Tag Archives: British Columbia

Foreign Investor Anecdotes from the Globe and Mail – “One of the more expensive homes bought last year is registered to a student who is not living there. It changed ownership three times in five years and is now empty.”

“A Beijing-based private equity manager who bought a $2.3-million home in the hot Vancouver real estate market said he did that while earning just $19,000 a year. He also wired nearly $2-million to his family in Canada during the same period.

Jing Sun is among several foreign investors who bought property in Canada in recent years, but kept the extent of their wealth out of view of the tax authorities and the courts, a Globe and Mail investigation has found.

The Globe’s findings come amid a controversy in Vancouver, where many blame foreign buyers for soaring house prices that have made a single-family home unattainable for some long-time residents. The Urban Development Institute will tackle the topic for the first time in a sold-out public forum on Wednesday in Vancouver.

The subject became an election issue when Conservative Leader Stephen Harper promised to collect data on foreign ownership of Canadian real estate and to consider new taxes and regulations to keep housing affordable.

An in-depth look at public data – including land titles, tax reporting and court records – revealed a distinct pattern, suggesting the typical wealthy foreign family buying Vancouver real estate pays little or no income or capital gains tax.

“I actually have clients in this circumstance,” said David Chodikoff, a Toronto tax lawyer who was a prosecutor but now defends clients who have trouble with the Canada Revenue Agency.

He is among several experts who said most wealthy foreign buyers are not breaking the law, but simply using tax avoidance manoeuvres or loopholes in the system.

“They love to take advantage of Canadian tax law … and it is happening in other communities too,” Mr. Chodikoff said.

Many of the houses being snapped up are not huge mansions. Increasingly, they are family homes priced out of reach for locals whose taxes pay for public services, and some of whom earn more than the incomes reported by buyers such as Mr. Sun.

Court records show Mr. Sun’s wife lived without him in their pricey Vancouver home for six years while he sent her $260,000 a year from China. They paid $40,000 a year for their children to attend private school in Canada.

When the couple broke up, Mr. Sun stopped supporting the family. In his divorce case last year, he claimed he had been making $19,000 a year. The court asked for tax and other financial records, but he failed to produce any, the documents say.

He said his money was loans from friends and family in China. The judge did not believe that, saying his bank would not have approved his financing if he had no wealth of his own.

“In my view, the respondent has yet to overcome the unlikelihood … of a bank advancing him over $1-million [in a home mortgage] on the basis of a $19,000 salary,” B.C. Supreme Court Justice Emily Burke said last year.

Accountants and tax lawyers say it is common for investors from China to pay no income tax in Canada while moving their wealth to Canada through spouses and children here.

The Globe discovered one in three multimillion-dollar homes bought recently in Vancouver areas popular with foreign buyers is registered to a homemaker, student or corporation – one indicator of how the identity of the person who actually paid can be hidden.

When a spouse or child sells a property that is registered in their name, the real investor can avoid capital gains taxes – because the relative in Canada can claim it was their primary residence, therefore not an investment.

Other revealing data came from Statistics Canada, which tracks income that households report to the CRA.

In the Vancouver area of Dunbar, which realtors said is a top neighbourhood for Chinese clients, one in four of what Statscan calls “couple families” – excluding seniors – declared income of less than $35,000 in 2013. That puts them in the lowest tax bracket.

Given that the municipal property taxes on a $2-million to $3-million home are about $10,000, those reported income levels are questionable.

Land titles records on 250 houses bought in the past two years for more than $2-million in key Vancouver neighbourhoods indicate that 85 per cent of those new owners have Chinese names. There is no way to tell how many are Canadian. However, 2014 statistics from Macdonald Realty and ReMax show that 70 per cent of their clients were from mainland China.

The records list the occupations of non-corporate owners. The most frequent is “business person.” The next is “homemaker,” then “student.”

“When you sift through the information, you find that the wife [or student] has no income … there is no possible way they could afford to purchase the home,” Mr. Chodikoff said.

Several of the houses visited by The Globe appear to be unoccupied, with cobwebs at the front entrance and mail piled up.

One of the few owners who answered the door was a 25-year-old University of British Columbia science major who did not want to be identified. “My parents bought the house – for me to study here,” she said.

She is the registered owner of the $2-million home – but she said her parents live there too when they are not in China on business. “After I study, they will sell again.”

One of the more expensive homes bought last year – in Point Grey – is registered to a student who is not living there. It was bought for $4.8-million and has a stunning view of the mountains. It changed ownership three times in five years and is now empty.

The Globe found five out of 13 properties owned by students are empty and four are rented out, suggesting they were bought as investments.

A family friend picking up the mail at one house said the real owner is a business person in China who will not be in Canada for months. At another empty student-owned home, the backyard pool is filled with dirty water and garbage.

Many of the properties registered to homemakers are occupied. Several family members at those homes indicated the heads of the households are transferring wealth to Canada – because it is seen as a small, clean, inexpensive haven.

A homemaker listed as the owner of a $3.5-million house bought this year said her husband chose it “because it was good for our daughter’s [public] school to be nearby.”

She said she is staying in Vancouver – primarily so their children can get a Canadian education – while her husband travels back and forth.

She said the couple has permanent resident status in Canada, which benefits the family, but her husband earns good money in China from his food trading business.

A key question is whether foreign ownership actually is inflating the market while locals whose income tax dollars pay for roads and hospitals are squeezed out. If so, Canada would be losing affordable housing as well as much-needed provincial and federal tax revenue.

The data examined by The Globe suggest the foreign buyers have a significant, disproportionate impact on home prices.

One third of the 250 properties increased more than 50 per cent in price since 2010 – some of those more than doubled. They were also resold at least twice in that period.

The price of one property went up 40 per cent, then 123 per cent, in five years. The average single-family home in all of Vancouver increased 21 per cent in the same time period, according to the Canadian Real Estate Association.

Having trouble viewing this on mobile? Tap here.
Top ten price increases
Vancouver properties in Dunbar, Point Grey and South Granville from a sample of 250 homes purchased in the past two years for more than $2-million

The most revealing picture on tax avoidance emerged in court records from more than 200 B.C. divorces and other disputes involving real estate investors.

In several, the judges suspected or concluded significant overseas income was hidden.

Essentially, CRA rules say a non-resident who buys and sells Canadian property must pay capital gains and other taxes on earnings from those investments. If they have a primary residence and family living in Canada, they must file resident tax returns and report all of their income.

Some cases indicate that millionaires buy properties through relatives in Canada and then claim in their tax returns to be non-residents – which means they pay no Canadian taxes on their worldwide income. Others who file as residents appear to have grossly under-reported or failed to report their earnings.

Several cases involved multiple properties in the names of spouses, children, girlfriends and corporations.

The most clear-cut example of suspected tax evasion was a 2013 spousal support case against Hong Kong businessman David Ho.

The judge determined he had a net worth of $15-million to $20-million when his girlfriend, Jade Chen, came to Canada and started managing assets for him. The court concluded Mr. Ho’s annual income – from one bank account alone – was 100 times higher than the total income he reported to the CRA, which was as little as $1,254 in 2009.

The court concluded that Mr. Ho bought several properties in the Vancouver area. He put one in Ms. Chen’s name, another in his son’s, and two – worth $5-million – in the name of a corporation that had no purpose but to hold his assets in trust.

When a corporation sells property, the shareholders can simply sell the company’s shares to the new buyer, so the home stays in the company name. In that scenario, no one pays the B.C. provincial property transfer tax – $40,000 on a $2-million sale – because no change in owner name is registered. Unlike Ontario, B.C. has not closed this loophole.

Mr. Ho became a Canadian citizen years ago and signed up for B.C. health coverage. Until recently, however, he claimed on his taxes that he was a non-resident.

“[Mr. Ho’s accountant] advised Mr. Ho to break all significant ties with Canada, such as owning property and bank accounts, to ensure that Canadian tax authorities considered him to be non-resident,” B.C. Supreme Court Justice Victoria Gray said.

The accountant, Frank Sze of Richmond, said that sometimes owners don’t want their names attached to the properties.

“There are a lot of people who don’t want their names to appear in the land registry. They don’t want to be known,” Mr. Sze told The Globe and Mail. When asked why, he said, “Just because.”

Even after Mr. Ho began paying Canadian income taxes as a resident in 2011, he claimed his income was only $27,500, the court documents said.

“Many of the concerns about Mr. Ho’s evidence related to how he handled assets and how he reported them for tax and legal purposes,” said the judge, who awarded Ms. Chen a quarter of a million dollars.

In some cases, Chinese investors have said their income was from family gifts and loans, which are tax-exempt.

When millionaire Xiong Hu Li’s wife divorced him in 2013, he ignored court orders to produce financial records, including tax returns. Instead, court records say, he claimed that all the money invested in Vancouver while he was in China came from his parents.

His wife, Rong Yao, had a $6-million Vancouver home, a condo, a Porsche and an Audi registered in her name. She testified at one point she owned 16 properties in B.C., until her husband had them transferred into his mother’s name.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Mark McEwan concluded Mr. Li “appears to have significant financial interests in China … millions of dollars … the money in Canada is of less consequence to him than revealing his assets appears to be.”

The judge called Mr. Li’s failure to account for his wealth “reprehensible” and awarded Ms. Yao spousal support, plus almost $4-million in assets.

Tax experts told The Globe and Mail Canada’s tax regime is not set up to collect from foreign millionaires who earn money overseas and have homes and family in Canada.

“I think it’s a serious issue and its a problem for the government and a problem for Canadians,” Mr. Chodikoff said.

“There could be a quite significant loss of tax revenue. More resources need to be pumped into the CRA – and more political will – so there is a desire to have stronger laws.”

The CRA indicated it is investigating the situation, but gave no specifics.

“There have been no prosecutions for tax evasion of people in Vancouver who claim to be non-resident or claim China as their primary residence,” a statement from the agency said.

“The CRA can, however, confirm that it has numerous ongoing investigations across Canada, some relating to residential real estate.”

An accountant in Vancouver who spoke on condition that he not be named said that the point is to remove the money from China.

“The picture is, basically, a lot of these people don’t really live here,” said the accountant, who came to Canada several years ago, and has wealthy Chinese clients.

“The guy in China wants to shift the money to the children – to get it out of China. Then if the Chinese government goes after the man, the assets are with the children.”

– from ‘Foreign investors avoid taxes through Canadian real estate’, by Kathy Tomlinson, Globe and Mail, 7 Oct 2015

Bank Of Canada Induced ‘Havoc’, Plus Bits & Pieces

“The governor of the Bank of Canada is sending a strong message to the markets: You do your job and we will do ours.
Stephen Poloz has been dogged by the perception that he has been attempting to “talk down the dollar” — essentially to help encourage business investment and expand export markets — as the economy struggles to regain its initial post-recession traction.
On Tuesday, Mr. Poloz attempted to set the markets straight, saying it is not up to his policymakers to determine currency levels. To do so, he said, would be to court economic “havoc.”

Financial Post, 16 Sep 2014

“Creating havoc with perversely subterranean interest rates, on the other hand, is completely within our mandate…”
– vreaa

“..new condos in [Toronto] and [Vancouver] routinely cost $700 a foot, while whole houses in the US average less than $100 for the same foot.”
– Just one of many reasons listed by Garth Turner in answer to the rhetorical question ‘How to tell when housing boom’s running on fumes?’, Greaterfool.ca, 14 Sept 2014

“British Columbia’s housing market is still red hot this year but declining affordability could slow it down by 2015, according to the Canadian Real Estate Association. …
The average price for a home is expected to rise by about six per cent in B.C. in 2014, but … the CREA is forecasting B.C.’s average real estate prices to rise by less than one per cent in 2015.”

Vancouver Sun, 15 Sep 2014

Interest Rates Held Far Lower Than Necessary Cause Speculative Bubbles


“The Fed’s mode of operation has drastically changed over the past 12 years. Prior to 2002 the Fed would tighten monetary policy in reaction to outward signs of rising “price inflation” and loosen monetary policy in reaction to outward signs of falling “price inflation”, but beginning in 2002 the Fed became far more biased towards loose monetary policy. This bias is now so great that we are starting to wonder whether the Fed has become permanently loose.”

“The chart above comparing the Fed Funds Rate (FFR) target set by the Fed with the Future Inflation Gauge (FIG) clearly illustrates how the Fed has changed over the past two decades. Note that the Future Inflation Gauge is calculated monthly by the Economic Cycle Research Institute (ECRI) and should really be called the Future CPI Gauge, because it is designed to lead the CPI by about 11 months.”

“The chart shows that prior to 2002 the FFR tended to follow the FIG. After the FIG warned of rising “price pressures” the Fed would start hiking the FFR, and after the FIG started signaling reduced upward pressure on the CPI the Fed would start cutting the FFR. During 2002-2004, however, the Fed not only didn’t hike its targeted interest rate in response to a sharp increase in the FIG, it continued to cut the FFR. The Fed’s decision to maintain an ultra-loose stance during 2002-2004 was the fuel for the real estate investment bubble and set the stage for the collapse of 2007-2009 [in the US].” [editor’s note: The Canadian RE market was bailed out by parallel rate cuts here — before it had even crashed!]

“There was a lesson to be learned from what happened during 2002-2007, but the Fed apparently learned the wrong lesson. The lesson that should have been learned was: Don’t provide monetary fuel for bubble activities, because the eventual economic fallout will be devastating. Unfortunately, the lesson that was actually learned by the Fed was: An economic bust can be avoided forever by keeping monetary policy loose forever. The result is that the divergence between the FFR and the FIG that arose during the first half of the last decade is nothing compared to the divergence that is now in progress. Moreover, the near-zero FFR doesn’t do justice to the ‘looseness’ of the Fed’s current stance, in that 4+ years after the end of the last official recession the Fed is still pumping money as if the US were in the midst of a financial crisis.” …

“By ignoring investment bubbles and erring far more in favour of “inflation” than it has ever done in the past, the Fed is currently setting the stage for the mother-of-all economic busts.”

– from ‘Future ‘Inflation’ and Monetary Madness’, Steve Saville, 14 Oct 2013

Canadian markets are completely subservient to action in the US. (If you don’t believe this, watch any aspect of a Canadian market of any sort on a US market holiday. Flatline!)
Canadian interest rates were cut in lockstep with the US in late 2008, even though the RE market here sorely didn’t need the juicing. The BOC and the Min of Finance were, and are, at fault for dropping interest rates too far, and then holding them too low for too long.
If you want to see a graphic representation of the reason for our national RE bubble, look at the orange areas in chart below (a version of the one above). [BTW, the charts here are almost a year old.. the FIG is now back around 4, and the Fed Fund rate remains zero].
The policy is perverse, and the piper is yet to be paid.
– vreaa

fig c g

‘A decade ago 40% of all purchasers in the States were first-timers. Today is it 27%. In Canada the number exceeds 50%, and is rising.’

Josh sells real estate in urban Toronto. “Fourteen years now,” he says, “since I was 21. And in all that time, there’s been only one really crappy time – six years ago now.” …
Josh’s clients are mostly people his age – the sub-40 set. The average deal is around $800,000, he says, “but one in four, I’d say, range from one-two to one-four.” Of those spending more than a million, Josh figures the average mortgage is about 80% – taking into consideration CMHC insurance is no longer available for seven-figure deals.
“Used to be that a million-dollar mortgage was a big deal,” he adds. “Now I see them all the time.”
By the way, to carry $1,000,000 today with a variable-rate mortgage at just under prime is about $4,500 a month. With insurance and property tax, it’s a little over $5,000. The land transfer tax in Toronto on a $1.2 million so-so house needing serious renos in the north end is $40,200. So to close on that with 20% down would require cash of about $290,000, and then a million in financing. …
No wonder RBC came out with that report last week. The bank found people between 35 and 44 have far more debt than their parents did at the same age – and more leverage than any other group in society. Mortgage rates today may be 3% instead of the 14% they were in 1993, but the amount of debt has ballooned so dramatically that monthly payments eat up far more of disposable income.
As a result, people in this age group are more dependent on real estate than any in the past. Almost 100% of the increase in net worth for Josh’s cohort has come from housing appreciation, since they’re saving and investing virtually nothing outside of their walls.
While real estate augments, they win. When it declines, they’re screwed. …
[And] it’s worth understanding what happens to people like Josh’s clients once they have seen a disaster. In the US these days the appetite for house-buying is sinking with regularity among the young. A decade ago 40% of all purchasers in the States were first-timers. Today is it 27%. In Canada the number exceeds 50%, and is rising.
So either the American kids are wusses and might suffer, or the kids here are naïve and could implode.

– from Generations, by Garth Turner, greaterfool.ca, 10 Aug 2014

Our bubble is national, and will end as all bubbles do, with implosion.
Vancouver has the biggest bubble and the least non-RE support; it will suffer the most.
As one recent online article succinctly stated: “You can’t taper a Ponzi scheme”.
– vreaa

‘Canada’s moment as an economic standout is over.’

“Canadian employers created barely any jobs in July, surprising forecasters and reinforcing the Bank of Canada’s decision to keep interest rates low.
Statistics Canada’s monthly tally of hiring and firing produced a net gain of 200 positions last month, as a 60,000 increase in part-time jobs marginally outweighed a 59,700 plunge in full-time positions. …
“There is little job growth in Canada and the degree of slack in the labour market remains elevated,” David Watt, chief economist at HSBC’s Canadian unit, advised clients in a note.
Canada’s moment as a standout among the world’s richer economies is over. The country weathered the financial crisis relatively well and gross domestic product and employment rebounded to pre-recession levels faster than most of its peers. Economic growth now is coming much harder. For the better part of the year, Canada has tended to follow monthly gains in hiring with offsetting declines in the weeks that follow. …
The labour participation rate, which measures the percentage of the population either working or seeking work, dropped to 65.9 per cent, the lowest since October 2001. Employment in goods-producing industries has shrunk by 56,000 positions this year, reducing the headcount to its lowest since January 2012, according National Bank Financial. …
Canada’s economy is need of a jolt that just isn’t coming.
The Bank of Canada has signaled its readiness to leave its benchmark lending rate unchanged at 1 per cent for a considerable period, yet it is wary of cutting borrowing costs because that could prompt highly indebted households to take on more credit.”

– from ‘Surprisingly negative jobs report supports low-rate stance’, G&M, 8 Aug 2014

Canada’s housing price bubble has been the result of 12+ years of too-cheap money rather than growth in real economic fundamentals. At some point prices will reconcile with fundamentals. – vreaa

‘Extreme Speculation’ – “The problem is that the diversion of resources into investments that are only justified by the stream of new money and artificially low interest rates will destroy wealth at the same time as it is boosting activity.”

The Vancouver RE market can only be understood as part of a global phenomenon of too-cheap money encouraging ‘extreme speculation’. -vreaa

“When the central bank pumps money into the economy and suppresses interest rates it creates incentives to speculate and invest in ways that would not otherwise be viable. At a superficial level the central bank’s strategy will often seem valid, because the increased speculating and investing prompted by the monetary stimulus will temporarily boost economic activity and could lead to lower unemployment. The problem is that the diversion of resources into projects and other investments that are only justified by the stream of new money and artificially low interest rates will destroy wealth at the same time as it is boosting activity. In effect, the central bank’s efforts cause the economy to feast on its seed corn, temporarily creating full bellies while setting the stage for severe hunger in the future.
We witnessed a classic example of the above-described phenomenon during 2001-2009, when aggressive monetary stimulus introduced by the US Federal Reserve to mitigate the fallout from the bursting of the NASDAQ bubble and “911” led to booms in US real estate and real-estate-related industries/investments. For a few years, the massive diversion of resources into real-estate projects and debt created the outward appearance of a strong economy, but a reduction in the rate of money-pumping eventually exposed the wastage and left millions of people unemployed or under-employed. The point is that the collapse of 2007-2009 would never have happened if the Fed hadn’t subjected the economy to a flood of new money and artificially-low interest rates during 2001-2005.”
– from ‘Setting the stage for the next collapse’, Steve Saville, The Speculative Investor, 22 July 2014

“Yellen will not use interest rates to head off or curtail any asset bubbles encouraged by the extremely low rates that might appear. And history is clear: very low rates absolutely will encourage extreme speculation. But Yellen will, as Greenspan and Bernanke before her, attempt to limit only the damage any breaking bubbles might cause. … I had thought that central bankers by now, after so much unnecessary pain, might have begun to compromise on this matter, but no such luck… The evidence against this policy after two of the handful of the most painful burst bubbles in history is impressive. But not nearly as impressive as the unwillingness of academics to back off from closely held theories in the face of mere evidence.”
– from Jeremy Grantham’s latest newsletter, GMO Q2 2014

“It won’t last. It just prepares the way for the bust. It forces out real businesses. And it drives out people who find themselves financially unable to live here any longer.”

When reading this article, Vancouverites may want to play spot-the-differences/spot-the-similarities. – ed.

How the Surge of Hot Money Pushes San Francisco to the Brink
Wolf Richter, wolfstreet.com, 22 July 2014 [also reprinted at zerohedge]

The median home price in my beloved and crazy San Francisco – that’s for a no-view two-bedroom apartment in an older building in a so-so area – after rising 13.3% from a year ago, hit an ultra-cool, slick $1,000,000.

It made a splash in our conversations. People figured that nothing could to take down the housing market. Yet, as before, there will be a devastating event: the moment when the billions from all over the world suddenly stop raining down on San Francisco.

Every real-estate data provider has its own numbers. The Case-Shiller placed the peak of the prior bubble in “San Francisco” in June 2006 with an index value of 218, well above the current index value of 191. Though named “San Francisco,” the index covers five Bay Area counties that include cities like Oakland and Richmond where home prices, though soaring, haven’t gone back to previous bubble peaks.

The $1,000,000 that DataQuick, now part of CoreLogic, came up with is for the actual city of San Francisco. In the data series, San Francisco’s prior housing bubble peaked in November 2007 when the median home price hit $814,750. People thought this would go on forever, that San Francisco was special, that the national housing bust would pass it by. A month later, the median home price plunged 10%.

It was the beginning of a terrible bust – the moment when money from all over the world stopped raining down on San Francisco. Real estate here lives and dies with the periodic storm surges of moolah from venture capital investors, IPOs, and corporate buyouts.

Now we’re in another storm surge. The Twitter IPO transferred billions from around the world to Twitter investors and employees in the city and the Bay Area. When Facebook acquired Whatsapp for $19 billion, its 55 employees and some investors started plowing some of this money into the local economy, money that didn’t come from heaven but indirectly from Facebook shareholders. In the current climate, hundreds of transactions, large and small, take place every month, including a slew of IPOs. That’s the great hot-money-transfer machine. And San Francisco sits at the receiving end.

There are some drawbacks, however. Number one, it won’t last. It just prepares the way for the next bust. Number two (and in the interim), it forces out real businesses with real revenues and profits. And it drives out people who find themselves – though well-employed – financially unable to live here any longer.

Take the story of Bloodhound that was catapulted into the limelight by ValleyWag. In January 2013, a Series A round brought its total funding to $4.8 million, based on its conference app, an “ambitious vision to fundamentally change how buyers meet sellers,” as TechCrunch put it. “Its hardcore dedication to product and the fact that it can reuse everything it builds puts it leagues ahead of….” Etc. etc. The article was dripping with startup hype.

Companies like Bloodhound are flush with money from investors and have no need to make revenues or profits, and they have no clue how to manage expenses, or that expenses even need to be managed, and there’s nothing to constrain them in any way and force them to be prudent with investors’ money. Armed to the teeth this way, they dive into the local real estate market.

As the startup bubble in San Francisco was coming to a boil, and billions started showing up in bits and pieces, landlords began lusting after this money. And so in October 2012, the Million Fishes Art Collective – “an incubation program” for artists – was not able to renew its lease on a 10,000 square-foot space on Bryant Street at 23rd Street, in the Mission, which had been an iffy area and therefore affordable. After ten years, Million Fishes was gone, and so were the artists and the shows that had been open to the public. It reportedly had been paying over $13,000 per month.

The space was prepared for a startup armed with hype, hoopla, and Series-A money piped in from VC-fund investors around the world. Along come Bloodhound with whatever remained of its $4.8 million in funding. It signed a 5-year lease for $31,667 a month in rent and $564 in fees, or nearly 150% more than Million Fishes had paid. The neighborhood wasn’t amused, but hey, big money rules, and it was a done deal.

So Bloodhound was blowing $387,000 a year on rent, and it didn’t care because expenses were no objective because profits weren’t even on the horizon. It was just building a thingy that would forever change the world. But now Bloodhound is gone as well. Stopped paying rent, ran out of money, just packed up and disappeared. ValleyWag reported:

When emailed for comment, Bloodhound co-founder Anthony Krumeich simply stated “We moved out of the office. No longer fit our needs.” However court documents indicate Bloodhound has gone AWOL and abandoned their office. The landlord’s attorney has not been able to issue the company or its founders a summons….

Bloodhound didn’t change the world. But its hot money changed San Francisco. It helped drive up rents. Each transaction impacts a number of future transactions via the multiplier effect. This scenario is repeated over and over. Enterprises with real cash flows are pushed out because they can’t compete with the hot money that briefly comes into town looking to multiply itself.

But occasionally, it goes too far, even for San Francisco. A little while ago, Pinterest jumped into the fray. It has raised $800 million so far, and sports a valuation of $5 billion, but has no noticeable revenues, doesn’t even dream of profits, and has no idea how to control expenses – and no need to. Armed with this distorted attitude and hundreds of millions of dollars in global hot money, it set its sights on the beautiful, historic 600,000 square-foot San Francisco Design Center at 2 Henry Adams St., where 77 design businesses were plying their trade the hard way by generating the cash flow necessary to sustain themselves.

The Design Center’s owner, according to the SFGate, “had sought to take advantage of a city zoning ordinance that allows owners of designated historic landmarks to change zoning from so-called PDR – production, distribution and repair – to traditional office space. That would have allowed Pinterest to locate its offices there.” The tenants would have been booted out in favor of a company that had no reason to care about how much money it blew on office space. Alas, after an uproar, the Board of Supervisors Land Use & Economic Development Committee voted to table the matter indefinitely.

The ratchet effect continues as each transaction impacts future transactions, pumped up by hot money that doesn’t care about actual expenses and profits. And the space Million Fishes had leased for $13,000 a month, and that Bloodhound had leased for $31,667 a month, went back on the market, ValleyWag reported, at $37,500 a month.

This too is happening to homes where one sale price of one home impacts the price on average of 60 others via the multiplier effect [How Wall Street Manipulates The Buy-to-Rent Housing Racket]. That’s how the median home price of $1,000,000 came about: powered by hot money that follows hope and hype about the next big thingy that will change the world. As before, someday the hot money will suddenly evaporate, with devastating effect. To pinpoint that moment, we just have to watch the IPO market. When it blows off its top, so will San Francisco.

UBS is already preparing for that moment. The world’s largest wealth manager is “very worried” about “the lack of liquidity” that could wreak havoc during the expected sell-off. So UBS reduces risk “over the full spectrum of assets.”