Canadian police investigated more than 1.3 million total property crime incidents in 2024, according to the latest Statistics Canada incident-based crime reporting . Over the past decade, the offence category has accounted for between 44% and 57% of the Crime Severity Index, making it the most prevalent collective offence police investigate.
This begs the question as to what exactly falls under the rubric of property crime, and how the Canadian criminal justice system addresses the different types of property crime.
With expertise in defending Greater Toronto Area clients from the property crimes of theft and fraud, Mass Tsang’s criminal defence lawyers have the answers. Read on to learn what you need to know about property crime offences in Canada.
Property crimes in Canada are characterized as non-violent offences involving theft, damage, or unauthorized interference with the property of others. In 2024, thefts involving values below $5,000 accounted for about 40% of all police-reported property crime incidents, while mischief (vandalism) accounted for the next highest percentage, at almost 25%.
While incidents of identity theft and identity fraud represented relatively low respective rates of 0.4% and 1.6% of 2024 total police-reported property crimes in Canada, their numbers more than doubled over a decade. The primary forms of property crime, along with 2024 police reported incident numbers, include:
Numerous sections of the Criminal Code define the various property crimes and detail punishments judges can impose on those convicted of the offences. Most property crimes are categorized as hybrid offences, under which the Crown can charge the offenders by summary conviction (with a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and/or $5,000 fine) or by indictment (with much higher maximum penalties, typically up to 10 years’ imprisonment).
Here is a brief rundown of basic Criminal Code property crimes, highlighting what distinguishes them from each other:
Primarily detailed in Section 322 of the Code, with Section 334 detailing the punishment, theft is a hybrid offence, with maximum punishment thresholds varied based on the value of the stolen property.
Theft over $5,000
Indictable: 10 years’ imprisonment
Summary conviction: two years imprisonment and/or $5,000 fine.
Theft under $5,000
Indictable: two years’ imprisonment.
Summary conviction: two years imprisonment and/or $5,000 fine.
Motor vehicle theft is separately addressed by Section 333.1 and subsequent sections. Value is not a consideration in sentencing, but violence or threats of violence during the commission of the offence automatically make the charges indictable, with a 14-year maximum sentence. Likewise, if the theft was committed in relation to a criminal organization.
Section 335(1) of the Code, “Joyriding,” which is defined as “taking a motor vehicle without consent,” is not treated as full-fledged theft, as the offender is believed to have lacked intent to permanently deprive the owner of their possession of the vehicle. It is strictly a summary conviction offence.
This Section 354(1) Code offence is charged and punished on a value basis like theft. A key legal consideration is that the alleged offender must have knowledge that the property was obtained directly or indirectly by the commission of a crime.
The property crime mischief is detailed in Section 430 of the Criminal Code and essentially covers damage to property and impeding someone else’s use or enjoyment of their own property. Note that the Code specifically defines computer data as property subject to the law. Mischief is a hybrid offence that typically imposes a maximum 10-year sentence when charged as an indictable offence for property valued at more than $5,000; or a two-year and/or $5,000 fine when charged by summary conviction. Values below $5,000 carry a maximum of two years and/or a $5,000 fine if charged by indictment or summary conviction.
The Code stipulates that mischief “motivated by bias, prejudice or hate,” or affecting cultural property or war memorials, should be charged similarly to property values above $5,000. Mischief to war memorials also carries mandatory minimum punishments scaled to impact repeat offenders. Additionally, mischief that endangers someone’s life is solely an indictable offence that carries a maximum life sentence.
The Criminal Code primarily details fraud under Section 380 . As with theft, potential punishment varies depending on the $5,000 value threshold. However, fraud carries a higher 14-year maximum prison term for amounts over $5,000 in indictable cases. The Code also mandates a mandatory minimum of two years’ imprisonment for values exceeding $1 million.
The Code lists over a half-dozen aggravating factors that judges should consider when determining the severity of sentencing for fraud offenders. Additionally, more than a dozen other sections in the Code detail specific forms of fraud, such as identity fraud and theft . Identity fraud carries a maximum 10-year prison term when charged under indictment, while identity theft imposes a maximum five-year term.
Section 348(1) and subsequent sections detail breaking and entering, which is charged solely as an indictable offence if the break-in involves a residence, but as a hybrid offence if it involves non-residential properties. Courts can impose a life sentence on those convicted of break and enter involving residences; otherwise, the maximum punishment is 10 years imprisonment when charged by indictment or the standard two years and/or $5,000 fine when charged summarily.
The primary legal consideration with breaking and entering is the provisions that the alleged offender commits the offence with the “intent to commit an indictable offence therein” or “commits an indictable offence therein.” However, the burden of proof for proving a lack of intent or commission of the ascribed indictable offence falls solely on the defence. In short, the court will presume the provision exists unless the defendant can prove otherwise.
Arson, which the Code details in Sections 433 to 436 , is typically charged as an indictable offence, though arson related to fraud or negligence can be charged summarily. If the offence endangers human life, the maximum punishment is life imprisonment; otherwise, the offence usually carries a 14-year maximum.
If you’ve been charged with a property crime in the Greater Toronto Area, secure the most effective legal defence possible with the legal experts at Mass Tsang. With decades of combined property crime defence work and a stellar record for securing favourable outcomes for our clients, contact us today for a free consultation.
A: Courts can impose a life sentence on anyone convicted of arson or mischief (vandalism) that endangers someone’s life, and for breaking and entering a residence. Most other property crime categories carry a maximum 10-year prison sentence, aside from fraud over $5,000 and aggravated cases of motor vehicle theft, which carry a 14-year maximum.
A: The Criminal Code punishes vandalism based on the extent of damage. Vandalism that causes less than $5,000 in damages can subject convicted offenders to up to two years in prison. Damages exceeding $5,000 allow courts to sentence offenders to up to 10 years in prison.
A: Canadian courts are prone to impose lenient sentences on those convicted of property crimes when compared to their statutory maximums. Courts strive to balance the punishment to meet the proportionality of the offence in conjunction with any aggravating or mitigating factors. As a non-violent offence, courts are more inclined to impose sentences that prioritize deterrence and restitution over punishment. Thus, courts rarely impose prison terms on first-time offenders convicted of property crimes involving less than $5,000 in losses/damages. Repeat offenders and those causing higher-value losses/damages face a greater likelihood of imprisonment, though severe sentencing is generally reserved for the most egregious cases.
A: Yes, as a criminal offence, property crime convictions generate a permanent criminal record in Canada. However, Canadian courts frequently provide first-time offenders with absolute or conditional discharges, which suspend the record after a respective one or three years, provided the offender complies with the terms of their discharge.
A: Yes, digital technology has given rise to new forms of distinct digital property crimes like cyber fraud and identity theft.
A: If you’re innocent of the offence, we assume that you would want to do everything possible to clear your good name and reputation. If perhaps not so innocent, we suggest that you might like to do everything possible to ensure that you’re not saddled with a life-disrupting criminal record. A skilled criminal defence lawyer — like those at Mass Tsang in Toronto — maximizes the potential for securing a favourable case outcome that negates the imposition of a criminal record, whether through withdrawals, stays, diversions, discharges, or a not guilty ruling.
