ADAMS: If you fell for the "rain tax," I have a bridge in North York to sell you

If you've spent any time on the Canadian side of X (formerly Twitter) or scrolled through the Toronto Sun, you've likely seen it: the "Rain Tax." The narrative is as predictable as it is absurd. According to the right-wing establishment media, Mayor Olivia Chow is a socialist cartoon villain who has finally figured out how to tax the very water that falls from the sky.

It sounds like a Monty Python sketch. What's next? A breathing fee? A sunlight surcharge? But if you peel back the layers of sensationalism, you find another classic example of how modern conservative outlets turns sound, boring, and frankly necessary policy into "ridiculous shit" by preying on a local shortage of critical thinking.

The narrative pushed by the RWEM is simple: Olivia Chow was attempting to "tax the rain." The implication is that you'll be billed for every droplet that hits your lawn. It's framed as a desperate "tax grab" by a left-wing mayor to fund a bloated municipal budget.

This is, to put it bluntly, total nonsense.

What was actually on the table was a Stormwater Charge.

To understand why this is a good idea, you have to understand how Torontonians currently pay for the massive system of pipes, drains, and treatment plants that prevent their basements from becoming an indoor swimming pool every time it pours.

If you live in Toronto, the stormwater infrastructure is funded through your overall water bill. You are charged based on how much water you consume—the stuff that comes out of your taps.

Here is the problem: Stormwater management has almost nothing to do with how many showers you take. It has everything to do with how much impervious surface (pavement, roofs, driveways) your property has. When rain hits a garden, it soaks in. When it hits a massive parking lot at a big-box store, it rushes into the city sewers all at once, overwhelming the system and causing floods.

Here's how it works under the current, "fair" system Postmedia is defending:

• The Family of Four: Pays a high water bill because they do a lot of laundry and wash dishes. They are effectively subsidizing the city’s flood prevention.
• The Massive Commercial Parking Lot: Uses almost no tap water, so they pay next to nothing toward the infrastructure, despite being the primary cause of the runoff that breaks the pipes.

The "Rain Tax" was actually a proposal to uncouple these costs. The city suggested lowering the water usage rate and adding a separate charge based on a property's hard surfaces. It's a "user-pay" model, designed to make the Walmart down the street pay for the massive strain its asphalt puts on Toronto's sewers, rather than passing that bill to taxpayers.

The most galling part of this narrative is the claim that this is some radical "Chow-ism." In reality, this policy has been under study in Toronto since 2017, years before Chow took office. Furthermore, "conservative" cities like Mississauga, Kitchener, and Guelph have had these charges for years. They aren't socialist utopias; they are just cities that realized it’s more efficient to bill for infrastructure based on actual impact.

But efficiency doesn't get clicks. "Rain Tax" does. Ben Mulroney knows that if he explains the nuance of impervious surface area assessments, people will stop listening to his show. But if he tells you the government is taxing the weather, you'll get angry, you'll share the clip from his show, and you'll vote for whoever promises to "stop the madness."

In April 2024, the consultation for the stormwater charge was indefinitely paused because the "noise" became too loud. The misinformation worked.

The irony is that by killing the "Rain Tax," the right-wing establishment media protected large commercial landholders and left the average homeowner holding the bill for an aging, crumbling sewer system. Torontonians are facing more frequent and intense storms due to climate change, and our infrastructure isn't ready. We need a way to fund these upgrades that doesn't just gouge people for washing their hair.

Critical thinking is the ability to look past a catchy, scary nickname and ask: How does this actually work? Who wins if this doesn't pass? The "Rain Tax" isn't a tax on rain. It's a bill for the plumbing. And the next time your street floods or your water rates spike, remember that the conservative outlets screaming about the sky falling are the same ones who fought the policy that would have helped fix the pipes.

Don't let a bad-faith headline treat you like you're stupid. You deserve a city that works, and that requires policies based on engineering and equity, not memes and rage-bait.

This piece was written by an individual contributor and reflects the editorial position of The Provincial Times. Read our Content Policy here.