A Message from Canadian Seniors

We Worked for This.
We Saved for This.
Hands Off Our Retirement.

A well-funded lobby group wants to tax your home equity and slash your Old Age Security. They call it "generational fairness." We call it what it is: a tax grab on people who played by the rules.

Write Your MP Today
Read the facts

Two proposals that would punish every Canadian senior who saved responsibly

Generation Squeeze, a UBC-based lobby group funded in part by CMHC taxpayer dollars, is pushing two policies that would fundamentally change retirement in Canada.

Proposal 1: Tax Your Home Equity Every Year

!
An annual surtax on homes valued over $1 million — starting at 0.2% and rising to 1%. On a $1.25 million Vancouver home, that is $2,500 to $12,500 per year, on top of existing property taxes.
!
In Metro Vancouver, Victoria, and Greater Toronto, almost every homeowner would be affected. A modest east-side bungalow in Vancouver bought for $60,000 in 1980 is now assessed at $1.5 million. The owner didn't get richer — the dollar got weaker.
!
"Deferrable until sale or death" — meaning the tax accrues with interest against your estate, eating into what you leave your children. The very generation they claim to help inherits less.

Proposal 2: Slash Old Age Security

!
Lower the OAS clawback threshold from $182,000 per couple to $100,000 — or even lower. Some polls show support for $81,000 or $50,000. At $100,000, one in five seniors loses benefits. At lower thresholds, it could be half of all retirees.
!
Eliminate the Age Credit and Pension Income Credit — tax breaks that seniors specifically rely on, worth up to $1,500/year per person.
!
They call this "reform." In practice, it means a retired couple with a $110,000 combined income — a modest pension and some savings — would lose thousands per year.

Seniors are not the problem

400,000
Canadian seniors currently living in poverty — the people who would be hurt most by destabilizing retirement programs
2/3
Senior incomes are roughly two-thirds of working-age incomes — most are not wealthy
$250K
CMHC taxpayer grant to Generation Squeeze to research the home equity tax — your tax dollars funding a lobby against you
40+
Years of work, saving, and sacrifice that today's seniors put in — following the rules their government set

Eight reasons these proposals are wrong

Argument 01

We Played by the Rules

Today's retirees saved into RRSPs, paid into CPP, bought homes when they could afford them, and planned their retirement based on the rules that existed. They deferred gratification for decades. Now, after a lifetime of following the rules, a lobby group wants to change those rules retroactively.

You cannot tell a generation to save for retirement and then punish them for having succeeded.

Argument 02

Paper Wealth Is Not Income

A senior living in a home they bought for $80,000 in 1985 did not "earn" the $1.2 million it's now assessed at. That's inflation, population growth, and monetary policy — forces entirely outside their control. They can't eat their home equity. They can't pay a grocery bill with it. Taxing unrealized gains forces people out of homes they've lived in for decades.

The home equity tax treats shelter as a speculative asset. For most seniors, it's simply where they live.

Argument 03

Seniors Already Pay Their Share

Canadian seniors pay property taxes, income tax on every RRIF withdrawal, capital gains tax on investments, and GST/HST on everything they buy. RRSPs and RRIFs are not "tax shelters" — they are tax deferrals. Every dollar that went in untaxed comes out fully taxed as income. The CRA collects eventually.

The principal residence exemption is not a loophole. It was a deliberate policy decision to ensure Canadians could own their homes without being taxed out of them.

Argument 04

The Real Cause of Unaffordable Housing Is Not Seniors

Housing became unaffordable because of decades of policy failures: insufficient zoning reform, constrained housing supply, record-low interest rates that inflated prices, mass immigration without matching infrastructure, and foreign capital flows. None of these were caused by a 72-year-old living in the house she raised her children in.

Blaming seniors for the housing crisis is intellectually dishonest. Taxing their homes does not build a single new unit of housing.

Argument 05

OAS Is Not "Too Generous"

The maximum OAS benefit is approximately $8,900 per year — about $742 per month. That is not a lavish payout. For hundreds of thousands of seniors, it is the difference between paying rent and not. The current clawback already begins at approximately $91,000 in individual net income and eliminates OAS entirely at around $151,000.

Lowering the threshold to $100,000 household income would catch modest two-pension households — a retired teacher and a retired electrician — who are by no stretch of the imagination wealthy.

Argument 06

It Won't Help Young People

Generation Squeeze claims these taxes would be redirected to help younger Canadians. But there is no guarantee that any government would do so. Tax revenue goes into general revenue. The $7 billion "saved" from cutting OAS would just as likely go to servicing the national debt or funding other priorities.

Meanwhile, the real way to help young people is to stop taxing them so heavily on their earnings. A 25-year-old earning $60,000 loses nearly a third of their income to income tax, CPP, and EI before they can even think about saving for a home. Fix that first.

Argument 07

Pitting Generations Against Each Other Is a Political Tactic

The framing of "generational fairness" is designed to create resentment between parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren. But most families share wealth across generations — parents help with down payments, grandparents fund education, families care for each other. Taxing seniors doesn't help their children. It hurts the whole family.

The real divide isn't between generations. It's between families trying to build a life and a government that takes too much from everyone.

Argument 08

A Wealth Tax on Homes Means Less for the Next Generation

Generation Squeeze says they want to help young Canadians afford homes. But a wealth tax on home equity does the exact opposite. When a senior's estate is eroded by years of accumulated surtax — deferred with interest — there is less to pass down to their adult children. The same children who can't afford today's rents. The same children who can't scrape together a down payment. The same children who Generation Squeeze claims to be fighting for.

Many Canadian families count on an eventual inheritance — not as a windfall, but as the only realistic path to home ownership in cities like Vancouver and Toronto where a starter home costs over $1 million. A parent's home equity is often the single largest asset that will ever transfer between generations. Tax it away, and you don't help the next generation — you trap them.

Today's young adults face sky-high rents that consume 40–60% of their income. First-time buyers are priced out of every major market. And when their parents — who worked for 40 years to pay off that mortgage — finally pass on, the government will have already taken its cut through property tax, income tax on every RRIF dollar, probate fees, and now a home equity surtax on top. What's left?

If Generation Squeeze truly cared about the next generation, they would fight to protect family wealth transfers — not tax them into oblivion. The greatest gift a parent can give is a foundation to build on. Don't let the government take that away.

What they say vs. what actually happens

They Say What Actually Happens
"Homeowners gained wealth in their sleep" Homeowners worked for decades to pay off mortgages at interest rates that hit 21% in 1981. Nothing was free.
"The tax can be deferred" Deferred with interest means your estate pays more. Your children — the "squeezed generation" — inherit less.
"Only 20% of seniors would lose OAS" That's over one million Canadians. And if the threshold drops to $81,000, it's far more.
"Savings will fund housing & childcare" No mechanism guarantees this. Government revenue goes to general coffers.
"$100,000 threshold is generous" For a couple with two modest pensions in Vancouver — one of the most expensive cities on earth — $100,000 is not wealthy.
"Tax the home equity shelter" The principal residence exemption exists so people aren't taxed out of their homes. Removing it is a radical change.

Want to help young Canadians? Here's how — without punishing their parents

The housing crisis and affordability squeeze are real problems. But the answer isn't taxing seniors. The answer is fixing the policies that created the problem in the first place.

Cut Income Tax on Young Workers

A 25-year-old earning $55,000 pays roughly $8,000+ in income tax plus $3,800 in CPP/EI premiums. Reducing the tax burden on the first $60,000 of income would put thousands back in the pockets of young workers every year — money they could save for a down payment.

Build More Housing

Canada needs 3.5 million additional homes by 2030 according to CMHC. Streamline zoning, fast-track permits, incentivize developers, and stop blocking density. This is a supply problem, not a tax problem.

Expand the First Home Savings Account

The FHSA allows $8,000/year in tax-deductible savings for a first home. Increase the limit and allow parents and grandparents to contribute. Let families help each other — don't tax them for trying.

Match Immigration to Infrastructure

Canada welcomed over 1 million newcomers in recent years while building a fraction of the housing needed. Immigration is vital to the economy, but it must be matched with housing, healthcare, and transit investment.

Stop Taxing Seniors Into Poverty

Instead of cutting OAS, index it properly to real inflation — especially food and shelter costs. Protect the 400,000 seniors already in poverty. A country that taxes its elderly out of their homes is not a country worth building.

Write your Member of Parliament

Your MP works for you. Let them know that taxing seniors out of their homes and cutting their retirement benefits is not acceptable. A short, respectful letter carries more weight than you think.

  1. Find Your MP Go to ourcommons.ca/Members and enter your postal code. You'll find your MP's name, email, and office address.
  2. Write a Personal Letter Use the template below as a starting point, but add your own story. Where did you work? How many years? What did you sacrifice to save? Personal stories are powerful.
  3. Send It by Email and Mail Email is fast, but a physical letter to the constituency office has more impact. Mail to any MP in Canada is postage-free — just address it to: [MP Name], House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0A6.
  4. Share This Page Forward this page to friends, family, neighbours, and community groups. Post it on social media. The more voices, the harder it is to ignore.

Dear [MP Name],

I am writing to you as a retired Canadian and your constituent in [Your Riding]. I am deeply concerned about proposals currently being promoted by the lobby group Generation Squeeze to impose an annual tax on home equity and to lower the income threshold for Old Age Security benefits.

I worked for [number] years, paid my taxes, contributed to CPP, saved in my RRSP, and purchased my home according to the rules set by this country's government. My home is not a speculative investment — it is where I live. My OAS is not a luxury — it is part of the retirement plan I was promised.

These proposals would punish Canadians who saved responsibly while doing nothing to address the real causes of the housing affordability crisis: insufficient housing supply, restrictive zoning, and decades of policy failures at every level of government.

I urge you to publicly oppose any legislation that would tax the equity in Canadians' principal residences, lower the OAS clawback threshold below its current level, or eliminate the Age Credit and Pension Income Credit.

If the government truly wants to help younger Canadians, it should reduce the income tax burden on young workers, build more housing, and stop pitting generations against each other for political gain.

I look forward to your response.

Respectfully,
[Your Name]
[Your Address]

Don't wait. Act today.

Every letter matters. Every voice counts. The politicians making these decisions need to hear from the people who will be affected — before it's too late.