It has become fashionable for couples to visit
their family lawyer and request that old titles to land be transferred
from one of the spouses (usually the husband) into the names
of both spouses as joint tenants. The reason most frequently
given is that they have heard it is much cheaper and easier to
administer an estate when titles are registered jointly.
While the latter statement is usually true,
it is certainly not a black and white issue. There are valid
reasons why a couple ought to hesitate before they go to the
expense of conveying their titles.
First, there is the immediate cost to convey
titles into the joint tenancy. The Land Titles Office charges
$20.00 plus $2.00 per $1,000.00 of value of the property being
conveyed. In addition there is a similar amount for solicitors'
fees.
Second, although an application by a joint tenant
is easier and cheaper -it is not free! Some people seem to think
that upon the death of one of the title holders, the other joint
tenant must simply send their title to the Land Titles Office
and a new one would be issued in their name. Unfortunately, a
formal application must be prepared together with an affidavit
exhibiting a death certificate, all at some cost.
Third, the underlying assumption to the transferring
of titles seems to be that the spouse who is acquiring the interest
will outlive her (or his) spouse. What if a husband transfers
title into joint names with his spouse, only to have his spouse
die first? First he incurred the cost of placing titles in joint
names, and now he has the additional cost of making an application
as surviving joint tenant to obtain the title back. I can just
imagine a client berating his lawyer for all the inconvenience
and expense he has incurred to get the title back into his own
name when it was in his name alone in the first place. If only
one could know for certain who would outlive whom. If one could
foresee the future, the best answer would be to have the first
to die (before he dies) convey title into the survivor's name
alone!
Fourth, most people die without owning any land
because they sell prior to the death of either spouse. It may
be a sale to a son or daughter or a sale simply to raise some
extra cash to keep them in their senior years. But if one plans
on selling the land before one dies - and manages to do so -
the cost of conveying into joint names is obviously wasted.
Fifth, there is the Goods and Services
Tax. Canadian Customs & Revenue Agency has indicated it would
not |
insist upon registration
or payment of the Goods and Services Tax upon registration of title
into joint names where the transferee is a spouse of the transferor.
But the latter is only an administrative decision that could change
without much warning, and certain other conditions must first be
met. Accordingly, caution in this area must be exercised.
Sixth, when titles are in joint
names it creates an additional complexity when drawing the couple's
Wills. The complexity arises because one can no longer say with
certainty who will own the land at the time of death except that
it will be the last to die. Accordingly, if a specific bequest
is desired of the land, it would be necessary to deal with the
bequest in both Wills. If the parties died at the same time, the
yet-to-be proclaimed Survivorship Act would require the
probating of both estates!
Seventh, although the cost of administering
most estates is more than an application by surviving joint tenant,
there is no guarantee that in an ever changing world that will
be the case ten years from now.
Finally, a more important consideration
in estate planning has always been the role of income tax. Although
the administration of an estate may cost 2 1/2% of the value of
the estate, Canadian Customs & Revenue Agency can take as much
as 50% of a person's earnings year after year in income tax. It
was not that many years ago when many couples were transferring
titles out of joint names into the name of one spouse so that the
other could establish and pay into a Registered Home Ownership
Savings Plan. Now, some title holders are considering a transfer
of their land into the name of their spouse to trigger a taxable
disposition in order to utilize the Capital Gains Exemption. Many
people anticipate the repeal of the Capital Gains Exemption - especially
as it relates to farm land.
Most couples purchasing homes,
and occasionally business property, would take title in their joint
names. Whether one incurs the expense of conveying titles into
joint names when it is already in the name of one of the spouses
depends upon the individual's circumstances. There is no doubt
that for some senior couples who plan to hold onto their land at
least until the death of one of them, transferring title into joint
names is a good idea.
However, before a decision is made
in this regard, one ought to consider all the factors and would
be well advised to consult with their family lawyer. |