Feb. 3rd 2018 BC Liberal leadership race megathread

[Cynthia]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

I'm just really not fond of the empty house tax thing, and for that reason it's at least 95% likely I vote Liberal or not vote at all

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

You can keep it. You just either have to rent it out or pay a tax on it.  I don't think that is too onerous, especially since you can hire a property management company to take care of the rental part.

For instance: http://www.easyrent.ca/

It is rented out, but unfortunately they would tax rented out properties as well.

[Cynthia]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

That's not an accurate representation of the EHT, but yeah, you absolutely should not be able to "keep a house" you're not living in for an extended period of time, at least in an ideal world. Empty homes shouldn't exist as long as people without homes do too.

It's fully rented out, which they would also tax under their proposed plan.

[Cynthia]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

I'm just really not fond of the empty house tax thing, and for that reason it's at least 95% likely I vote Liberal or not vote at all

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

This is a hilariously out-of-touch post.

I completely understand how ridiculous that post was, but the problem is it's not empty

[Cynthia]

Vancouver is dealing with a huge housing shortage due to foreign ownership, and is pricing out middle and work class residents. How would you deal with the situation?

My take is if you can afford to homes, you can afford to pay the tax. If you can't pay the tax, then maybe you shouldn't be owning two homes. There are thousands of BCians who actually contribute to the local economy by living there that deserve it way more.

I only own this home and intend to return to that home when I complete whatever I have to do abroad

[DC Al Fine]

Vancouver is dealing with a huge housing shortage due to foreign ownership, and is pricing out middle and work class residents.

I feel bad for Torontonians and Vancouverites. Seems nearly impossible to have a middle class lifestyle out there. Perhaps some of them should move out east? Halifax has a comparable unemployment rate, higher median household income and home prices are cheap. My wife and I are buying a starter home next year and our budget is < $200,000.

How would you deal with the situation?

My take is if you can afford to homes, you can afford to pay the tax. If you can't pay the tax, then maybe you shouldn't be owning two homes. There are thousands of BCians who actually contribute to the local economy by living there that deserve it way more.

I really doubt the tax will be that effective. The stereotypical PRC multi-millionaire using a house as insurance in case things go south is not going to blink at an extra $5k in property tax or whatever it is. Besides, Cynthia said the tax covers rentals... Taxing additional supply is not going to solve the housing shortage

In a perfect world (assuming I'm running all three levels of government) I would:

1) Significantly tighten mortgage lending rules

2) Hike property taxes on single family homes, not just on foreign owned or empty homes. This will hopefully promote building more medium density townhouses semis and lowrise apartments.You

3) Encourage building like crazy. Half the problem is supply. Steamroll NIMBY opposition and any foolish building/planning regulations on the books (not sure what Vancouver's are, but it would generally involve making it easier to build the homes described  in #2; zone more places for stuff other than single family homes, cut parking requirements, setback requirements etc)

[136or142]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

That's not an accurate representation of the EHT, but yeah, you absolutely should not be able to "keep a house" you're not living in for an extended period of time, at least in an ideal world. Empty homes shouldn't exist as long as people without homes do too.

It's fully rented out, which they would also tax under their proposed plan.

On the one hand, I assume you know your situation better that I do.  On the other hand, what you write here makes no sense to me.

http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/will-your-home-be-taxed.aspx

Properties not subject to the tax
Most properties will not be subject to the Empty Homes Tax, including those:

Used as a principal residence by the owner, his/her family member or friend, or other permitted occupier for at least six months of the current year
Rented for at least six months of the current year, in periods of 30 or more consecutive days
Meeting the criteria for one of the exemptions

[Hatman 🍁]

Vancouver is dealing with a huge housing shortage due to foreign ownership, and is pricing out middle and work class residents.

I feel bad for Torontonians and Vancouverites. Seems nearly impossible to have a middle class lifestyle out there. Perhaps some of them should move out east? Halifax has a comparable unemployment rate, higher median household income and home prices are cheap. My wife and I are buying a starter home next year and our budget is < $200,000.

[/quote]

I suppose the jobs in Halifax aren't as lucrative? It's not really seen as a beacon of employment in its reputation, but it is a wonderful city, and I wouldn't mind living there myself if I had to.

[Cynthia]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

That's not an accurate representation of the EHT, but yeah, you absolutely should not be able to "keep a house" you're not living in for an extended period of time, at least in an ideal world. Empty homes shouldn't exist as long as people without homes do too.

It's fully rented out, which they would also tax under their proposed plan.

On the one hand, I assume you know your situation better that I do.  On the other hand, what you write here makes no sense to me.

http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/will-your-home-be-taxed.aspx

Properties not subject to the tax
Most properties will not be subject to the Empty Homes Tax, including those:

Used as a principal residence by the owner, his/her family member or friend, or other permitted occupier for at least six months of the current year
Rented for at least six months of the current year, in periods of 30 or more consecutive days
Meeting the criteria for one of the exemptions

Ok, I clearly misunderstood the original principle. Now I support this tax.

[Hatman 🍁]

[Vega]

Could the housing crisis have been avoided?

[mileslunn]

Could the housing crisis have been avoided?

Not really, the government could have acted sooner and lessened the impact but not easily avoidable.  While this hurt the BC Liberals, I think their failure to get a majority was a combination of many things.  Considering how close they came, a few tweaks here and there would have put them over the top.  Mind you losing this time might be a blessing in disguise since I think had they won in 2017, they would have faced a strong route in 2021 whereas being losing at least they should at minimum form a strong opposition even if they don't win.  I think while choice of leader matters (and Wilkinson certainly was not the best choice), BC is so polarized that it only will make a difference by a few points in either direction.  What is the biggest issue is does the PR referendum pass or not.

If PR passes, I think the NDP/Greens are highly favoured to continue even if the BC Liberals do win a plurality of votes.  If PR fails, I think the BC Liberal chances are a lot better.  Their main risks are the Green vote declines and most of that goes over to the NDP thus even if they gain a few votes, NDP gains more.  The other is the BC Conservatives get their act together and win 5-10% of the popular vote which will came almost exclusively from the BC Liberals thus denying them a win even if the total right wing vote goes up.  If it goes to PR, eventually the BC Liberals will return, but the party will probably fracture between its Liberal and Conservative wings and you will likely see a BC Liberal-BC Conservative coalition, but probably not until 2025.  Never mind with the loss of the Conservative wing, the Greens would probably be more open to forming a coalition with them if they were more like the federal Liberals as I think the strong conservative element in the party is the main barrier.

[warandwar]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

[mileslunn]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

It could have been lessened but not eliminated, any big city with limited space is going to have cost issues.  See New York City, Toronto, San Francisco, Paris, Sydney, London etc which have similar issues.  On Zoning, more forsight could have been used in terms of more high rises but you can only build in vacant spaces which there isn't much of unless you want to scrap the ALR, which wouldn't go over well and would hurt on food security.  In terms of social housing, unlike the UK and many European countries, social housing is actually quite limited in Canada in general for reason I am not exactly sure why, but never really become common like it did in much of Europe.

[DC Al Fine]

Vancouver is dealing with a huge housing shortage due to foreign ownership, and is pricing out middle and work class residents.

I feel bad for Torontonians and Vancouverites. Seems nearly impossible to have a middle class lifestyle out there. Perhaps some of them should move out east? Halifax has a comparable unemployment rate, higher median household income and home prices are cheap. My wife and I are buying a starter home next year and our budget is < $200,000.

I suppose the jobs in Halifax aren't as lucrative? It's not really seen as a beacon of employment in its reputation, but it is a wonderful city, and I wouldn't mind living there myself if I had to.

Wages are lower, but still in the ballpark (at least compared to Vancouver). It's more a combination of the industries available to work in, a lack of community for visible minorities (our visible minorities are mostly black or Arab, relatively few Punjabis or Chinese), and the fact that Vancouver is a very, very nice place to live and people just don't want to leave.

Oh and there's a stereotype that the Maritimes are entirely made up of quaint fishing villages that seems to be quite common

[Vega]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

It could have been lessened but not eliminated, any big city with limited space is going to have cost issues.  See New York City, Toronto, San Francisco, Paris, Sydney, London etc which have similar issues.  On Zoning, more forsight could have been used in terms of more high rises but you can only build in vacant spaces which there isn't much of unless you want to scrap the ALR, which wouldn't go over well and would hurt on food security.  In terms of social housing, unlike the UK and many European countries, social housing is actually quite limited in Canada in general for reason I am not exactly sure why, but never really become common like it did in much of Europe.

Vancouver has less than 1 million people, so it seems strange that it is such an issue. I understand what you're saying, though.

[mileslunn]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

It could have been lessened but not eliminated, any big city with limited space is going to have cost issues.  See New York City, Toronto, San Francisco, Paris, Sydney, London etc which have similar issues.  On Zoning, more forsight could have been used in terms of more high rises but you can only build in vacant spaces which there isn't much of unless you want to scrap the ALR, which wouldn't go over well and would hurt on food security.  In terms of social housing, unlike the UK and many European countries, social housing is actually quite limited in Canada in general for reason I am not exactly sure why, but never really become common like it did in much of Europe.

Vancouver has less than 1 million people, so it seems strange that it is such an issue. I understand what you're saying, though.

Greater Vancouver has 2 million people.  Also it is the most beautiful city in Canada, while asides from Victoria only other city where temperatures are generally above freezing in the winter.  To make matters worse it is geographically limited on how far it can expand outwards.  Ocean to the West, mountains to the north, US border to the south so only eastward but because that is some of the best farmland in BC and food security is desired much of the Fraser Valley is part of the ALR thus off limits to development.  So while not as big as most expensive cities, it cannot expand as far and also the climate.  Another barrier is height restrictions on skyscrapers.  Since Vancouver is known for its beautiful mountains, building high rises is heavily restricted to certain areas so the focus would have to be on more multi unit low rises.  Perhaps also out in the valley they could open it up for more high rises (Richmond is off limits due to proximity to airport).  Also better rapid transit could help as then people could move further eastward out into the suburbs.  If you go out to Langley, prices while still very high, are not quite as ridiculous but due to long commutes no one wants to live that far but if you had a good rapid transit system like the Go Train in Ontario I think more people would move further afield than do now.

[Vega]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

It could have been lessened but not eliminated, any big city with limited space is going to have cost issues.  See New York City, Toronto, San Francisco, Paris, Sydney, London etc which have similar issues.  On Zoning, more forsight could have been used in terms of more high rises but you can only build in vacant spaces which there isn't much of unless you want to scrap the ALR, which wouldn't go over well and would hurt on food security.  In terms of social housing, unlike the UK and many European countries, social housing is actually quite limited in Canada in general for reason I am not exactly sure why, but never really become common like it did in much of Europe.

Vancouver has less than 1 million people, so it seems strange that it is such an issue. I understand what you're saying, though.

Greater Vancouver has 2 million people.  Also it is the most beautiful city in Canada, while asides from Victoria only other city where temperatures are generally above freezing in the winter.  To make matters worse it is geographically limited on how far it can expand outwards.  Ocean to the West, mountains to the north, US border to the south so only eastward but because that is some of the best farmland in BC and food security is desired much of the Fraser Valley is part of the ALR thus off limits to development.  So while not as big as most expensive cities, it cannot expand as far and also the climate.  Another barrier is height restrictions on skyscrapers.  Since Vancouver is known for its beautiful mountains, building high rises is heavily restricted to certain areas so the focus would have to be on more multi unit low rises.  Perhaps also out in the valley they could open it up for more high rises (Richmond is off limits due to proximity to airport).  Also better rapid transit could help as then people could move further eastward out into the suburbs.  If you go out to Langley, prices while still very high, are not quite as ridiculous but due to long commutes no one wants to live that far but if you had a good rapid transit system like the Go Train in Ontario I think more people would move further afield than do now.

Interesting - thanks for that information. I imagine in another reality being able to expand more to the South would be a big help.

Do you think the housing situation will have a big impact on population growth in the future, or a lack of it?

[mileslunn]

Miles, that's total crap! If Vancouver had much more public housing and didn't have zoning that benefits long lines of single-family houses in very very trendy, well-speculated land, housing would not be nearly the issue it is now.

It could have been lessened but not eliminated, any big city with limited space is going to have cost issues.  See New York City, Toronto, San Francisco, Paris, Sydney, London etc which have similar issues.  On Zoning, more forsight could have been used in terms of more high rises but you can only build in vacant spaces which there isn't much of unless you want to scrap the ALR, which wouldn't go over well and would hurt on food security.  In terms of social housing, unlike the UK and many European countries, social housing is actually quite limited in Canada in general for reason I am not exactly sure why, but never really become common like it did in much of Europe.

Vancouver has less than 1 million people, so it seems strange that it is such an issue. I understand what you're saying, though.

Greater Vancouver has 2 million people.  Also it is the most beautiful city in Canada, while asides from Victoria only other city where temperatures are generally above freezing in the winter.  To make matters worse it is geographically limited on how far it can expand outwards.  Ocean to the West, mountains to the north, US border to the south so only eastward but because that is some of the best farmland in BC and food security is desired much of the Fraser Valley is part of the ALR thus off limits to development.  So while not as big as most expensive cities, it cannot expand as far and also the climate.  Another barrier is height restrictions on skyscrapers.  Since Vancouver is known for its beautiful mountains, building high rises is heavily restricted to certain areas so the focus would have to be on more multi unit low rises.  Perhaps also out in the valley they could open it up for more high rises (Richmond is off limits due to proximity to airport).  Also better rapid transit could help as then people could move further eastward out into the suburbs.  If you go out to Langley, prices while still very high, are not quite as ridiculous but due to long commutes no one wants to live that far but if you had a good rapid transit system like the Go Train in Ontario I think more people would move further afield than do now.

Interesting - thanks for that information. I imagine in another reality being able to expand more to the South would be a big help.

Do you think the housing situation will have a big impact on population growth in the future, or a lack of it?

Yes in many ways housing prices are a sign of supply and demand so when more people want to live somewhere than it can accommodate prices will rise.  The problem is for those born and raised in Vancouver it might force many of them out so will be interesting to see what happens.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I'm probably going to vote libertarian in the next provincial

I hate all of them, Wilkinson, Horgan, or Weaver

nihilist!

I'm just really not fond of the empty house tax thing, and for that reason it's at least 95% likely I vote Liberal or not vote at all

Like I can't keep a house that I owned for 10 years just because I moved abroad for work?

Edit: it's not actually empty (fully rented out except two rooms and my family live there around 3 months of the year), but from my understanding of the proposed plan I would still be taxed at 2%. I'm not opposed to raising taxes; for example, if BC gov't increase my property taxes by 100% and use that money to fund affordable housing, I have zero problem with it; I am COMPLETELY not opposed to taxing vacant propertiesbut 2% estimated value tax on houses that are fully rented out seems ridiculous IMO.

All my rents are below market and I have never raised rent for the past 5 years.

Oh gosh, poor you! You OWN a HOUSE in BRITISH COLUMBIA and get ADDITIONAL INCOME from that house, the value of which likely appreciates at a RIDICULOUS rate.

The tax won't actually apply to you, but jeeze. Wouldn't be terrible if it did. Some us live in one room for $1300 a month.

[Lotuslander]

Interesting discussion about BC housing market - more particularly Metro Vancouver housing market.

Carl Sagan's famous quip relevant here: "You have to know the past to understand the present.”

In that vein, my take as my close/extended family has been involved in Metro Vancouver residential development since 1960's.

A relevant starting point.

1. Back in 1973 when the Barrett BC NDP gov't introduced the ALR, literally overnight SFD lot prices/undeveloped land parcels literally doubled overnight in value in Metro Vancouver. Many of my family members became instant millionaires overnight as a result.

2. As a result of ALR introduction back in 1973, Metro Vancouver also literally overnight became known as the highest priced housing market in Canada. "Law of unintended consequences". BTW, the ALR immediately reduced the future supply of potential residential lands, which is a major component cost of housing.

3. ALR included Class 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7 farm lands. The latter portion of ALR class lands consisted basically horse hobby farms and they remain extent to this day in much of Langley (Metro Vancouver), for example. Personally I don't believe that's in public interest but BC is full of ideologues that would call my position blasphemy.

4. Now let's look at BC housing starts (mostly in Metro Van). Back in 1973, BC had ~37,000 housing starts. Later on in 1980, ~40,000 housing starts. Put that into context in terms of population between then and now. Based upon population, today BC would require between 67,000 - 73,000 housing starts in order to keep equilibrium.

5. However, over past 5 years, BC has only had between 27,000 - 33,000 housing starts. Major relative decline re: population increase. Only this year are housing starts ~40,000. Still far short based upon historical averages re: population.

6. Also important to note that absolute numbers of SFDs has declined in Metro Vancouver over past decade. Obviously impacts *demand* for SFDs in terms of price increases thereto. Have always said, if ya own a SFD in Metro Vancouver, ya own a proverbial "gold mine".

7. Important to note as well that, unlike 1970's/1980's, household size has shrunk - many single households putting further strain on demand for housing.

8. As for purported offshore money sharply increasing housing values? Don't buy it and land title declarations confirm same. In that vein, back circa 1987, major cash-inflow into Metro Vancouver real estate from Hong Kong occurred pending 1997 China take-over of Hong Kong. Richmond & Vancouver West-side were major focus of residential purchases by this off-shore demographic.

9. That Hong Kong money changed their residential price structures & demographics of Vancouver westside & Richmond forever - yet was not a political issue back then.

10. Back in the late 1980's and into the 1990's Hong Kong money was also purchasing almost every office, retail, industrial, & apartment block property available. Quite unreal compared to current foreign real estate purchases in those categories.

11. Now rental housing - back in the 1970's & 1980's fed gov't had MURB (multi-unit residential building) program. Most of the last wave of apartment rental buildings constructed in Metro Vanouver are from that era. MURB was basically a tax shelter inducing private capital to construct apt. buildings. Quite effective program INHO.

12. Today not much rental housing constructed at all. Most rentals now either SFD basement suites or condo rentals. Ergo the 1% vacancy rates.

13. Another key reason behind low housing starts v. 1970's to 1990's in BC. Today, takes well over one year just to receive a building permit to replace an old SFD in Vancouver city proper with another. Hell, until about 1990's an entire 300-lot SFD residential subdivision in Metro Vancouver would have had underground services/roads completed in that time frame.

14. Moreover, SFD builders were all "mom & pops" back then. Not today. Residential housing developers have been whittled down considerably due to land purchase costs, financing, and soft & hard costs. Ergo results in fewer developers with longer time frames.

15. Now back to politics. BC NDP gave impression that they would make "housing more affordable" in Metro Vancouver. Major reason why they won extra seats in Metro Vancouver during 2017 election. Frankly, feel sorry for poor saps/voters that bought into that "plank".

16. Ever since the GreeNDP gov't was formed back in July, 2017, one can see many on social media, who voted BC NDP, complaining about why the BC NDP "affordable housing" platform hasn't been implemented. Sigh. It was just rhetoric in order to gain votes. Worked quite frankly.

17. BC NDP in response has stated "Wait for our February budget". Quite obvious that nothing material will come out of same - only if one actually understands housing market. Gonna say this - NDP voter expectations on this file will become majorly deflated. Ergo, another political problem ensues. One can expect that old Wendy's TV commercial come into play then:




Only 3 options today to cause Metro Vancouver housing costs to become more "affordable":

A. Interest rates hitting 20%, akin to 1981, which caused housing prices to collapse in 1982 along with mini economic depression & skyrocketing unemployment rates;

B. Removal of Class 4, 5, 6, and 7 ALR lands in Metro Vancouver (mostly horse hobby farms today), which will result in decrease in overall land values throughout Metro Vancouver (almost akin to doubling of Metro Vancouver land prices doubling after ALR introduction back in 1973);

C. Major negative net out-migration of Metro Vancouver population akin to late 1990's combined with loss of consumer confidence. Back in late 1990's BC consumer confidence levels were almost lowest in history. To wit, back then many bank foreclosures occurred on housing & rarely anyone was bidding upon same. For example, back in 2000, I purchased a 1-bedroom, 10-year old,  concrete construction condo for a measly $30,000 (!!) at BCSC Court-Ordered sale. Said unit also had a tenant paying $800/month in rent. In hindsight... one helleva bargain. Those days are over.

My 2 cents.