On November 24, 2025, Ontario’s Bill 60, which many landlords were eager to see through, finally passed the provincial parliament. The vote of 71 to 43 can basically be understood as: the landlord camp breathed a sigh of relief, and some tenant rights groups have already begun planning the next demonstration. This is a bill that calibrates the balance of tenants’ and landlords’ rights. It corrects the balance that has been tilted significantly for a long time. Although it is still a long way from a fair market mechanism, it is a small step in the right direction. Even so, the bill still faced fierce opposition from vested interest groups, and protests continued.
Bill 60 is the first small bill in 15 years aimed at protecting landlords, and is aimed at cracking down on abuse of the system by "professional tenants" rather than targeting good tenants. Bill 60 encourages property owners who have left their properties vacant to put them on the rental market, increasing supply and stabilizing rents, but is a heavy blow to tenants who don’t pay rent. The goal of Bill 60 is to achieve faster hearings, fewer delays, and fewer loopholes in the system that can be abused. Under the old rules, tenants who did not pay rent took advantage of the long and inefficient process and stayed for a long time. The landlord had to spend a long time to fill the financial hole out of his own pocket. He was exhausted physically and mentally, and even became homeless and was forced to sell the house. The new rules introduce clear, faster court processes, shorten appeal periods and add more referees, with the aim of making the rental market run smoother and fairer. To put it bluntly, this bill is intended to accelerate the "wrangling war" between landlords and tenants, hoping that both parties can "live and work in peace and contentment" from now on.
An initial draft of the bill also included a more landlord-friendly proposal that was later removed. The proposal would give landlords the right to terminate a lease and readjust the rent and lease term based on market conditions when the lease expires, rather than automatically renewing the lease. Ontario’s proposal is the same as the current rental bill in Alberta. That is, a lease is a contract. The agreed rent must be fulfilled within a certain period of time. After expiration, a new contract needs to be signed. This is a reasonable approach to protect the landlord’s economic interests and respect the spirit of the contract. Although this motion in Ontario has been deleted from this bill, it points out the direction for further balancing the rights of tenants and landlords in the future. The label of ‘stable housing’ will have to be worn by landlords in Ontario for the time being. However, the seed has been planted, and we will wait until the next provincial election to see if it will sprout. Tenants in Ontario suddenly realized that the landlord should have the right to terminate the lease. Living in a rented house always faces an unstable life. Only by buying a house or applying for a government low-rent house can the stability of living be guaranteed. Ontario's motion has tugged at the heartstrings of potential first-time homebuyers, and discussions about housing stability are being put on the table.
01 A brief analysis of the content of Ontario Bill 60 regarding tenants and landlords
The inefficiency of Ontario’s Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) triggered this revision of the Ontario Act. Under Ontario’s current Residential Tenancy Act, the referee of the RTA is the LTB, and conflicts between landlords and tenants must be adjudicated by the LTB before they can take effect. For example, if a tenant is in arrears with rent, the landlord cannot evict the tenant violently on his own. He needs to go through the LTB trial. After a ruling is made, the eviction will be carried out by the bailiff. The duty of the LTB is to maintain the RTA. This time, Ontario's Bill 60 amends the RTA to reduce the discretion of the LTB referee, making the judgment faster, more just, and more law-based, rather than based on sympathy and goodwill. Tenants who have already defaulted on rent can be evicted as soon as possible, so as to prevent the inefficiency of the LTB from becoming a paradise for loopholes and a nightmare for landlords. During the epidemic, LTB was paralyzed for a time, and rent arrears cases were not handled in a timely manner. The number of cases backlogged by LTB reached a peak in 2023, with 38,000 pending cases, causing huge financial losses to the landlord group. You must know that the LTB is not responsible for recovering the tenant's rent arrears. Even if the LTB finally decides after a long trial that the tenant must pay off the arrears and evict the tenant, the landlord still has to go to the small claims court to file a lawsuit and recover. This process has destroyed the confidence of many real estate investors. Global Mail once conducted an exclusive interview and revealed a rent arrears tenant. Adika Raffle used LTB loopholes to play hide and seek with the landlord. He was evicted after 4 years of arrears in rent. The accumulated rent arrears and utility bills reached 60,000 Canadian dollars. The landlord Narinder Singh and his wife felt that they would never be able to recover such a huge debt in their lifetime. The escalating conflicts between tenants and landlords in Ontario are directly related to the inefficiency of LTB. In addition, the discretion of LTB referees has also expanded and escalated the conflicts, causing landlords to retreat, reducing the supply of rental housing, and making the housing crisis in Ontario intensified. The new Bill 60 is a reform measure aimed at rectifying the LTB order and reducing referee discretion. The seven most important elements of Bill 60 for tenants and landlords are as follows:
1. Compensation exemption for owner-occupied repossession: Under the old regulations, under Section 48.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA), when a landlord issues an N12 notice to a tenant for owner-occupied reasons, he or she is required to provide a replacement unit or pay one month's compensation. Under the new rules, landlords do not need to provide one month's compensation if the termination date of the N12 notice is at least 120 days from the date of service, instead of the original minimum of 60 days. This change does not mean that the N12 notice must now be served 120 days in advance; it simply means that it needs to be served 120 days in advance if the landlord wishes to avoid paying one month's compensation.
2. Clear definition of persistent late payment of rent: A new subsection has been added to Section 58 dealing with evictions for persistent late payment of rent. The bill would define in RTA regulations the exact conditions that constitute "continued late payment of rent". There is currently a lack of clarity in Section 58, does it need to be overdue 12 times or 6 times? At least 10 days overdue each time? , and some LTB referees have mistakenly ruled that continued "unpaid rent", non-payment, such as non-payment for four consecutive months, does not qualify as "continuous late payment of rent". This ruling is absurd. This change is intended to prevent such inappropriate rulings.
3. Shortened waiting period for applications for unpaid rent: Under the old rule, landlords had to wait 14 days from the date of service of the N4 notice before submitting an application to the LTB, i.e. on the 15th day or one day after the termination date. Under the new rules, the waiting period for applications has been shortened to 7 days. The change applies to all tenancy types, whether weekly or monthly, and will be very welcome to landlords, especially smaller landlords.
4. Limiting the discretion to set aside an eviction order: Section 77.8 of the RTA involves "set aside motions", that is, when the tenant issues a notice to vacate or agrees to vacate, the landlord applies for an eviction order through L3, and the tenant can subsequently file a motion to set aside the eviction order. The new provisions stipulate that the conditions under which a referee can revoke a deportation order will be specified by prescribing regulations, thereby limiting the referee's original discretion. This provision greatly limits the referee's discretion, which is a major constraint that prevents referees from indiscriminately showing compassion.
5. Restrictions on Raising Issues at Rent Hearings: Section 82 of the RTA, dubbed “the dreaded Section 82” by landlords and legal advisors, allows tenants to raise counterclaim issues such as mold, cockroaches, nuisance, repossession of parking spaces, etc., at the hearing of the landlord’s eviction application in an attempt to catch the landlord off guard and obtain an extension. While tenants were required a few years ago to provide five days' notice of a specific description, referees still have the power to ignore the five-day notice requirement and grant extensions. New provision amends Sections 82.1 and 82.2 to tighten requirements. Referees can no longer ignore the fact that a tenant has failed to provide 5 days notice. Unless the regulations provide otherwise, the tenant must pay to the landlord or deposit with the LTB half of the rent arrears claimed in the application before the hearing. Tenants can no longer raise last-minute questions like "I have cockroaches" unless payment is made.
6. Limit the conditions for deferring eviction: After the LTB approves an eviction order, tenants often find various reasons to request a postponement of eviction. Section 83.1B of the RTA deals with the specific conditions under which the execution of an eviction order may be deferred. Under the new provisions, the specific conditions for deferring evictions will be detailed by statute. For example, regulations may provide that deferrals may not exceed 3 months, or that deferrals may only occur under certain conditions, such as the child having to complete the school year. This modification further tightens the referee’s discretion
7. Tightening of LTB internal review procedures: Complete removal of section 209.2, which allows for review where a party is unable to reasonably participate in the original hearing. Tenants who are in arrears with rent often do not appear in court during the hearing, causing the hearing that has been waiting for a long time to be postponed again due to the tenant's absence, or the hearing is re-examined, which continuously delays the judgment time. The period for filing a request for rehearing is reduced from the original 30 days to 15 days from the date of the final decision or order.
The purpose of Bill 60 is twofold: to increase speed and to reduce power. Reduce the ability of LTB referees to exercise discretionary powers by concentrating these powers into clear provisions of the Act and regulations. The Ontario government believes that in order to address the backlog, power must be focused on regulations and statutes. If the RTA Residential Tenancies Act is likened to a ship sailing in a storm, then LTB umpires in the past were like captains, with broad discretion to adjust course based on the rocking of the ship and the direction of the wind. Bill 60 acts like putting an autopilot system on the ship: It reduces the captain’s ad hoc decision-making power and forces ships to move forward in a faster, more predictable manner through pre-written, stricter regulations that, for example, tighten the conditions under which questions can be asked and shorten application deadlines. While captains have less flexibility, the government hopes this will reduce human error and get to destinations faster.
02 How did the relationship between tenants and landlords in Ontario get to where it is today?
In Ontario, if a landlord encounters a tenant who has not paid any rent, he may have to wait for up to several months to get a hearing opportunity. The LTB loophole is a paradise for professional tenants. The trial process will be repeatedly dragged and delayed. During this period, the tenant who owes rent will live in the property for free, and the landlord will have to suffer financial losses and physical and mental torture. It is still unknown whether the final losses can be compensated. This is all because criminals have exploited loopholes in the RTA's law enforcement system, LTB, and a few unscrupulous tenants have confidently passed on the costs they should pay for their residence to the landlord. Taking advantage of LTB's inefficiencies to bully landlords, endlessly exploiting LTB's system flaws, and referees' favoritism to provide free housing. The provincial government's Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing said in a statement that Bill 60 ensures those who repeatedly abuse the system and create a backlog at LTBs are held accountable. The bill also ensures that families who rely on rental income can pay their mortgages, property taxes and utility bills, thereby maintaining a greater supply of rental housing and protecting the long-term stability of Ontario's rental housing supply. This bill will protect responsible renters and ensure accountability for renters who repeatedly abuse the system. It is hoped that this legislation will help clear the LTB backlog. Ontario Housing Minister Rob Flack said, "Bill 60 will restore balance and rebuild confidence in Ontario's rental housing market. The bill is designed to protect "responsible tenants" who meet their lease responsibilities, while ensuring accountability for those who "repeatedly abuse the system and create a backlog of LTBs." So, how did Ontario's tenant-landlord relationship get to where it is today?
In March 2020, the province suspended evictions for rent arrears and suspended most LTB hearings. When LTB resumed in mid-2021, landlords were flooded with tens of thousands of back rent review applications, with many tenants owing between four and 12 months of rent unable to repay even after returning to work. Before the pandemic, requests for review, the court equivalent of an appeal, were rare. But during the pandemic, it became a “routine” to live for free indefinitely. The tenant or taxpayer-funded attorneys would present new evidence to obtain a review and delay the eviction order, then repeat the process. Some landlords have been stuck for months or even years. This phenomenon is directly related to Premier Ford’s improper claim that tenants could not pay rent and the closure of LTBs during the pandemic. During the epidemic, small landlords have assumed the social responsibility of providing free shelter. The Ontario government's approach is a mistake that seriously tramples on private property rights and destroys the spirit of the contract. This Bill 60 can be considered as a remedy for the governor to correct the mistakes he has made.
Ontario’s rent control is the root of all other problems. Landlords face increases in mortgage, tax, utility, maintenance costs and rent arrears, but rent increases are limited. In the past five years, small landlords have experienced the severe test of plummeting rents during the epidemic, providing free shelters during the epidemic, rising monthly loan payments during the period of high interest rates, and rising taxes and fees during the period of inflation. If the cash flow is not interrupted, it is not easy to continue to hold the property. Even so, the government still favors tenants, and any legal changes regarding tenants and landlords that are not biased in favor of tenants will be considered "treason." The City of Toronto, under the leadership of Mayor Zou, is increasingly taking on the role of tenant defender. The City of Toronto's "Rental Renovation License Bylaw" was officially passed by the Toronto City Council on November 14, 2024, and will come into effect on July 31, 2025. Starting July 31, 2025, landlords must comply with new permit requirements when evicting tenants for renovation, demolition or conversion of residential units. Landlords must apply for and hold a Rental Renovation Permit in order to evict a tenant due to renovations. The license application fee is CAD$700. Landlords must submit a license application within 7 days of issuing an N13 notice to their tenants. Landlords cannot force tenants to move out if the application is not made on time. Landlords are required to provide a Tenant Compensation Plan, including required severance compensation, and a mandatory moving allowance of $1,500 for a one-bedroom or one-bedroom unit. Two or more bedroom units: $2,500 CAD. This is a blatant violation of the landlord’s private property rights. The balance between tenants and landlords has been so artificially distorted that even the slightest move to correct the balance is considered evil. After Ontario proposed Bill 60, the Toronto City Council passed a motion on November 17, 2025 with an overwhelming vote (23 votes in favor, 1 vote against, and 2 abstentions) to formally oppose the amendments to the Residential Tenancy Act in Bill 60. People with a bit of rationality and common sense, look at the seven main contents of Bill 60 above. None of them are aimed at good tenants, but all are aimed at inefficient LTBs and rent arrears. It’s as if Toronto City Council is saying, “We won’t allow anyone to disturb the quiet life of professional tenants! As for the quiet life of landlords… that’s not important.”
Rent control has manually tilted the balance between tenants and landlords in favor of the tenants. When a natural disaster such as an epidemic occurs, the balance between tenants and landlords tilts further towards the tenants. The constant and one-sided tilt makes tenants feel that the tilt is not enough. As long as the bill or regulations between tenants and landlords are revised, it should be tilted in favor of tenants. Otherwise, it is unscrupulous, unfair, unjust, and even evil. Premier Ford faced the protestors and said only: 'Get a job! ’ (Go find a job.) This is not very harmful, but very insulting. I wonder if the protesters will be obedient this time just like they followed the advice of ‘no rent’ during the epidemic.
03 Where does the relationship between tenants and landlords go?
Is there a tenancy law that allows both tenants and landlords to live and work in peace and contentment? Yes, in Alberta. There is no rent control in Alberta, rents are implemented in accordance with market standards, and leasing laws respect private property rights and the market economy. From the perspective of inter-provincial population mobility, Alberta is a province with a net inflow of people, while Ontario is a province with a net outflow of people. Because the Ontario RTA favors tenants and the LTB abuses its discretionary power, the relationship between tenants and landlords has deteriorated. Landlords in Ontario are very difficult to select tenants, so they continue to push up rents, making it difficult for young people to afford the cost of living. In contrast, Alberta respects the property rights of landlords and respects the market. After the lease expires, the landlord has the right to refuse to renew the lease and to raise the rent. Therefore, landlords are enthusiastic about real estate investment, resulting in sufficient supply in the rental market and making it easier for young people to afford housing costs.
This time Ontario's Bill 60 proposed that after the lease expires, the landlord has the right to decide whether to renew the lease. However, it encountered siege from vested interest groups. In order to solve the LTB backlog problem as soon as possible, the province withdrew the motion so that the above seven items could be passed quickly. The successful experience of the Alberta government has only been a temporary setback in Ontario. We hope that the Ontario government will continue to work hard and continue to advance the rental law in a direction that protects private property rights and respects the market more.
Long-term renting does not mean you can live in the same house for a long time. Through this discussion of Bill 60, tenants should clearly realize that the stability of life comes at a price, and this price cannot always be borne by landlords. Ayn Rand wrote a novel "Atlas Shrugged", which tells the story of Atlas, who carried the earth on his shoulders. Finally one day he was overwhelmed and went on strike, plunging the whole world into darkness. Landlords cannot bear too many social responsibilities and undue financial burdens. If the balance continues to tilt to one side, it will tip over one day and never regain balance. Therefore, this big discussion finally came to a simple conclusion: if you want to not be affected by landlords or bills, the best way is to become a homeowner yourself. Buying a house is the only toll gate leading to the broad road of "living stability".
Conclusion
The passage of Ontario's Bill 60 is like a doctor finally prescribing a new prescription when facing a patient with a chronic disease (Ontario's housing market). Although this prescription (Bill 60) included some quick pills for acute symptoms (such as delayed hearings, late rent payments), key ingredients regarding long-term patient nutrition and institutional improvements (such as tenancy security, rent control) were temporarily withdrawn due to public pressure. Landlords believe that to truly cure patients, it is not only necessary to provide these procedural "first aids", but also to ensure that the "caregiver" of the landlord can continue to provide services stably, rather than being forced to become a "family nurse" who assumes all social responsibilities.
Alberta’s rental laws not only do not provide rent control, but also do not provide tenancy protection. After the one-year lease expires, the landlord and tenant sign a new contract. This market-oriented approach has set an example for Ontario. I hope the Ontario government will go further on the right path.
Living stability comes at a price, and buying a house is the ultimate solution to the stability problem. Otherwise, you can only wait in the queue for government low-rent housing. The landlord's transfer of the right to use the property is conditional. It is transferred under certain time and price conditions. It is neither a free transfer nor a permanent transfer. Tenants need to always remind themselves that both rent and residence time are temporary. Buying a house is the best option to obtain permanent residence and stability.
November 25, 2025 Henry Wang in Toronto