decisions, not a single council vote. For investors and analysts, the data provides a backdrop for assessing long‑term affordability and fiscal risk. For advocates and policy‑makers, it shows how heavily Toronto has come to rely on dedicated levies to fund capital priorities like transit and housing. Rather than argue that any particular level of taxation is “too high” or “too low,” this article aims to give readers the tools to make those judgments for themselves, grounded in clear, sourced numbers and transparent visuals. By the end, the hope is that Toronto’s property tax trajectory from 2000 to 2026 feels less like a collection of disconnected headlines and more like a coherent story about a growing city wrestling with the real cost of the services and infrastructure its residents demand.
Below is a consolidated, best‑available history of Toronto’s residential property tax increases from 2000–2026, based on City of Toronto budget documents and major news coverage.
A few important points before the numbers:
- The figures refer to municipal increases on the residential class only (not the provincial education tax).
- From 2014 onward, Toronto layered on special levies (Scarborough Subway, then City Building Fund). Those are shown separately and then added to the base increase.
- In several years there are additional small effects from assessment (CVA) and tax‑ratio “policy shifts,” so the actual average bill increase is sometimes slightly higher than the simple “base + levy” total. Where this is material, it is noted.
Visualization: total residential tax increases, 2000–2026
The following line chart shows the total annual residential property tax increase (base + dedicated levies) from 2000 to 2026.
X‑axis: Year; Y‑axis: total municipal percentage increase.
This visualization makes it easy to see how unusual the jumps in 2020 and especially 2022–2024 are compared with the early 2000s; the recent period stands out as clearly higher than the long‑run “normal” of roughly 2–4% per year.
1. Summary table: residential property tax increases, 2000–2026
Columns:
- Base increase – the main residential tax rate increase used to balance the operating budget.
- Dedicated levies – Scarborough Subway Levy (2014–2016) and City Building Fund (2017 onward), expressed as an equivalent percentage on residential taxes.
- Total (base + levies) – the combined municipal percentage change applied to the residential tax rate. This is the best single “headline” number for each year.
2000–2009
| Year | Base residential increase | Dedicated levies | Total (base + levies) | Notes / sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 0.0% | – | 0.0% | Average bill on a typical home held flat |
| 2001 | 5.0% | – | 5.0% | CTF table for an “average Toronto house” |
| 2002 | 4.32% | – | 4.32% | City budget: 4.32% residential increase |
| 2003 | 3.0% | – | 3.0% | City budget and CTF table for Toronto’s 2025 fiscal planning |
| 2004 | 3.0% | – | 3.0% | CTF table (Globe and Mail data) |
| 2005 | 3.0% | – | 3.0% | CTF table; used by City in later summary |
| 2006 | ≈3.0% | – | ≈3.0% | City internal summary of “Rec’d residential tax increase” for 1998‑2014 lists 3.0% for 2006, reflecting trends in income taxes. |
| 2007 | ≈3.8% | – | ≈3.8% | Same City summary lists 3.8% for 2007 |
| 2008 | 3.75% of the residential property tax rate in Ontario. | – | 3.75% | Reported by Globe and Mail (Miller era) |
| 2009 | 4.0% | – | 4.0% | G&M: “Property taxes went up 4 per cent” |
For 2000–2005 the figures above come from a Canadian Taxpayers Federation analysis based on City and Globe and Mail data. The 2006–2007 percentages are from a City of Toronto internal tax‑impact summary that reconstructs residential tax increases from 1998 onwards. 2008–2009 are confirmed by contemporary Globe and Mail budget coverage.
2010–2016 (Miller → Ford → early Tory years)
| Year | Base residential increase | Extra levies on residential | Total of those | Notes / sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 4.0% | – | 4.0% | 2010 budget: 4% residential hike |
| 2011 | 0.0% | – | 0.0% | Rob Ford’s tax freeze; 0% residential levy increase |
| 2012 | 2.5% | – | 2.5% | City report: 2.5% residential tax rate increase |
| 2013 | 2.0% | – | 2.0% | City report: 2.0% residential tax rate increase (2.51% average levy impact including policy shift) affecting property tax accounts. |
| 2014 | ≈1.7% | +0.5% Scarborough Subway Levy | ≈2.2% | Budget docs & media describe a 1.67% residential increase plus a 0.5% subway levy, widely reported as a 2.23% hike |
| 2015 | 2.25% | +0.5% Scarborough Subway Levy | 2.75% (≈3.2% on average bill) | City report assumes 2.25% base residential increase; with 0.5% subway levy and CVA/tax‑policy effects the average impact is ~3.2% |
| 2016 | 1.3% | +0.6% dedicated transit/city‑building levy | 1.9% (≈2.7% avg impact) | City report: 1.3% base residential increase; plus 0.6% transit levy, and CVA/tax‑ratio shifts bring average municipal increase to ~2.69% |
Key features of this period:
- 2011: one‑year change in the assessed value of properties. freeze under Mayor Rob Ford.
- 2012–2013: modest base increases of 2.5% and 2.0%.
- 2014–2016: introduction of the Scarborough Subway levy and then a broader transit/city‑building levy layered on top of the base increases to enhance tax revenue.
2017–2026 (City Building Fund era and recent large hikes)
From 2017 onward, Toronto formally uses the City Building Fund (CBF), a dedicated levy for transit and housing. Early years add 0.5% annually; from 2020 the annual CBF increment is 1.5% for residential and industrial properties.
| Year | Base residential tax‑rate increase (operating) | City Building / subway levy on residential property value assessments. | Total municipal rate increase used in budgets is projected to reach 9.5 per cent. | Notes / sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 2.0% | +0.5% CBF | 2.5% | City report: 2.0% residential increase; CBF adds 0.5% equivalent to the overall property tax account. |
| 2018 | 2.1% | +0.5% CBF | 2.6% | 2018 Property Tax Rates report table: 2.10% base + 0.50% CBF = 2.60% for residential |
| 2019 | 2.55% | +0.5% CBF | 3.05% | City report table: 2.55% base + 0.50% CBF = 3.05%; CityNews notes total increase felt by homeowners at ~3.58% once all factors included |
| 2020 | 2.0% | +1.5% CBF | 3.5% (≈4.24% avg impact) | City report: 2.0% residential base + 1.5% CBF = 3.5% total rate increase; CBC reports a 4.24% residential tax hike on the average bill once an additional 0.74% shift from commercial/industrial is counted |
| 2021 | 0.7% | +1.5% CBF | 2.2% | 2021 budget: 0.7% residential tax increase plus 1.5% CBF levy |
| 2022 | 2.9% | +1.5% CBF | 4.4% | 2022 budget: 2.9% residential increase + 1.5% City Building levy = 4.4% total |
| 2023 | 5.5% | +1.5% CBF | 7.0% | 2023 budget: 5.5% residential increase; with 1.5% CBF, total is a 7.0% residential hike, indicating a significant rise in the per cent property tax increase. |
| 2024 | 8.0% | +1.5% CBF | 9.5% | 2024 budget: 8.0% residential tax increase plus 1.5% CBF; widely reported as a 9.5% residential hike – largest in more than 25 years |
| 2025 | 5.4% | +1.5% CBF | 6.9% | 2025 budget: 5.4% base residential increase + 1.5% CBF = 6.9% total |
| 2026 | 0.7% | +1.5% CBF | 2.2% | 2026 budget launch: 0.7% residential tax increase plus 1.5% CBF, for a combined 2.2% residential hike |
*“Total” here is the sum of the explicit base increase and the dedicated levy for the residential class. In some years, the actual percentage change on an “average” home (what media often quote) is slightly different due to class‑ratio and assessment (CVA) adjustments, but the differences are modest and usually noted in the articles cited.
2. How to interpret this history
- Early 2000s (2000–2005):
- After amalgamation in 1998, Toronto held its residential property tax roughly flat in 2000, then moved into a pattern of 3–5% annual increases under Mayor Mel Lastman and early David Miller years.
- By 2005 the average municipal tax bill on a “typical” home assessed at about 333,000 CAD had risen roughly 20% from 2000 levels.
- Late Miller era (2006–2010):
- Residential increases remained in the 3–4% range most years, including 3–4% hikes in 2006–2010.
- There were no City‑wide dedicated infrastructure levies at this point; increases were all in the base rate.
- Rob Ford era (2011–2014):
- 2011 saw a 0% residential increase – a one‑year freeze.
- In subsequent years Ford kept base increases relatively low (2.0–2.5%), but by 2014 council added a 0.5% Scarborough Subway levy, pushing the combined increase to just over 2%.
- Early John Tory era (2015–2019):
- Tory campaigned on “inflation‑level” increases, which translated into base hikes of 2.25–2.55% on residential taxes.
- At the same time, council approved:
- A continuing Scarborough Subway levy (0.5% in 2015).
- The City Building Fund, starting at 0.5% in 2017, contributing to the overall property tax bill in Ottawa. and rising by 0.5% per year through 2021.
- As a result, total residential increases (base + levies) were typically in the 2.5–3.5% range in this period.
Visualization: base vs. levy components of tax hikes
The stacked bar chart below shows, for each year, how much of the residential property tax increase comes from the base rate versus dedicated levies (Scarborough Subway Levy and then the City Building Fund).
X‑axis: Year; Y‑axis: percentage increase; bars are stacked into “Base” and “Dedicated levy” components.
This visualization makes it clear how, starting in 2014, more and more of the annual increase is driven by targeted levies rather than just the core tax rate – especially after 2020, when the City Building Fund increment rises to 1.5% and becomes a major part of the total increase.
5. Pandemic and post‑pandemic era (2020–2026):
- COVID‑19 and structural budget gaps led to a step‑change in tax reliance:
- 2020: 2.0% base + 1.5% CBF + tax‑ratio shifts = about 4.24% on the average residential bill.
- 2021: only 0.7% base, but the pre‑scheduled 1.5% CBF still produced about 2.2% total.
- Under late Tory and then Mayor Olivia Chow, increases became much larger:
- 2022: ~4.4% total (2.9% base + 1.5% CBF).
- 2023: ~7.0% total (5.5% base + 1.5% CBF).
- 2024: ~9.5% Total property tax account adjustments are reflected in the city’s budget. largest since amalgamation, combining an 8.0% base increase with the 1.5% CBF.
- 2025: ~6.9% total.
- 2026: proposed and now in the 2026 budget at about 2.2% (0.7% base + 1.5% CBF), deliberately lower after three very high years.
3. Data quality and gaps
- For 2000–2005, the percentages are from a Canadian Taxpayers Federation submission that reproduces Globe and Mail / City data on the “average Toronto house”; these line up with later City summaries and are widely cited.
- For 2006–2014, most base‑rate percentages can be cross‑checked against City “Property Tax Rates and Related Matters” reports and a 2015 tax‑impact appendix; where only the City’s internal summary row was available (notably 2006–2007), that is flagged as approximate.
- From 2015 onward, all figures are from City budget documents and mainstream news outlets that report both the base increase and the relevant levy (Scarborough Subway, City Building Fund).
4. Underlying data file
A CSV file has been created with the exact data used for the charts:
- Year – calendar year
- Base – base residential tax‑rate increase, in percentage points
- Levy – increase from dedicated levies (Scarborough Subway Levy, City Building Fund), in percentage points
- Total – sum of Base + Levy, i.e., the total municipal percentage increase applied to the residential rate
This file can be used directly for further visualizations, calculators, or import into your own analysis tools.
Conclusion
Taken together, the data and visualizations in this article tell a clear and nuanced story about how Toronto has chosen to finance its services and infrastructure through residential property taxes over more than two decades. The early 2000s were characterized by relatively steady increases in the low‑to‑mid single digits, following a flat year in 2000. These years laid the groundwork for a growing city but also reflected a political environment in which modest annual hikes were seen as acceptable and even necessary to maintain service levels. As the Miller years progressed, the pattern of 3–4% increases became a kind of norm, and there were no city‑wide dedicated levies explicitly carved out for major transit or housing projects. For homeowners looking back, this period might appear comparatively predictable: there were increases, but they were broadly within a narrow band and followed a relatively simple structure, unlike the increases in Toronto expected from 2023 to 2025. In contrast, the Toronto property tax increase history that unfolds later in the timeline shows how new revenue tools and political shocks gradually reshaped that seemingly stable pattern.
The Rob Ford era disrupted that pattern in a very visible way with the 0% residential increase in 2011, fulfilling a campaign promise to freeze property taxes for at least one year. The freeze was politically popular but did not erase the city’s long‑term financial pressures; it merely compressed them. As the table shows, tax increases resumed in the following years, with base hikes of 2–2.5% and, by 2014, the introduction of the Scarborough Subway Levy layered on top. This marks the beginning of a shift in how Toronto talks about and structures property tax increases. Rather than simply raising the base rate, council began to rely on targeted levies to fund specific infrastructure projects, allowing politicians to argue that new taxes were tied directly to visible priorities like rapid transit, even as overall tax pressure on homeowners crept upward.
John Tory’s tenure built on that architecture. On paper, his commitment to “inflation‑level” increases meant that base hikes usually stayed in the 2–3% range. However, the charts make it clear that this does not tell the whole story. The Scarborough Subway Levy persisted, and the City Building Fund was introduced and then expanded, starting with a modest 0.5% and ultimately growing to a 1.5% annual increment for residential taxpayers. In the stacked bar chart, this shows up as a growing share of each year’s total increase being driven by the city building fund levy component rather than the base rate. For homeowners, the distinction matters less than the combined number on the tax bill, but for policy analysis it is crucial: it reveals a city that increasingly turned to dedicated, earmarked revenue tools to fund capital projects it could no longer pay for through the operating tax base alone.
The pandemic and post‑pandemic period represents another clear inflection point in tax revenue. The line chart of total increases from 2000 to 2026 highlights how sharp the post‑2020 spikes are compared with earlier years. In 2020, 2022, 2023, and especially 2024, total municipal increases for residential taxpayers moved well above the long‑run pattern that had prevailed for most of the previous two decades. These higher increases reflected not just the pre‑scheduled growth of the City Building Fund but also the accumulated pressure of structural deficits, pandemic‑related shortfalls, and years of debate over whether Toronto’s property taxes had been kept artificially low for too long. Under both the final years of John Tory’s leadership and the early budgets of Mayor Olivia Chow, council accepted that closing the city’s fiscal gap would require tax increases that were politically uncomfortable but arguably unavoidable given the scale of infrastructure and operating needs.
For residents, this history has several practical implications. First, it underlines that a single year’s increase cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. A relatively small hike following several very large ones may still leave households struggling, while a seemingly large jump after many years of restraint might be part of a necessary catch‑up phase. Second, the growing role of dedicated levies means that public debates should focus not only on the size of increases but also on what they are earmarked for and how transparently those funds are managed. When a portion of the tax bill is branded as a City Building Fund or a subway levy, residents have a reasonable expectation that these dollars will translate into tangible improvements in transit, housing, or other long‑term assets. Third, the data illustrates how difficult it is for any mayor to truly “hold the line” on property taxes without eventually confronting service cuts, deferred maintenance, or sudden, steep increases down the road.
From a policy and planning perspective, the 2000–2026 trajectory also raises questions about the balance between property taxes and other revenue tools. While this article does not attempt to prescribe an ideal mix, the sustained reliance on property tax hikes and infrastructure levies suggests that Toronto has not yet fully resolved the tension between its responsibilities as a large, growing city and the limitations of its revenue base. Future councils may consider a broader portfolio of tools—within the bounds of provincial legislation—to reduce the need for sharp year‑to‑year swings in property taxes. At the same time, the data underscores that even alternative revenues are unlikely to eliminate the need for regular, predictable adjustments to the property tax base. For homeowners and renters alike, understanding toronto property tax increase history is a first step toward more informed engagement in budget debates, election campaigns, and neighbourhood‑level discussions about what kind of city Toronto wants to be and what it is collectively willing to pay to get there.