382
submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

(Reuters) - Canada on Sunday announced a two-year extension to a ban on foreign ownership of Canadian housing, saying the step was aimed at addressing worries about Canadians being priced out of housing markets in cities and towns across the country.

Canada is facing a housing affordability crisis, which has been blamed on an increase in migrants and international students, fueling demand for homes just as rising costs have slowed construction.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

How do you define 'corporate' ownership? If you can own 100 properties as an individual, does that count as 'corporate'? If it doesn't, that seems like an easy loophole. If the intent is to ban large quantities of homes owned by single entities, then doing it by quantity sounds more sensible.

That might redistribute old homes, but it doesn't necessarily solve the drip feeding of new homes that we have going on right now. For example, the UK used to build 250k+ houses every year during the 1950-1980s period. 50% of that was government built council houses for those in need. It's estimated that we need to build 250k more homes than we currently do in the UK, and the private housing industry has not done its part.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 17 points 8 months ago

Why you acting like we can only do one of these things?

  1. ban company/ corporate ownership of standalone housing.

  2. increased scale of taxation on any property past PPR. One house gets you 10% increase. Two gets you 20%, etc. oh it's empty? Now you got an empty property tax as well

  3. fuck up developer scarcity. Set hard time limits between land purchase and development / sale. Give land use laws teeth

Why you acting like we can only do one of these things?

I'm not, please don't assume that. It sounds like we're in agreement here, so I'm not debating you, but rather adding to your post, I suppose. It sounded like you wanted to extend the conversation towards solutions to the housing crisis in general.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 6 points 8 months ago

all g I realised that came across a bit more antagonistic than intended. I meant it more as "let's do ALL of it mwahhahaa"

[-] evatronic@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago

Why you acting like we can only do one of these things?

Because it's a common tactic used to confuse an issue and get the discussion bogged down in irrelevant details and "hah! Gotcha!" moments.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago

.......Yeah i'd read the rest of the thread before throwing that around

[-] maness300@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

You're the kind of person who sits on their hands and only gets off of them when you tell others to sit on theirs.

[-] Wwwbdd@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

How do you define ‘corporate’ ownership? If you can own 100 properties as an individual, does that count as ‘corporate’?

It's how you report the income. A corporation pays corporate tax rate on profit. An individual pays income tax. If someone wants to pay the individual income tax on 100 properties, that's awesome. 33% over 250k. Corporate tax rate can easily be half of that.

Plus filing your taxes is waaaaaay easier having a corp hold all the assets and generating revenue, and the individual as an employee who draws a salary. If you're just an individual with 100 properties and you get audited, you're in for a bumpy ride trying to pick apart personal vs rental purchases

this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2024
382 points (99.5% liked)

World News

38936 readers
2090 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS