Canada's 'housing bubble' deemed close to bursting

[Nouvellecosse]

Yea it's definitely a mistake to conflate a person's legal status with their actual life situation. Whether or not someone lives in a particular place is based on the reality of their life, including whether they spend all or most of their time there, have all or most of their assets there, and have the majority of their social connections and relationships there. If a person manages to achieve these things using some legal mechanism other than official permanent residency, that might be an inappropriate decision, but it doesn't make them a non-resident imo. In fact, it's estimated that in the US there are millions of undocumented (aka "illegal") residents who most would agree do certainly live there. In their case, they're not much more likely to be a flight risk than any other resident since they often have few connections to other places.

Of course in the case of Meng and her husband, they're going to be a flight risk regardless because they have significant wealth and do have connections to other places. But that would be the case regardless of official status.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Because it's being misused. It is hardly demonstrative that he has "deep ties to the community" to ensure she isn't a flight risk. The whole panoply of immigration fails brought on largely by the Liberals is on display in this case. A woman claiming a meaningful connection to Canada,yet who gave up her permanent residency (no doubt to avoid taxation) but still owns multiple homes (bought not to actually house anyone).

Trudeau and the Liberals are going down the electoral path faced by politicians recently in BC at provincial and municipal levels, they're going to get shellacked for doing nothing on this front.

You seem to be confusing advocacy arguments made in court, as reported by the media, with reality. In the unlikely event that the judge were to accept that the husband is a resident, you can revisit your complaint.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

You seem to be confusing advocacy arguments made in court, as reported by the media, with reality. In the unlikely event that the judge were to accept that the husband is a resident, you can revisit your complaint.

The very fact that argument is being used is an indictment of our system's failures.

Those connected with the Liberal party should warn them they are sleepwalking toward defeat in MetroVancouver next October. They've already lost a lot of goodwill and likely votes to the Greens over TXM.

Their inaction on housing will cost them more votes, as evidenced by sentiments in this latest poll:

..Late last month, Research Co. asked Metro Vancouverites about three simple issues: should we build more or fewer housing units, should we have more or fewer new housing units devoted exclusively to rentals and has the time come for Canada to consider the possibility of banning non-citizens from buying real estate in the country?..

...the favourite target of residents who are upset with the housing status quo is non-Canadians. The survey reminded respondents about the situation in New Zealand, where legislation was recently passed to ban most foreigners from buying real estate in the country.

The New Zealand law contemplates exceptions for foreigners who hold residency status in New Zealand, as well as citizens from Australia and Singapore, due to free-trade agreements. Almost four in five Metro Vancouverites (77%) supported enacting similar legislation in Canada. This is consistent with the high level of endorsement that the foreign-buyer tax – in all of its forms – has garnered over the past few years.

..There is huge support for a ban on foreign ownership of real estate, which can be partly attributed to recent media coverage of people who profited from decidedly advantageous situations that are unreachable for residents. A drastic change on this file, however, is in the hands of the federal government....

https://www.vancourier.com/no-easy-way-f...way-out-of-its-housing-crisis-1.23521632

[whatnext]

Real estate bubbles breed all sort of scams. There's a great article in today's Globe & Mail about Fortress Developments, and how they managed to lose millions dollars of people's savings, because they were all sold on "real estate is always a great investment".

Behind their paywall:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-inside-the-fall-of-fortress/

[SpongeG]

Huawei CFO's Arrest Could Be Last Straw For Vancouver's Struggling Housing Market
Daniel Tencer

The diplomatic spat between Canada and China that broke out in the wake of the arrest of Huawei's CFO, Meng Wanzhou, could have an unexpected casualty: Vancouver's already struggling housing market.

The tensions between the two countries could empty Vancouver of Chinese real estate investors, putting further downward pressure on the market, according to a recent research note at SmartKarma Insights.

Existing Chinese migrants could "reconsider their overall commitment to a Canada move for the extended family, as well as encouraging potential new China migrants to consider shifting migration patterns to more friendly climates," the report stated.

...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstori...wJiIFZJDomva6pqwahIIy5HNzunMKNuMsRRKqrQo

[whatnext]

An unintended Trade War Win!

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yea it's definitely a mistake to conflate a person's legal status with their actual life situation. Whether or not someone lives in a particular place is based on the reality of their life, including whether they spend all or most of their time there, have all or most of their assets there, and have the majority of their social connections and relationships there.

Yes although in this case she had her PR and decided to let it expire, so her legal status does say something about how much she values her attachment to Canada.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Will this scare away other foreign buyers? At the end of the day I think Canada needs better rules around land ownership tracking, taxation, and money laundering or the same thing will happen again in the future, even if Chinese buyers get scared away. The lesson is that the economy is globalized now and real estate in cities can become a lightning rod for international capital very quickly and in turn put pressure on residents and businesses. The rules in Vancouver and Canada established back around 1970-1995 don't make sense given the way the economy works now (e.g. subsidies originally envisioned for poor seniors end up going to rich international real estate buyers), and a lot of the criminal money laundering stuff isn't even being enforced.

On a personal level I am OK with things going either way, although I'd like prices to drop. I already own a place so if prices keep going up I'll stay put and maybe move away if the city hollows out too much. If prices tank I'll upgrade.

If Vancouver in 2040 is just like 2018 but with 4x the soulless globalization footprint I'm not sure it will be worth living in.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

At the end of the day I think Canada needs better rules around land ownership tracking, taxation, and money laundering or the same thing will happen again in the future, even if Chinese buyers get scared away.

Completely agree.

The worst rule IMO (and first that should get changed) is that capital gains on reselling something you claimed as your personal residence are exempt from taxation.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

If, for example, I had bought a 4-speed '71 Hemicuda convertible a couple decades ago at a reasonable price, and resold it this year for a couple million dollars (that's actually what those things are worth now), I'd pay no taxes at all, and put those millions post-tax directly into my bank account, if I can somehow make a claim that it was my main car? Would that sound reasonable to you?

There's a reason we have taxes - whenever you make a —-ton of money, regardless of how you did that, you owe some to the government, in order to help pay for all the nice programs that result in the society we can all enjoy.

[ssiguy]

It`s quite clear that Wenzhou will never be extradited. Trump took care of that this week by stating that she could be used as a pawn in the upcoming Chinese-US trade talks. The defense could now, quite legitimately, argue that her arrest was politically motivated and she could not get a fair trial in the US whether she is guilty or not.


Of course she will be long gone before the extradition hearing even begins, the Chinese will make sure of that by funneling her out of the country and/or arresting even more Canadians for non-existent reasons. Her huge political influence and wealth made her a grave flight risk and should never have gotten it in the first place but I`m not surprised she got it. Remember China is a authoritarian state which has shown it has no trepidations about breaking every law and moral code in the book to advance it`s own warped agenda as we have seen with the taking of the Canadian hostages. I am quite confident that the Chinese informed the judge and his family that not giving her bail would result in being hazardous to their health.


China is nothing but a scourge on this planet and the sooner it is brought to it`s economic and political knees the better off this planet will be.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It`s quite clear that Wenzhou will never be extradited. Trump took care of that this week by stating that she could be used as a pawn in the upcoming Chinese-US trade talks. The defense could now, quite legitimately, argue that her arrest was politically motivated and she could not get a fair trial in the US whether she is guilty or not.

What does Trump have to do with a fair trial? He has no control over the judiciary.

[casper]

Originally Posted by acottawa

What does Trump have to do with a fair trial? He has no control over the judiciary.

He has authority over the attorney general and the decision to prosecute or not.

Given there are no shortage of foreign companies that do business in the US and Iran that are not in jail perhaps is an indication of how fairly the US applies or does not apply these laws. Trump comments make it much more difficult for the US to say it is applying the law fairly.

All we know at this time is she gave a presentation to HSBC (not actually a US based bank), where she indicated her company had a relationship with a company that resold their products into Iran but not ownership and it turns out there was an ownership relationship and was subsequently sold off.

I think it is questionable why she was arrested individually and the US did not just try to fine the company instead.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by casper

He has authority over the attorney general and the decision to prosecute or not.

Given there are no shortage of foreign companies that do business in the US and Iran that are not in jail perhaps is an indication of how fairly the US applies or does not apply these laws. Trump comments make it much more difficult for the US to say it is applying the law fairly.

All we know at this time is she gave a presentation to HSBC (not actually a US based bank), where she indicated her company had a relationship with a company that resold their products into Iran but not ownership and it turns out there was an ownership relationship and was subsequently sold off.

I think it is questionable why she was arrested individually and the US did not just try to fine the company instead.

Extradition does not require the U.S. proves its prosecution services are evenly applying laws across the board (frankly no country does that). They have to prove probable cause that she has committed an extraditable offence.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It`s quite clear that Wenzhou will never be extradited. Trump took care of that this week by stating that she could be used as a pawn in the upcoming Chinese-US trade talks. The defense could now, quite legitimately, argue that her arrest was politically motivated and she could not get a fair trial in the US whether she is guilty or not.


Of course she will be long gone before the extradition hearing even begins, the Chinese will make sure of that by funneling her out of the country and/or arresting even more Canadians for non-existent reasons. Her huge political influence and wealth made her a grave flight risk and should never have gotten it in the first place but I`m not surprised she got it. Remember China is a authoritarian state which has shown it has no trepidations about breaking every law and moral code in the book to advance it`s own warped agenda as we have seen with the taking of the Canadian hostages. I am quite confident that the Chinese informed the judge and his family that not giving her bail would result in being hazardous to their health.


China is nothing but a scourge on this planet and the sooner it is brought to it`s economic and political knees the better off this planet will be.

Any competent defence can, and will, always argue whatever they think might stick, but whether that can successfully fend off extradition is anything but "quite clear", and may not be clear for years. It might be best if she were to take a hike - with hindsight it's unfortunate that nobody in Ottawa picked up the phone to suggest that she might like to make alternative travel arrangements ....

[whatnext]

Two headlines from opposite sides of the country:

Toronto Condo Party Likely to Sober Up in 2019, Developers Say

New report says B.C. housing market in midst of recession that could last for 3 years

[someone123]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Two headlines from opposite sides of the country

Canadas range from about 53 to 141 W in longitude. Toronto is 79 W and Vancouver is 123 W. They span about 44 degrees of longitude while Canada as a whole spans 88. It would be a lot more accurate to say "halfway across the country".

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by someone123

Canadas range from about 53 to 141 W in longitude. Toronto is 79 W and Vancouver is 123 W. They span about 44 degrees of longitude while Canada as a whole spans 88. It would be a lot more accurate to say "halfway across the country".

Yeah but when you're talking about parts of the country that matter, he's not wrong.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Yeah but when you're talking about parts of the country that matter, he's not wrong.

About 13 million people live east of Toronto. More than all of Western Canada.

About 1 million live west of Vancouver.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

About 13 million people live east of Toronto. More than all of Western Canada.

About 1 million live west of Vancouver.

Goode pointe.

Question: I see 750,000 people on Vancouver Island. What are the other major population concentrations in Canada west of Vancouver? Not being snarky, just thinking I might be missing something...

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Question: I see 750,000 people on Vancouver Island. What are the other major population concentrations in Canada west of Vancouver? Not being snarky, just thinking I might be missing something...

There are 0 other major population concentrations. But BC's north coast for example has about 100,000 inhabitants (over a huge area).

The greater Prince Rupert metropolitan area has 13,000 people.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

There are 0 other major population concentrations. But BC's north coast for example has about 100,000 inhabitants (over a huge area).

The greater Prince Rupert metropolitan area has 13,000 people.

OK thanks. That North Coast population is a lot more than I expected.