CMHC gives up on goal to return to 2004 housing affordability levels

[DesRicardo]

Permanent Damage.

The general public has known and felt this for awhile, but I guess they want to move the goalpost now for certain reasons.

CMHC gives up on goal to return to 2004 housing affordability levels

2019 will now be used by the national agency as a more realistic benchmark for housing

www.theglobeandmail.com

https://archive.ph/MpUMh

 

[SchlongConery]

I don't think that anyone making less than $200k a year who is not already in the housing market, or does not see some sort of windfall like an inheritance, will ever be able to buy a home.

It's a far off fantasy thought but something radical that would help Canadians would be to enact a law that would prohibit the beneficial ownership of residential property by anyone not a Canadian citizen or who has Permanent Resident status and is living in that ONE residence. LOT

Enact this law requiring foreign investors to sell their properties within the next five years.... AND in the meantime, the property would be assessed an annual tax of 10%, payable annually, with it being put up for power of sale if not paid within the following year.

Provinces like BC have enacted Land Transfer surcharges for foreign investors to try to cool their overheated market.

Also, change the tax laws for Canadians investing in real estate as business income rather than a capital gain.

This will softly take a HUGE investment factor out of the market.


Another thing that has to be studied is this trap homeowners fall into with banks luring them into ever increasing lines of credit against their homes. Among other things, it incentivizes homeowners to live beyond their means and trap themselves into a debt hole they can never climb out of unless they sell their home.

Homes should be regarded as a HOME, not some abstract investment.

 

[SchlongConery]

I don't think that anyone making less than $200k a year who is not already in the housing market, or does not see some sort of windfall like an inheritance, will ever be able to buy a home.

It's a far off fantasy thought but something radical that would help Canadians would be to enact a law that would prohibit the beneficial ownership of residential property by anyone not a Canadian citizen or who has Permanent Resident status and is living in that ONE residence. LOT

Enact this law requiring foreign investors to sell their properties within the next five years.... AND in the meantime, the property would be assessed an annual tax of 10%, payable annually, with it being put up for power of sale if not paid within the following year.

Provinces like BC have enacted Land Transfer surcharges for foreign investors to try to cool their overheated market.

Also, change the tax laws for Canadians investing in real estate as business income rather than a capital gain.

This will softly take a HUGE investment factor out of the market.


Another thing that has to be studied is this trap homeowners fall into with banks luring them into ever increasing lines of credit against their homes. Among other things, it incentivizes homeowners to live beyond their means and trap themselves into a debt hole they can never climb out of unless they sell their home.

Homes should be regarded as a HOME, not some abstract investment.

oops, I shot my mouth off about foreign ownership... seems the Feds already did this!

Government announces two-year extension to ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing - Canada.ca

Today, the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, announced the federal government’s intent to extend by an additional two years the existing ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing.

www.canada.ca

Government announces two-year extension to ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing
From: Department of Finance Canada
News release
February 4, 2024 - Ottawa, Ontario - Department of Finance Canada
Today, the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, announced the federal government’s intent to extend by an additional two years the existing ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing.

For years, foreign money has been coming into Canada to buy up residential real estate, increasing housing affordability concerns in cities across the country, and particularly in major urban centres.

Foreign ownership has also fueled worries about Canadians being priced out of housing markets in cities and towns across the country.

As part of using all possible tools to make housing more affordable for Canadians, the ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing, which is currently set to expire on January 1, 2025, will be extended to January 1, 2027. Foreign commercial enterprises and people who are not Canadian citizens or permanent residents will continue to be prohibited from purchasing residential property in Canada.

The ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing—and this two-year extension—is just one part of the federal government’s economic plan to make housing more affordable for Canadians. The federal government is taking bold action and working with all orders of government to build more homes, faster, and put homeownership back within reach for more Canadians.

Quotes

“By extending the foreign buyer ban, we will ensure houses are used as homes for Canadian families to live in and do not become a speculative financial asset class. The government is intent on using all possible tools to make housing more affordable for Canadians across the country.”
- The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

 

[DesRicardo]

I don't think that anyone making less than $200k a year who is not already in the housing market, or does not see some sort of windfall like an inheritance, will ever be able to buy a home.

It's a far off fantasy thought but something radical that would help Canadians would be to enact a law that would prohibit the beneficial ownership of residential property by anyone not a Canadian citizen or who has Permanent Resident status and is living in that ONE residence. LOT

Enact this law requiring foreign investors to sell their properties within the next five years.... AND in the meantime, the property would be assessed an annual tax of 10%, payable annually, with it being put up for power of sale if not paid within the following year.

Provinces like BC have enacted Land Transfer surcharges for foreign investors to try to cool their overheated market.

Also, change the tax laws for Canadians investing in real estate as business income rather than a capital gain.

This will softly take a HUGE investment factor out of the market.


Another thing that has to be studied is this trap homeowners fall into with banks luring them into ever increasing lines of credit against their homes. Among other things, it incentivizes homeowners to live beyond their means and trap themselves into a debt hole they can never climb out of unless they sell their home.

Homes should be regarded as a HOME, not some abstract investment.

This is going to be a huge problem in a decade or two. But what worries me the most is what direction are we going in Canada?

if this is the new baseline, I can’t see many young professionals wanting to stay here.

 

[Frankfooter]

This is going to be a huge problem in a decade or two. But what worries me the most is what direction are we going in Canada?

if this is the new baseline, I can’t see many young professionals wanting to stay here.

This is a global problem, housing is too expensive almost everywhere.
Where do you think they will move to where there are jobs, cheap housing and its safe?

 

[seanzo]

If the government was serious about lowering housing prices they would launch investigations into every bank in Canada and their mortgage operations to root out money laundering. As Sam Cooper detailed in his book Willful Blindness, transnational criminals (mostly Chinese but not exclusively) will have their wives or girlfriends take out mortgages to buy a home without proper proof of income and launder their ill gotten gains through real estate. While this certainly isn't the only thing that's driving real estate through the roof it's absolutely contributing significantly to the problem

 

[Skoob]

The government really doesn't want their citizens owning a home. They want them to rent one and subsidize that rent to create dependency on the government.
The more dependent people are on the government, the easier they are to control.

Everything else is really just a distraction because if they really wanted to, they could fix things...but they won't.

 

[Butler1000]

1. Lose all foreign ownership where they don't spend at least 5 months in country.
2. Ban corporations from owning residential homes outright.
3. Ban Canadians from owning more than 3 homes(not including vacation properties, with a special designation status)
4. Ban private condo openings(this is where they opened condos initially only to foreign investors).
5. Allow zoning for "tiny homes", to subdivide, within reason, large residential properties, and only for sale. To recreate a starter home market.
6. Regulation of the Airbnb market with limited licenses.

That's a start. But in reality Toronto is New Yirk light. We are a destination due to jobs , weather, safety, and other factors that will continue our growth. Land is finite. It will always go up. It happened to us around 2008. And we won't see drops there.

 

[Butler1000]

This is going to be a huge problem in a decade or two. But what worries me the most is what direction are we going in Canada?

if this is the new baseline, I can’t see many young professionals wanting to stay here.

Same baseline in many other international cities. We are that now. 2nd tier. Economic base, seat of provincial givt, banking centre, cultural centre, multicultural centre. Safe.

In the present state of the world we are going to increasingly become a place to live, work and park money.

 

[nottyboi]

Affordability is possible if they find a way to implement something like Singapores hdb system. The multiple layers of govt make it a challange as does the vastness of canada and market differences

 

[canada-man]

20 years ago you could get a townhouse in the Sheppard and Warden area for about $200K a year

 

[Bucktee]

Most new real estate development are rentals. That's the direction the country is headed... into a renter society.

When government officials talk about affordable housing, they're no longer talking about houses that are affordable to buy. They're talking about affordable rentals. The housing minister's doublespeak one month ago, made this very clear.

The dog crate condos that aren't selling right now are what homes in major Canadian cities are going to look like in the future. They're hardly livable by Canadian standards today, but those standards are going to shift as the years go by.

What does "banning corporations from owning residential homes" mean and how does it work?

All the apartment buildings in the city are owned by corporations. They're residential [shoebox] homes, for the people living in them. If you're going to tell citizens that a handful of corporations are allowed to monopolize ownership of rentals while ordinary citizens cannot own real estate for the purpose of being a landlord, you're not going to get far.

 

[jeff2]

Most new real estate development are rentals. That's the direction the country is headed... into a renter society.

When government officials talk about affordable housing, they're no longer talking about houses that are affordable to buy. They're talking about affordable rentals.

The dog crate condos that aren't selling right now are what homes in major Canadian cities are going to look like in the future. They're hardly livable by Canadian standards today, but those standards are going to shift as the years go by.

What does "banning corporations from owning residential homes" mean and how does it work?

All the apartment buildings in the city are owned by corporations. They're residential [shoebox] homes, for the people living in them. If you're going to tell citizens that a handful of corporations are allowed to monopolize ownership of rentals while ordinary citizens cannot own real estate for the purpose of being a landlord, you're not going to get far.

For Toronto, the disconnect is some potential homeowners(especially the people who are still having kids these days) want land but enviro regulations put in the place around 20 years ago call for density.
So, is everyone going to start living on top of libraries and subway stations and parking lots?

 

[Bucktee]

5. Allow zoning for "tiny homes", to subdivide, within reason, large residential properties, and only for sale. To recreate a starter home market.

The "starter home" is a clever marketing ploy that realtors began using in the mid 2000s. There was no such thing as a starter home in previous generations. The majority of people bought a home that they could afford and raised a family in it. Unless they had to move for work, they stayed in the home until they died or were shuttled off to nursing homes to be abused in their old age.

The idea that one should buy a home, build equity, then sell, and buy a new home with a new mortgage (and repeat these steps 2 or 3 times until you get your "forever home") is an extremely expensive one.

To do so, you need to build enough equity in your first home so that it covers transaction fees (realtor, lawyer, land transfer tax, etc) and leaves enough to significantly increase the downpayment needed for a larger nicer home. The math rarely works that way, unless you're okay with having a mortgage into your 80s and 90s.

 

[Bucktee]

The government really doesn't want their citizens owning a home. They want them to rent one and subsidize that rent to create dependency on the government.
The more dependent people are on the government, the easier they are to control.

They convinced citizens that covid was deadly to most people, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that suspending the Charter for [selective] protesters was okay, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that men can become women, although that's not possible.
They convinced citizens that legal gun ownership causes violent gun crime in Canada, although it doesn't.
They convinced citizens that they're not being replaced by foreigners, although they obviously are.
They convinced citizens that they're obligated to spend their tax dollars fighting wars overseas, when they're not.
They convinced citizens that the news media was created to inform the population (I guess, because they're just so benevolent and kind) instead of making money and creating narratives on behalf of government and big business, when that's exactly what they do.
The list goes on...

Whether deliberate or not, you're absolutely right that citizens becoming broke dependent renters will ensure that they're even more easily controlled bodies.

 

[wigglee]

They convinced citizens that covid was deadly to most people, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that suspending the Charter for [selective] protesters was okay, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that men can become women, although that's not possible.
They convinced citizens that legal gun ownership causes violent gun crime in Canada, although it doesn't.
They convinced citizens that they're not being replaced by foreigners, although they obviously are.
They convinced citizens that they're obligated to spend their tax dollars fighting wars overseas, when they're not.
They convinced citizens that the news media was created to inform the population (I guess, because they're just so benevolent and kind) instead of making money and creating narratives on behalf of government and big business, when that's exactly what they do.
The list goes on...

Whether deliberate or not, you're absolutely right that citizens becoming broke dependent renters will ensure that they're even more easily controlled bodies.

Yet you support the party of big corporations. The party of free enterprise. We know that big corporations have the big advantage in free enterprise. What did Harper and/or PP do to help regular people afford homes?

 

[Butler1000]

The "starter home" is a clever marketing ploy that realtors began using in the mid 2000s. There was no such thing as a starter home in previous generations. The majority of people bought a home that they could afford and raised a family in it. Unless they had to move for work, they stayed in the home until they died or were shuttled off to nursing homes to be abused in their old age.

The idea that one should buy a home, build equity, then sell, and buy a new home with a new mortgage (and repeat these steps 2 or 3 times until you get your "forever home") is an extremely expensive one.

To do so, you need to build enough equity in your first home so that it covers transaction fees (realtor, lawyer, land transfer tax, etc) and leaves enough to significantly increase the downpayment needed for a larger nicer home. The math rarely works that way, unless you're okay with having a mortgage into your 80s and 90s.

What were starter homes were in fact affordable ones when they built them smaller. And with less amenities. And yes they did exist. After WW2 thousands were built. They were those 2 bedroom bungalows you see lots of off Danforth and other sections of the city. In some cases people did move and resell. In others tear down, and others add additions.

The premise however, is realizing that land value in the big part. So by creating tiny homes that a single can afford, with less bells and whistles in it, you do give them, and couples an entre to build equity.

Take a single home with a deep lot, 40' x 130 deep, run a driveway all the way down it on one side. Run four lots 25' wide divided down it. Also keeps a set back for curb appeal. Run a parking pad in front of the houses. You can get 4 in at what? 250-350 location dependant? Not fancy, lose the granite counter tops, the other upgrades. That puts mortgages within reach. And I'm not saying every property. Adding 1 per street, and again, land size is key here, will not strain city systems.

By the way your pricing is based on the new reality of price ratio to income. These would come in at a much better ratio, hence a quicker route to actual equity.

Same should come in with condos. They need to strip out the golf simulators, and other unnecessary upgrades to lower costs and condo fees. Even gyms and the like. Most don't use or need them.

 

[Anbarandy]

The government really doesn't want their citizens owning a home. They want them to rent one and subsidize that rent to create dependency on the government.
The more dependent people are on the government, the easier they are to control.

Everything else is really just a distraction because if they really wanted to, they could fix things...but they won't.

Uhhh .... sure, yeah right ..... whatever. u say.

 

[Anbarandy]

They convinced citizens that covid was deadly to most people, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that suspending the Charter for [selective] protesters was okay, although it wasn't.
They convinced citizens that men can become women, although that's not possible.
They convinced citizens that legal gun ownership causes violent gun crime in Canada, although it doesn't.
They convinced citizens that they're not being replaced by foreigners, although they obviously are.
They convinced citizens that they're obligated to spend their tax dollars fighting wars overseas, when they're not.
They convinced citizens that the news media was created to inform the population (I guess, because they're just so benevolent and kind) instead of making money and creating narratives on behalf of government and big business, when that's exactly what they do.
The list goes on...

Whether deliberate or not, you're absolutely right that citizens becoming broke dependent renters will ensure that they're even more easily controlled bodies.

Uhh ..... we're kinda getting a sense of your nonsensical brain rewiring courtesy of whacked out right wing mouthpieces.

 

[Anbarandy]

For Toronto, the disconnect is some potential homeowners(especially the people who are still having kids these days) want land but enviro regulations put in the place around 20 years ago call for density.
So, is everyone going to start living on top of libraries and subway stations and parking lots?

There isn't any tangible enviro regulations anymore in Slug's Ontario which has all been effectively usurped, supplanted and swallowed up by Thug's MZOs and myriad of Build No Housing Faster, More Invisible and More Implausibly acts.

There are housing units for about 800,000 people within the boundaries of the City of Toronto proper that are already approved, permitted and shovel ready that developers are squatting on.

Free market based, whining, crying crocodile tears developers who have never miss an opportunity to landfall profit, tell the gov't to "get out of our way" in boom times, BUT always, always, always cry for the gov't to step in to help them in "bust times" that they themselves have grossly helped to create.

The free market law of supply and demand and enterprise capitalism that they preach and profit by suddenly goes out the 27th floor shoebox condo unit window when the seeds of greed that they helped to sow sprout into fricken weeds.