MLA David Eby at the packed meeting last night at the Hellenic Centre, as reported in the Sun today.
“People are really upset about what’s happening,” Eby said.
“Their wages have no connection to the amount of money that is being charged for rent and for housing to buy. The frustration that people have is they think their kids aren’t going to be able to afford to live here, they see the communities they love really no longer belonging to the community.
Probably most readers have already seen this article by Tamsin McMahon, CMHC hits roadblocks in review of foreign owners.
This excerpt hints at the complexity of data-gathering, and the role some realtors appear to be playing in the shadowy, distorted local market.
The federal housing agency also drafted a proposal for a separate research project that would measure “the effects of non-permanent residents on housing demand.” It held discussions with HSBC Bank late last year about ways to collect data that would “allow identification of foreign mortgage applications,” along with Canada Revenue Agency, which requires non-resident homeowners to pay withholding taxes on rent and real estate sales.
One of the ways CMHC is proposing to collect data on foreign investors is a pilot project to survey real estate agents and developers about clients who might be considered foreign buyers, starting with Vancouver. The federal agency is also looking to include questions about the residency status of buyers and owners to its survey on condo owners and housing starts and hopes to work with provincial land registries to add data about foreign owners, starting in Ontario.
But it has run up against resistance from the real estate industry, with internal documents laying out that meetings with developers to discuss adding foreign residency questions to CMHC regular surveys of condo sales yielded “mixed results.”
From Ian Young’s column yesterday “The Hongcouver” in the South China Morning Post:
Urban Futures and the census found a 2011 vacancy rate for single detached homes in the City of Vancouver of 3.5 per cent. It might not sound much, but that is vastly higher than the Ecotagious finding of 1.2 per cent for both 2011 and 2014. The 2011 census tally was some 190 per cent higher than Ecotagious found, and one in 30 houses being deemed vacant sounds a lot worse than 1 in 100. The Ecotagious figure even includes duplexes, which have a higher non-occupancy rate – removing them would only serve to widen the discrepancy.
But my favorite, as the data mills churn, is the comment on FB from Sally Buck, a photographer, after reading the Financial Post article: “Millennials fleeing Vancouver…”:
Last year we gained zero 25-44 year olds in Vancouver; we’re down by 1,300. And we gained only 884 18-24 year olds. What a boring conservative rich old fart city we’ll be.
VANCOUVER IN EVERT RESPECT THE FAILED CITY!
The rhetoric and paranoia will continue to churn until there are some realistic cold, hard numbers to ruminate on. Everyone agrees that the average value of a detached house is very high, but so far no one has been able definitively state how much of that value is caused by “foreign” money. Is it 5%? 15%? 45%? 99%?
Everyone also agrees that supply and demand dynamics are at play too. But that isn’t getting nearly the same attention as the sexed up idea that an invasion of “corrupt foreign wealth” has caused our fair city to fail. So, what is the solution amidst the noise, stop immigration?
Further, the market differences between the west side and east side are being subsumed by sweeping statements about foreign ownership, like the only solution is to have the government interfere with the market. Well, just how can that be dome? Purchase all the houses for sale, subsidize them to level the prices, then sell them to locals only? Who will come up with the billions to finance it?
The press loves this topic because screaming sells papers and TV ads. But that does nothing to lower prices, or to research effective means to deal with high real estate prices.
I agree.
The press – and opportunistic politicians – love this topic.
We’re in a bull market. In such a market even those who normally do not participate are prone to play buy/sell games. I’m watching family friends move from the inner suburbs to Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Land rich Vancouver retirees are now having a huge impact in places like Victoria and the Okanagan.
Foreign money, in the form of immigration, has always fuelled Vancouver’s growth. We’re a destination city. Visit the schools in some neighbourhoods and you’ll find English is a minority language spoken by children, but few parents.
Immigrants sometimes bring wealth that enriches their new country, but not always. I’ve seen data suggesting that a decade after arrival the average income of a refugee is higher than that of an investor class immigrant.
Numbers like that suggest that people are not coming here to start successful businesses and employ locals, but are simply dumping cash into real estate and going somewhere else to earn income.
That’s why Thomas and I both feel the need to heavily tax property and use that money to reduce the tax load on those who make a full time commitment to this country.
If each dwelling unit was contributing its fair share, then it could sit empty all year and hardly anyone would care.
“If each dwelling unit was contributing its fair share, then it could sit empty all year and hardly anyone would care.”
Exactly.
But politicians have that tax leverage tool, but do not use it. The old ideas of capital gains exemption, taxing incomes high but properties low and housing is not consumption (and thus has to be GST or PST exempt) need to be re-examined !
Housing is not consumption!
Anything over and above a modest small house is consumption to me. No one needs a 5 BR house in West Van with an oceanview or even a 1300 sq ft 2BR in Yaletown. This is all a lifestyle decision !
As stated elsewhere, we overtax incomes in BC and Canada in general but undertax consumption (and thus, housing) ! You make an extra $100,000 in a year and the government takes 50%. You sell the house in W-Van you bought for $200,000 2 decades ago for $4M and keep it all. As such, all foreign “investors” and certainly all affluent immigrants do the rational thing and buy the biggest house they can afford, as it is under-taxed. And declare incomes elsewhere often, yet get free ESL, education, healthcare, police services .. that seems like sound taxation policy to you ?
At least we now have the 2% land transfer tax and 3% over $2M, the new head tax. But we still grossly undertax properties while owned and when sold. Foreign owners ought to pay at least tripe the land transfer and property taxes, and we ought to question capital gains exemptions, or cap them, say at $1M, and/or require a minimum 5 or ten year hold before it is tax free.