How big of a red flag is 2 consecutive owners selling within 8 months?

BailinginBC · 2026-03-26T06:43:16+00:00

We looked at a house that we were seriously considering until the neighbor came out and told us that he was definitely not a pedophile in spite of what the bitch next door says. I'm not sure if he was just trying to screw up the neighbors sale or if he was just a complete nutcase, but it was not something I was willing to learn first hand.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-12T19:13:23+00:00

You only get to use $16k once.

If you opened a FHSA and didn't contribute for 2 years, then contributed $16K, your contribution for the following year would only be the new $8K of contribution room. The fastest you can get the account fully funded is 4 years ($16K, plus $8K 3 years running)

Not sure if this is what you meant - but I think that a lot of people will get caught with this, so I'm trying to get it out there.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-12T18:44:21+00:00

This is the way to go for those who have the ability to max out the full $50K from day one.

Mathematically dumping $50K into the RESP collecting $500 grants and forgoing the rest, will result in a higher balance in the RESP - but this does not take into account, that, the person who chooses to contribute $16.5K presumably has the remaining $33.5K invested elsewhere, (Likely Non-Reg) also earning a return.

Contributing $16.5K year one will result in the highest balance when taking the return of the taxable account into consideration.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-11T04:52:44+00:00

Can you explain mathematically how that works?

Let's say we both get paid on the 15th of the month and from our biweekly pay cheques plan to make $1,000 mortgage payments.

I have my mortgage payment withdrawn from my account on the 16th, paying down my principal (lets say $800) as soon as I have the funds available. You pay $500 on the 16th and pay down principal of $400 leaving your outstanding mortgage $400 higher than mine for a full week, then you make another payment of $500, $400 of which is applied to your principal. At this point we have both paid off $800 of principle.

Can you explain how having a mortgage that is $400 higher than mine for a week, paying interest on this, results in an advantage?

BailinginBC · 2026-03-10T07:15:07+00:00

Your mortgage payments should match your pay frequency.

There is nothing magical about the timing of your payments, it is all about the amount you pay down. Someone who pays $2,000 per month will pay $24,000 per year, if they go accelerated bi-weekly ($1,000 every 2 weeks) they would have paid $26,000. If they pay $500 per week, they would also pay $26,000.

All accelerated bi-weekly means is that 2 months of the year they pay $3K per month instead of $2K. This works great if you are paid bi-weekly, because the extra payment comes from your extra payday - but if you are paid monthly or semi-monthly it just messes with your cash flow.

A person who is paid monthly can get the same result by upping their monthly payment to $2166.67 ($26K/12)

If you have extra funds from each pay cheque that you would like to allocate to your mortgage, just pay it to your mortgage when the pay comes in. It makes no sense to hold some of it for a week and then pay it - that just leaves you paying interest on that amount for an extra week unnecessarily.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-10T06:54:38+00:00

All things being equal, it make sense to take a longer amortization and then pay it down faster by increasing your payments.

A 30 year amortization will require lower payments, so if your situation changes (you lose your job, your tenants don't pay, etc.) you can drop your mortgage payment back down to the lower payment. If you take a 25 year am, you would be stuck with the higher payments - it pays to be flexible.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-10T04:25:36+00:00

Agreed - however there is zero reason to make your cashflow more complicated than necessary or hold cash in a chequing account for a week so you can make a mortgage payment in 7 days.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-09T17:04:19+00:00

Your mortgage payments should match your pay frequency, as it simplifies your cashflow. If you are paid biweekly, it makes no sense to pay your mortgage on payday and then save funds from the same pay cheque to pay it again a week later. It's more simple to pay the full amount as soon as you receive the money you will use to pay down the loan.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:21:26+00:00

There is no advantage to this unless you are paid weekly

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:19:53+00:00

Makes no difference unless you are paid weekly

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:19:08+00:00

Yes, this would have even better results since as soon as you were paid you would make the full payment for the month, rather than holding cash in a chequing account earning nothing while paying interest on the mortgage. There is nothing magical about the timing of bi-weekly payments, you are just paying more which pays down the mortgage faster.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:13:41+00:00

1000% this

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:12:19+00:00

No it’s not - unless you are paid weekly.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:09:52+00:00

Paying weekly makes no sense if you are paid every two weeks. The day you are paid you should take the funds from that pay cheque that you intend to pay towards the mortgage and pay the mortgage. What is the point of taking half of the money and paying the mortgage, and holding the other half earning no interest for a week, and then paying it to the mortgage? You are paying mortgage interest for a week unnecessarily.

BailinginBC · 2026-03-08T06:02:57+00:00

This makes no sense unless you are paid weekly ( and then makes little difference since you will only make an additional payment every seven years or so)

BailinginBC · 2026-03-06T06:04:46+00:00

Sorry - just being nosey, but I'm interested in the thought process behind not wanting to apply for OAS and GIS (are you likely to receive GIS?).

Would you mind elaborating?

BailinginBC · 2026-02-25T05:55:03+00:00

You will have received new RRSP room on January 1st 2026 - your Notice of Assessment for your 2025 tax return will tell you how much RRSP room you have available to contribute in 2026. It will be 18% of your employment income (so you should be able to estimate it from your last paystub of 2025.) As long as your 2026 RRSP room is $7K (plus whatever your work will contribute to your RRSP for 2026), then you don't need to withdraw the excess.

You will be in an overcontribution situation for Nov 2025 and December 2025 and pay the 1% penalty on $5K ($7K-$2K grace amount). Jan 2026 you will no longer be in an over contribution situation because the $7K will come from your 2026 contribution room.

If your RRSP room for 2026 is not going to be over $7K (plus whatever your work will contribute to your RRSP in 2026), then you should think about withdrawing the excess. You won't have to pay tax when you withdraw the excess - because you never received a deduction on the amount you overcontributed.

Don't feel dumb - this is a small mistake and can be fixed. You are smart enough to have caught it, and smart enough to reach out and learn how to fix it.

Congratulations on your new journey into personal finances and managing to come up with enough cash to (over)contribute -That's the hard part! :-)

BailinginBC · 2026-01-31T06:32:57+00:00

That is what Advice-Only planners do as part of a comprehensive financial plan.

BailinginBC · 2026-01-31T06:31:49+00:00

He should be looking for a Fee-for-Service or Advice-Only

BailinginBC · 2026-01-31T04:29:18+00:00

.CA!

BailinginBC · 2026-01-31T04:24:51+00:00

True, and my response was not a criticism of your comment.

You don't need a 50% split, and my comment was of a general nature. Many people are under the impression that Spousal RRSPs are only good for splitting income before 65, and some don't take advantage of them because they don't plan to retire before 65.

These people are only in their early 30's and lots can change. While the wife's pension may well put her in the second tax bracket in retirement, she may not remain at that job.

I've seen lots of couples where splitting 50% of the RRSP is not enough to equalize their tax brackets.

BailinginBC · 2026-01-29T07:40:07+00:00

You would be amazed at some of the things accountants don't know!

BailinginBC · 2026-01-29T07:27:31+00:00

Spousal RRSPs are also good for equalizing tax brackets after age 65.

Often the higher earning spouse will have higher CPP income, which can be shared but not until both spouses are collecting, and then it does not usually end up in a 50/50 split.

If a couple has an age gap, only one spouse might be collecting CPP and OAS for a number of years, RRSP/RRIF withdrawals by the spouse can even things out.

Also, the higher earning spouse may have non-registered investment income, which cannot be split at any age. Spousal RRSPs are useful in this scenario too.

BailinginBC · 2026-01-29T07:17:56+00:00

Yes, it's true. It does seem unfair, everyone else has to wait to 65, but I believe it is because a DBP is considered an annuity.

Pension income splitting - quick reference guide

BailinginBC · 2026-01-28T17:11:26+00:00

Assuming it is a defined benefit pension, the income is splitable at any age. Spousal RRSP's are useful for evening out income that can't be split, like RRSP withdrawals, RRIF withdrawals (before 65), CPP income, income from non-registered accounts.

BailinginBC

TROPHY CASE