The Dance Around Foreign Ownership of Vancouver RE

“..the City of Vancouver wants to collaborate with the provincial and federal governments to explore the viability of “restricting property ownership by non-permanent residents.”

That line appears in Vancouver’s 10-year housing strategy released Thursday, a comprehensive plan seeking to address all elements of the city’s housing crisis.

Upon learning the city’s new housing strategy proposes looking at restricting foreign ownership, Andy Yan told Postmedia: “It’s interesting … It’s the admission that you have a problem. As with many things in life, that’s the first step.”

“This does mark a bit of a sea change,” said Yan, now the director of Simon Fraser University’s City Program. “From the accusations that observers and critics are racists, to the realization that Vancouver does indeed sit in this global marketplace for residential real estate, through which local incomes can’t compete.”

The idea to investigate foreign ownership restrictions is one of a number of “tax and financial regulations to limit the commodification of housing and land for speculative investment” proposed in the city’s report, along with ideas like introducing a speculation and flipping tax, reforming federal and provincial tax regulations and seeking to “close loopholes.”

These proposals are designated as “high” priority in the city report, to be addressed in the first year of the 10-year plan.

Dan Garrison, Vancouver’s assistant director of housing policy, said Friday: “Our thinking on that has evolved in the last number of years … Whether it’s foreign ownership or investment from other sources, certainly that piece around investment driving housing costs is something that’s really ramped up in the public mind in the last couple of years.”

The city report raises the idea of investigating the examples of Australia and New Zealand, two countries where foreign ownership has been a red-button issue, that have both taken steps to limit foreign ownership.

B.C. Finance Minister Carole James is “reviewing the tax system and evaluating existing and proposed housing tax measures,” including the role of speculation in B.C.’s housing market, as part of the planning for the 2018 budget, James said Friday in an emailed statement.

“However,” James said, “a ban on foreign ownership of homes is not being considered as part of Budget 2018 planning. British Columbians are proud to welcome thousands of newcomers each year who help strengthen our province.”

– excerpt from ‘Sea change’: Vancouver considers ‘restricting property ownership by non-permanent residents’, Dan Fumano, Vancouver Sun 25 Nov 2017

9 responses to “The Dance Around Foreign Ownership of Vancouver RE

  1. If only someone could have warned the mayor back in 2011 that there was a real and chronic problem. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  2. A switch to asset based taxes from income taxes would really help getting “free” cash, and boost productivity and growth generation.

  3. Notice James’s conflation of the categories of “newcomer” and “foreign.”

  4. Net migration to B.C. in 1996 was higher in absolute numbers than it is today.

    Immigration to B.C. in 1996 totaled 52K. Last year just 38K foreigners chose B.C., and the average between 2011 and 2015 (massive bubble years) was even lower.

    In 1996, B.C.’s population was growing at 2.5% per year, vs. today’s rate of 1.3%.

    But, according to the bulls, Vancouver was a relative unknown in the 90s. Only in the past few years has the city secured its place as “world class”, and it is this transformation that explains housing prices.


  5. white_angelos_dog_blows_$1700
  6. Nobody peeps about “Greedy Jim” owning Vancouver. Instead, it’s yak yak Yellow Peril.
    Will the city change after this wizened homunculus is thrown into a hole. Many will rejoice.

  7. white_angelos_dog_blows_$1700
  8. To give some perspective:
    There was a presentation by UNICEF at my kids’ school, so I looked it up. It’s in 190 countries. Six million individuals plus governments and organizations (oddly enough some boneheaded soccer teams) contribute to its revenue – about five billion last year.
    That is to say – one wizened homunculus can pay the whole shot out of his pocket and still have lots left over with massive cash flow.
    The Thomson family have eight times that amount.
    If anyone suggests that you should give to charity, point your finger at these revoltingly greedy individuals. That’s where the money should come from.
    Foreign ownership is a red herring.

  9. Create value, get rich. Stop whining, losers!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s