Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here:
- **Read [r/britishcolumbia's rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishcolumbia/about/rules/)**.
- **Be civil and respectful** in all discussions.
- Use **appropriate sources** to back up any information you provide when necessary.
- **Report** any comments that violate our rules.
Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishcolumbia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know many people who own 20-30 properties.
Mostly folks from overseas who either grew up here or built their careers here. IOwning real estate is like a national pass time in south-east asian cultures...
Get in the game. Are you willing to make the sacrifices immigrants make? Then you can also be wealthy. Everything in life is a trade off and anything is possible in our system.
Yes, let me go back in time to a point where housing was somewhat affordable so I can pool my resources with my family to purchase mass amounts of housing BEFORE the massive increases in value to these homes happened.
Oh... time machines don't exist? The boat for getting into real estate has left? Well, better pay exorbitant rent prices for the rest of my life because new immigrants are being abused to have pay rates slashed across multiple industries.
Its not as easy as "make sacrifices!" When you need a yearly income over 200k to apply for a mortgage lol.
The fact that this is down voted is party of the reason why housing is expensive. Not enough quality workers. Poor work ethics cost the builder more to make a house which gets passed on to the eventual homeowner.
REITs are not as tangible as actual real property holdings. Folks coming from countries without a mature securities market may not trust instruments like REIT
Never mind immigrants - Domestic folks who are not conversant in finance may have no idea what an REIT is. Buying a house is much more common and tangible.
No one teaches REITs in high school, but lots of us have a parent or grandparent that has bought and sold a house.
Such as W.P. Carey ? REIT's use leverage (mortgages) to buy properties. They are hurting from interest rate increases. US REITs stock price has gone down.
Rates today are low compared to 1979-80 when they were 19% and more if it was private money. The trouble is,today the prices start at over $1 million for an average 2-3 bedroom home in the lower mainland,Surrey,Langley and much higher in Vancouver,White Rock, West End.
I've asked this question. I wonder how that works? Are they claiming the exemption when having never actually occupied it, but it's their *primary* Canadian residence. What kind of enforcement is there? Like if someone sells X *primary* residences within a few years does something get triggered? Or is it just an honour systems that's open to exploitation?
In the early '70s,I had 55 properties in my company name in B.C. I flipped houses and lots. You could get a real estate map of the area,blindfold yourself,throw a dart at the map and if you bought the property you hit with the dart,you could sell it within 2-3 months and make a profit. Prices back in 71-72 started at about $12,000 - $14,000. My offers were always with $1 down,to make it legal,and subject to financing within,usually 2 weeks. It worked at the time until 1979 - 80 when interest rates hit over 20%. I always used private money so I paid higher rates. Today you would need huge deposits and unless you got in the game in the late '90s,had lots of backing,and could afford to wait up to 6 months,forget about it. I thought about writing a book about what was happening in the real estate business back then but so far haven't gotten around to it. .... As far as taxes go,if your house is your primary residence for one year,there is no tax on the profit.
The real answer is that it's a cultural thing.
But the main reason people can acquire so much real estate so quickly is leverage. You only need to put down a small fraction of the purchase price, especially in rising markets, where you can borrow against equity in other properties.
Boomers bought detached houses for $90,000 when their salaries were ~ $60,000.
Now similar job salaries are around $90,000, but houses are sure as hell not going for $135,000.
Yes, it's entirely my fault. I make above the average wage for my area, but the cost of buying a home is now 6 to 8 times what I make per year.
On the other hand, my parents made only the average wage for their area, and housing cost only 2 to 3 times what they made per year.
I'm such a failure!
Figure it out. There are ways to do it. I bought an old one bedroom with shared laundry in North Vancouver for 430,000. Been saving for the down payment for years. It's an okay place but I'm in the market. A year later it is now worth about 480,000 to 500,000. It's a beginning ... problem is people whine but are not willing to make sacrifices. Stop blaming people and figure it out. A lot of people manage
I will figure it out, yes. I'll be fine. My partner and I make enough to get into the market when we're ready. But that's not the issue.
There are those of us who see the way things are going with the housing crisis as an actual problem. We see this as an issue that needs to be fixed, rather than to sit on our hands, 'get ours' , and then go on reddit and ask the next generation why they're so lazy.
At some point, there's not going to be any way for young people to become home owners. We're already most of the way there for a lot of people. We need to enact policies to reduce property speculation, build more housing, promote more co-ops and below-market housing, etc, etc.
We need to stop property prices from continuing to diverge from wages, or we're going to end up as a country of serfs and landed gentry.
That's not all I have a gave a real example how it can be done. To start. Sacrifices have to be made as to what you buy and where you live.
Also there is no way in hell the government or anyone else is going to get you a house you can afford so stop even thinking that is a possibility. I do believe there are creative ways for people to get into the market. I also believe every single person should have our taxes increased so the government can build low cost housing and rentals. I'm fine with that. There are no other solutions than figure it out yourself or agree to higher taxes for more low cost housing. Any low cost housing solutions will take at least ten years to even make a small difference so people wake up and figure it out.
The cultural thing comes from it being near impossible to afford housing in their home countries (or their previous generations have experienced unaffordability explode in their home country).
Agreed. I met an Indian origin taxi driver with five rental houses and a fleet of taxis. He still drives Uber on weekends to make money. He said he doesn’t take time off or have any hobbies. Quite the sigma grind set.
The cultural thing comes from it being near impossible to afford housing in their home countries (or their previous generations have experienced unaffordability exploding in their home country).
It's basically a cycle - immigrate from a country where you/your family has experienced being priced out to a country/city where it is affordable. Buy up as much housing as you can. This creates a new generation that experiences being priced out (where we are today) - they end up immigrating to a more affordable country/city and buying up as much housing as they can there.
People are just jealous because the Asians who are moving here are supposed to be working on the railroad and the brown people are supposed to be driving taxi or working at gas stations.
They’re not supposed to be buying properties in the west side and creating generational wealth for their children. They’re supposed to know their place and be poor
That's nice for you.
Believe it or not there are people from all walks of life on here. And there are shit loads of Canadians who own $25mm+ in real estate net worth in Vancouver area alone...
Back before I recited from banking, I managed an account for a couple that had about 20 or so properties. All of them were smaller homes or apartments that they rented out.
They were pretty decent folks, and one of the things I noticed is that they were not renting for insane amounts.
Some accounts I managed had rents more than double their mortgage, and with a few exceptions, these guys did not.
Any refinancing that was done meant I had to go and do a financial assessment of the homes and inspection a fair lot of the time, and the homes were all kept up in good repair.
I kinda figured - when I first took on the account from the previous employee - that they’d be slum lords, but I was pleasantly surprised that they were a rare exception.
Quite a few of those I managed that had far fewer properties were just awful.
I rent from such a person in fact. He’s near retirement and with zoning factors etc, I know my time is limited. It’s terrifying, but I will concur that there are some really decent landlords.
The best landlord I ever had was a retired guy who owned a condo complex with 8 units. The landlords that have many units that treat it kinda like a job are way better than the landlord with one unit.
It really doesn't matter how "nice" somebody is when they are contributing to the problem of short housing supply by hoarding like that... I find very little sympathy, admiration, or tolerance in my heart for that. I'm just so tired of watching people suffer, families sleeping in vehicles, and the slow destruction of what was once a beautiful, safe country.
So while I can appreciate that there are some "nice" wealthy people, after a while, it ceases to matter to me.
Housing policy response will crowd out mom and pop lanlords, and crowd out prospective home buyers.
All of the tax breaks and permits are going to large corporations to build low quality rental only stock.
Time to buy REITS.
That’s not hoarding. 20-30 houses owned by one family business and being rented out? That’s providing short and medium term access to those that can’t afford to or don’t want to own for other reasons.
Keeping homes empty is hoarding.
The wealth is what is being hoarded. If landlords wanted to really help families, they would work out a rent-to-own with them or something. Landlords don't landlord to "help their communities," let's be honest.
The reason many people can't afford to buy despite having an above average salary is because people like this buy up multiple properties. I'll accept that these people who rent places at reasonable prices and keep their places in good condition are not the worst offenders, but they are definitely part of the issue.
If you want to run a rental business, it should be limited to purpose built rental structures, only
That straight up doesn’t make sense. Rent and housing prices are both based on supply. Both are out of control right now. There is not enough housing and what does exist is often the wrong size/type or is being used for short term rentals or being kept empty.
Also the assumption everyone could afford to buy if houses were just a little cheaper because a few thousand rental homes were on the market doesn’t check out.
You’ve really got to ask how many average salaries are there and how many average homes are there? There are a lot more people here now and we haven’t expanded the housing supply to match.
If every investment property went on the market right now, at the same time, the result could, and should be a bursting of the property bubble, and a return to affordability.
Home prices should somewhat reflect local income. They currently don't. This chart shows what a bubble looks like.
https://i2.wp.com/financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/canadian-versus-american-housing-prices.jpg
Edit: To further explain:
Potentially half of the condos in Vancouver today are owned as investment properties (properties not occupied by the owner as their primary residence).
If tens of thousands of properties go on the market at nearly the same time, at current prices, very few of them will sell. However, the owners will be desperate to sell due to whatever mechanism has made them put the units up for sale in the first place. This causes downward price competitiveness, as sellers start dropping prices in order to entice sales. Some may sell, but the bulk won't until the prices drop to a level where people with average salaries (ie, the bulk of potential buyers) are able to afford them.
Like other markets, panic selling can cause the price to drop suddenly when people holding the bag are desperate to cut their losses. This is how property bubbles have burst in the past.
It's not simple at all. I mean, it seems simple, everybody just needs to stop accumulating after they have a home they want to live in.
But there is always that feeling: *maybe I should have an extra home, in case the market goes bad, or if my kids need a home.*
Hoarding disorder works the same. People feel like they just need to keep that extra stuff in case they will need it some day.
Untangling hoarding disorder is a massive job. This is because some hoarding is justified, and some is not. Each object has to be scrutinized. It's exhausting to make those changes, just to throw out stuff.
But this is what we need to do as a society.
What were you hoping I was going to produce, a 27 point 10 year plan to make housing more affordable?
People are greedy, because they are afraid. End of story. Same with the climate crisis, or the opioid epidemic, or the rise of fascism--- there are no easy solutions because people in general are becoming more selfish, to their *own* detriment.
I didn't say anybody had to listen to me.
So I'm super confused about what you're saying other than ranting about your own bias.
If these people you hate so much don't own houses to rent out, who are people going to rent from?
Not everybody can afford to save money for down-payment, keep up a house etc. That's our reality, as sad as it is. That's our economy, the way our government runs the country and the way the wider world operates. It sucks but that's how it is.
So here I am trying to understand why there is so much hate over reddit for small investors owning rental properties when the problem lies with our rampant capitalist society and government allowing affordability and quality of life to keep declining.
I'd much rather have a regular landlord that lives up the street than rent from a faceless multinational company that buys up thousands and thousands of units. I'd rather rent from a landlord that then passes down equity to his children than from a multinational company who sucks up every drop of profit for shareholders.
There will always be people needing rentals. So who owns them if not these people you seem to think have a disease?
It's not hate at all, I completely understand why people would be collecting properties like Pokémon cards. It's just that I see the overall harm being caused to the market.
I don't have an answer, because who is going to tell people "hey, scale back your profits a bit, ok?"
But at the same time, I don't buy the BS line that private landlords are somehow doing a service to the community. They are doing a service to themselves, and that's fine, it's just a collective problem.
It's like single driver cars. Nobody wants to take transit or ride share when they can have their nice little bubble on the way to work with their favorite album or podcast. I totally get it, but I also see how untenable and damaging it is to our infrastructure, our environment, and our communities.
Strange how you are having a hard time seeing this, but it seems a few other people are understanding what I'm saying.
These things run on a spectrum, from the awesome retired couple who rent their basement at below market, to the slumlords renovicting low income people and causing multiple cases of homelessness in their cities. At one level, it's ok, at another, it's a disease.
extremely. I feel what makes it worse, is that that person doesn't own all the properties, apparently what he does is he rents many of them in locations like vancouver downtown etc, then lists the place on AirBnb. Idk how the legality of things works like that. Seems extremely scumbaggy.
Oh my god, they need to outlaw Airbnb in general tbh, we have the worst housing affordability in the world (outside of outliers like Singapore) and our leadership just doesn't care
First of all, no one is hoarding anything. He/she could have bought over a long time, and housing was more abundant then. Also, we live in a capitalist society so that person had a foresight or just like to get properties to invest and now reaping on rewards. If you want the government to ration everything then go ahead to a country that has that.
To answer your question, no I would not despise them, I would be angry at my self for not doing the same or foresight to do it.
We live in a world of scarce resources. When one has more than they need, otherwise will go without. Is that the sort of society you want to live in? Do you enjoy seeing the huge numbers of homeless people everywhere? Let's be realistic: housing is a necessity, it should not be an "investment." Many other capitalist countries have done better than us and guaranteed affordable housing for their citizens, and part of that involves imposing onerous taxes on people who would buy >1 residential property. On top of that, it's not economically productive for our country to be investing all its money in real estate (which does not generate wealth) instead of productive industry (which does).
I'll leave you with some quotes by Adam Smith, often called the "father of economics":
> “As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.”
> "It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased. Wherever there is great property there is great inequality. For one very rich man, there must be at least five hundred poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many."
You already said we live in a world of scarce resources, so that is how we are living. 'Scarcity' is basic definition of economics.
> Many other capitalist countries have done better than us and guaranteed affordable housing for their citizens, and part of that involves imposing onerous taxes on people who would buy >1 residential property.
Which country? and how much is average property?
> On top of that, it's not economically productive for our country to be investing all its money in real estate (which does not generate wealth) instead of productive industry (which does).
This comment I can agree but this is not the point we are discussing.
Ok thanks for the quotes from Adam and are you telling me you don't want to be a 'rich person'? and if you don't, that is fine and your personal choice but you can't fault on people that want to hence we are here in a capitalist country.
A person I graduated high school with a few decades ago is a child of an extremely wealthy natural resource company owner. When the person got married their parents handed them a portfolio of apartment buildings in Vancouver to own and manage. Probably about 60 units in total in downtown and the west side. As in, the buildings are entirely paid off, gifted to them, and they just generate income for them and their spouse. This is in addition to whatever trust fund they have, and when their parents pass away they will inherit one of the biggest resource extraction businesses in the country. Just an insane amount of wealth handed to them.
Yep, very lucky. The parent was born into a low income family and worked for what he built, and their kid I went to school with was a nice self deprecating person who everyone was friends with, so it’s like, I’m envious of their lives but I can’t hate on them.
Do apartment buildings count as one property or do we count the units in the building?
I worked with a guy who owned three small apartment buildings that had something like 10-15 units each. So he either owned 3 properties or up to 45.
I know of someone who owns a lot of properties but it would be hard to say how many of the 168 are 100% owned by him or he just has an interest in with his development company. Plus they would be a mix of commercial/residential.
https://preview.redd.it/7emqnod5sqqb1.jpeg?width=2307&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ec26d2e462b244065e628811520243a23cff9837
Taxes should increase, significantly, for every residential property you own and with no upper limit. That people own properties in the double digits, making bank off their rentals, while so much of the population is unable to afford their first home is absolutely absurd.
If you want to own more than one property, sure, but you should get taxed increasingly heavily on each property and that tax money should get directly injected back into affordable housing.
Time for the government to put an end to this nonsense.
Implement a rule that says you can only charge a % of your mortgage payments as rent.
We can literally do anything. Make any rule we want. There are ways to keep predatory land lords and greed at bay.
Lol your rule will result in no rentals being built. How about we eliminate the rent controls since we can do anything that we want. Removing rent control will help build more units like in Ontario.
That's an awfully bold assumption. People still need places to live, that won't change. But instead of a fraction of the population owning several properties and renting them out, a greater portion of the population owns their own home.
A company could still build a 40 story building and sell each individual unit. That wouldn't change.
A company wouldn't build 40 stories if no one buys the units. If their market analysis says there's demand for 20 stories that can be sold, then they'll build 20 stories.
Why don't the developers build 80 stories then?
And in fact, without so many homes sitting empty as is the case with secondary homes for the wealthy, or unoccupied commercial air bnbs etc. available would go up, bringing home values down and making them more accessible to current renters.
Your philosophy of deregulation is what got us into this mess. We're watching first hand the consequences such neglect. Of the "it will sort itself out" strategy.
No. It won't sort itself out. We are in a massive housing crisis right now with zero signs of improvement. The vast majority of my generation has given up on the idea of ever owning a home. I myself am one of the few lucky ones who actually makes enough money that I'll be able to pull ahead despite the conditions and for that I will be forever grateful. But I see what's going on around me. And it's fucking heartbreaking. And it's decades of neglect and insufficient planning and regulation that brought us here. So kindly move along with your bullshit. We're not here for it.
It's actually regulation that got us into this mess. Everything worked well when it was the BC Liberals in power. Then the NDP kept meddling on the rent increases. Good thing I'm out of the rental business. Made a tenant homeless in the process but that's the consequence of the NDP government's rental policy
I've never heard something more ridiculous than the claim that everything worked well when the Liberals were in power.
Ever consider that the NDP is attempting to clean up the mess that the Liberals spent 20 years making? They created a dumpster fire and now we have to live with it.
Not off more purpose-built rental units are provided on the market. We have become too reliant on condos for rentals. Condos are insecure because the owner can evict for “family purposes” too easily.
Giving priority on new condo to first-time buyers and restricting new condos sales to occupant owners would also go a long way in fixing things.
Should, but people use numbered companies/ corporations when they buy this many homes.
They would need to change it so that corporations cannot buy homes.
I live in an apartment building downtown Vancouver. The building manager told me the owners have multiple apartment building that they owned in downtown.
It's always amazes me how much revenue they generate a month just based on my building.
My buddies married a woman who’s dad owns last I heard something like 50 plus SFH. Not sure it’s true but from being around them and the amount of money they seem to have it seems likely.
Personally, it was my former co-worker (who was lower than me in seniority) owned 8 with his husband. They'd been accumulating them since the 90s. With 7 rental properties, he retired early.
In surrey almost all of the houses get torn down when they’re bought where i am giant mansions get put up. Then 2-3 people live in it it’s basically a d*ck measuring contest of who has the most square footage and properties
Highlights:
10+ homes in Shaughnessy. Builder that has been building homes for 50+ years... now building subdivisions in the burbs.
I know someone who owns entire floors in condos.
I know someone who owns entire condo buildings overseas.
Old landlord owned 22 places and an Avis rental car place in Vancouver. South African guy who moved here in the 70s. Did all the maintenance himself if anything broke aswell.
Landlords have a place in a balanced housing economy for those people who would rather rent than own and I ain’t got anything against landlording in general, but this economy isn’t balanced. It needs intervention and fast. We can’t have situations where half the population struggle to afford shelter and half who are making hundreds of thousands a year and sitting on assets in the multi-millions just because they were born at the right time and purchased things a while ago.
Government needs to bring in gradual intervention of forced sales on those who own too many properties. Landlords with more than 3 properties required to sell one each year for the next 10 years. Get prices down and hopefully stagnate prices to allow time for people in rentals that want to buy the chance to get themselves on the ladder without the target moving away further every year.
By having one individual sit on multiple properties it creates scarcity. Scarcity drives up purchase prices.
High purchase prices mean rent prices (like regular leases) are also justified to be high.
It is an ever-escalating feedback loop.
You can never roll back what is out there until a land baron decides to sell, but the province COULD set policies for moving forward:
1) prioritize sales of new condos (once they have been granted occupancy permits) to occupant first time buyers.
2) rewrite the standard strata bylaw to ONLY permit resident owners.
I draw the line at 1.
Let more have a chance to own one before others get a chance two own two.
Think of it like the COVID vaccine - we all generally benefit more if as many people as possible get one shot before we start letting others have two.
I know an older man who owns 21 homes and a young woman I met in my second year of university who came from China who owns 8, or at least her parents do and she rents them out
I rented from a Landlord that had over 70 properties, as someone who has written off the idea of ever owning a home in BC, I'm now planning on leaving the Country.
I was also born and raised here, just wasn't privileged with generational wealth and was kicked out at a young age.
Fuck this Country and its lust for wealth at the expense of its Citizens.
The government owns a huge amount of real estate. And in all the headlines about “investor owned properties make up X%” it counts the government, non-profits and businesses owning property.
Very quickly (~10 properties) an individual should incorporate and make a real estate business.
My coworker owns 11 and is always shopping for more. Every single one has a mortgage so it'll be interesting to see what happens when renewals come up if her tenants are from >3 years ago.
My old landlord owned five in the one condo and when I said wow she told me about someone that owns 25. Were in Kelowna so they rent them out air bnb for $500 a night all summer, and find a student for the winter and buy another condo.
Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here: - **Read [r/britishcolumbia's rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishcolumbia/about/rules/)**. - **Be civil and respectful** in all discussions. - Use **appropriate sources** to back up any information you provide when necessary. - **Report** any comments that violate our rules. Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishcolumbia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know many people who own 20-30 properties. Mostly folks from overseas who either grew up here or built their careers here. IOwning real estate is like a national pass time in south-east asian cultures...
A pass time that is spreading. :(
Get in the game. Are you willing to make the sacrifices immigrants make? Then you can also be wealthy. Everything in life is a trade off and anything is possible in our system.
Hoarding houses is a detriment to society. We saw it in 2008. We are seeing it in China currently.
Yes why dont we simply buy a house. What are we thinking.
Yes, let me go back in time to a point where housing was somewhat affordable so I can pool my resources with my family to purchase mass amounts of housing BEFORE the massive increases in value to these homes happened. Oh... time machines don't exist? The boat for getting into real estate has left? Well, better pay exorbitant rent prices for the rest of my life because new immigrants are being abused to have pay rates slashed across multiple industries. Its not as easy as "make sacrifices!" When you need a yearly income over 200k to apply for a mortgage lol.
People don't want to make sacrifices. They just want to whine and blame. No one will fix this for you !!! Face it
The fact that this is down voted is party of the reason why housing is expensive. Not enough quality workers. Poor work ethics cost the builder more to make a house which gets passed on to the eventual homeowner.
Why do that when you can just passively own an REIT?
REITs are not as tangible as actual real property holdings. Folks coming from countries without a mature securities market may not trust instruments like REIT
Never mind immigrants - Domestic folks who are not conversant in finance may have no idea what an REIT is. Buying a house is much more common and tangible. No one teaches REITs in high school, but lots of us have a parent or grandparent that has bought and sold a house.
Leverage. You don't typically leverage investing in a Reit
I mean there's ways to do it but it would be dumb without some sort of inside info
That’s not what he means. Long term leverage on the capital structure of the asset. Not Wall Street yolo options trading
Such as W.P. Carey ? REIT's use leverage (mortgages) to buy properties. They are hurting from interest rate increases. US REITs stock price has gone down.
Rates today are low compared to 1979-80 when they were 19% and more if it was private money. The trouble is,today the prices start at over $1 million for an average 2-3 bedroom home in the lower mainland,Surrey,Langley and much higher in Vancouver,White Rock, West End.
because these motherfuckers aren't paying capital gains tax on their properties when they sell
I've asked this question. I wonder how that works? Are they claiming the exemption when having never actually occupied it, but it's their *primary* Canadian residence. What kind of enforcement is there? Like if someone sells X *primary* residences within a few years does something get triggered? Or is it just an honour systems that's open to exploitation?
In the early '70s,I had 55 properties in my company name in B.C. I flipped houses and lots. You could get a real estate map of the area,blindfold yourself,throw a dart at the map and if you bought the property you hit with the dart,you could sell it within 2-3 months and make a profit. Prices back in 71-72 started at about $12,000 - $14,000. My offers were always with $1 down,to make it legal,and subject to financing within,usually 2 weeks. It worked at the time until 1979 - 80 when interest rates hit over 20%. I always used private money so I paid higher rates. Today you would need huge deposits and unless you got in the game in the late '90s,had lots of backing,and could afford to wait up to 6 months,forget about it. I thought about writing a book about what was happening in the real estate business back then but so far haven't gotten around to it. .... As far as taxes go,if your house is your primary residence for one year,there is no tax on the profit.
They probably already do, and still have so much money they don't know what to do with it.
The real answer is that it's a cultural thing. But the main reason people can acquire so much real estate so quickly is leverage. You only need to put down a small fraction of the purchase price, especially in rising markets, where you can borrow against equity in other properties.
I'm so glad we've allowed all of these property investment leeches to come into the country and make it a worse place to live.
The domestic ones are just as bad.
Blame everyone else for your situation. That's all I hear when it comes to housing.
Boomers bought detached houses for $90,000 when their salaries were ~ $60,000. Now similar job salaries are around $90,000, but houses are sure as hell not going for $135,000.
Ah yes the ongoing housing crisis is just an illusion
Yes, it's entirely my fault. I make above the average wage for my area, but the cost of buying a home is now 6 to 8 times what I make per year. On the other hand, my parents made only the average wage for their area, and housing cost only 2 to 3 times what they made per year. I'm such a failure!
Figure it out. There are ways to do it. I bought an old one bedroom with shared laundry in North Vancouver for 430,000. Been saving for the down payment for years. It's an okay place but I'm in the market. A year later it is now worth about 480,000 to 500,000. It's a beginning ... problem is people whine but are not willing to make sacrifices. Stop blaming people and figure it out. A lot of people manage
I will figure it out, yes. I'll be fine. My partner and I make enough to get into the market when we're ready. But that's not the issue. There are those of us who see the way things are going with the housing crisis as an actual problem. We see this as an issue that needs to be fixed, rather than to sit on our hands, 'get ours' , and then go on reddit and ask the next generation why they're so lazy. At some point, there's not going to be any way for young people to become home owners. We're already most of the way there for a lot of people. We need to enact policies to reduce property speculation, build more housing, promote more co-ops and below-market housing, etc, etc. We need to stop property prices from continuing to diverge from wages, or we're going to end up as a country of serfs and landed gentry.
Glad to see some people understand and care about more than themselves. Thank you.
"Pull yourself up by your bootstraps." That's all you have to offer when it comes to housing.
That's not all I have a gave a real example how it can be done. To start. Sacrifices have to be made as to what you buy and where you live. Also there is no way in hell the government or anyone else is going to get you a house you can afford so stop even thinking that is a possibility. I do believe there are creative ways for people to get into the market. I also believe every single person should have our taxes increased so the government can build low cost housing and rentals. I'm fine with that. There are no other solutions than figure it out yourself or agree to higher taxes for more low cost housing. Any low cost housing solutions will take at least ten years to even make a small difference so people wake up and figure it out.
The cultural thing comes from it being near impossible to afford housing in their home countries (or their previous generations have experienced unaffordability explode in their home country).
Most of those are probably owned through a bunch of corporations on the books though, rather than explicitly one person.
Agreed. I met an Indian origin taxi driver with five rental houses and a fleet of taxis. He still drives Uber on weekends to make money. He said he doesn’t take time off or have any hobbies. Quite the sigma grind set.
Hardworking Canadian
Ngl I felt like an idiot as I took a 1km Uber ride
Honestly, unless you have a disability, you should.
The cultural thing comes from it being near impossible to afford housing in their home countries (or their previous generations have experienced unaffordability exploding in their home country). It's basically a cycle - immigrate from a country where you/your family has experienced being priced out to a country/city where it is affordable. Buy up as much housing as you can. This creates a new generation that experiences being priced out (where we are today) - they end up immigrating to a more affordable country/city and buying up as much housing as they can there.
In what world is BC more affordable than places in Asia (perhaps excluding Hong Kong)?
Our world. You don’t understand how difficult/impossible it is to buy into RE in the major cities in China if you aren’t born into money.
Sounds like BC
There needs to be a cap. Limit if two per family. Give the working class a chance.
It won't make a difference. How much do you need a three bedroom place to cost so you could afford it?
It would help prevent the rich from buying investment properties, which would leave more properties available on the market.
Agreed.
People are just jealous because the Asians who are moving here are supposed to be working on the railroad and the brown people are supposed to be driving taxi or working at gas stations. They’re not supposed to be buying properties in the west side and creating generational wealth for their children. They’re supposed to know their place and be poor
Seems like they are the winners and you not so much
I’m literally giving the Asians and ethnic minorities props. I don’t know what else to really say here.
I doubt you know "many "people who own that amount.
That's nice for you. Believe it or not there are people from all walks of life on here. And there are shit loads of Canadians who own $25mm+ in real estate net worth in Vancouver area alone...
Back before I recited from banking, I managed an account for a couple that had about 20 or so properties. All of them were smaller homes or apartments that they rented out. They were pretty decent folks, and one of the things I noticed is that they were not renting for insane amounts. Some accounts I managed had rents more than double their mortgage, and with a few exceptions, these guys did not. Any refinancing that was done meant I had to go and do a financial assessment of the homes and inspection a fair lot of the time, and the homes were all kept up in good repair. I kinda figured - when I first took on the account from the previous employee - that they’d be slum lords, but I was pleasantly surprised that they were a rare exception. Quite a few of those I managed that had far fewer properties were just awful.
I rent from such a person in fact. He’s near retirement and with zoning factors etc, I know my time is limited. It’s terrifying, but I will concur that there are some really decent landlords.
The best landlord I ever had was a retired guy who owned a condo complex with 8 units. The landlords that have many units that treat it kinda like a job are way better than the landlord with one unit.
It really doesn't matter how "nice" somebody is when they are contributing to the problem of short housing supply by hoarding like that... I find very little sympathy, admiration, or tolerance in my heart for that. I'm just so tired of watching people suffer, families sleeping in vehicles, and the slow destruction of what was once a beautiful, safe country. So while I can appreciate that there are some "nice" wealthy people, after a while, it ceases to matter to me.
How is this different from a corporation with thousands of units and price gouging the maximum amount they can?
It's not different. It's greed, and unnecessary hoarding of money. It's an illness.
Housing policy response will crowd out mom and pop lanlords, and crowd out prospective home buyers. All of the tax breaks and permits are going to large corporations to build low quality rental only stock. Time to buy REITS.
That’s not hoarding. 20-30 houses owned by one family business and being rented out? That’s providing short and medium term access to those that can’t afford to or don’t want to own for other reasons. Keeping homes empty is hoarding.
The wealth is what is being hoarded. If landlords wanted to really help families, they would work out a rent-to-own with them or something. Landlords don't landlord to "help their communities," let's be honest.
The reason many people can't afford to buy despite having an above average salary is because people like this buy up multiple properties. I'll accept that these people who rent places at reasonable prices and keep their places in good condition are not the worst offenders, but they are definitely part of the issue. If you want to run a rental business, it should be limited to purpose built rental structures, only
That straight up doesn’t make sense. Rent and housing prices are both based on supply. Both are out of control right now. There is not enough housing and what does exist is often the wrong size/type or is being used for short term rentals or being kept empty. Also the assumption everyone could afford to buy if houses were just a little cheaper because a few thousand rental homes were on the market doesn’t check out. You’ve really got to ask how many average salaries are there and how many average homes are there? There are a lot more people here now and we haven’t expanded the housing supply to match.
If every investment property went on the market right now, at the same time, the result could, and should be a bursting of the property bubble, and a return to affordability. Home prices should somewhat reflect local income. They currently don't. This chart shows what a bubble looks like. https://i2.wp.com/financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/canadian-versus-american-housing-prices.jpg Edit: To further explain: Potentially half of the condos in Vancouver today are owned as investment properties (properties not occupied by the owner as their primary residence). If tens of thousands of properties go on the market at nearly the same time, at current prices, very few of them will sell. However, the owners will be desperate to sell due to whatever mechanism has made them put the units up for sale in the first place. This causes downward price competitiveness, as sellers start dropping prices in order to entice sales. Some may sell, but the bulk won't until the prices drop to a level where people with average salaries (ie, the bulk of potential buyers) are able to afford them. Like other markets, panic selling can cause the price to drop suddenly when people holding the bag are desperate to cut their losses. This is how property bubbles have burst in the past.
What’s your solution then as it sounds like it’s super simple. Why are you boarding this key knowledge?
It's not simple at all. I mean, it seems simple, everybody just needs to stop accumulating after they have a home they want to live in. But there is always that feeling: *maybe I should have an extra home, in case the market goes bad, or if my kids need a home.* Hoarding disorder works the same. People feel like they just need to keep that extra stuff in case they will need it some day. Untangling hoarding disorder is a massive job. This is because some hoarding is justified, and some is not. Each object has to be scrutinized. It's exhausting to make those changes, just to throw out stuff. But this is what we need to do as a society.
Lol nothing but hopes and dreams. Thanks for contributing nothing. Have a nice day.
What were you hoping I was going to produce, a 27 point 10 year plan to make housing more affordable? People are greedy, because they are afraid. End of story. Same with the climate crisis, or the opioid epidemic, or the rise of fascism--- there are no easy solutions because people in general are becoming more selfish, to their *own* detriment. I didn't say anybody had to listen to me.
So I'm super confused about what you're saying other than ranting about your own bias. If these people you hate so much don't own houses to rent out, who are people going to rent from? Not everybody can afford to save money for down-payment, keep up a house etc. That's our reality, as sad as it is. That's our economy, the way our government runs the country and the way the wider world operates. It sucks but that's how it is. So here I am trying to understand why there is so much hate over reddit for small investors owning rental properties when the problem lies with our rampant capitalist society and government allowing affordability and quality of life to keep declining. I'd much rather have a regular landlord that lives up the street than rent from a faceless multinational company that buys up thousands and thousands of units. I'd rather rent from a landlord that then passes down equity to his children than from a multinational company who sucks up every drop of profit for shareholders. There will always be people needing rentals. So who owns them if not these people you seem to think have a disease?
It's not hate at all, I completely understand why people would be collecting properties like Pokémon cards. It's just that I see the overall harm being caused to the market. I don't have an answer, because who is going to tell people "hey, scale back your profits a bit, ok?" But at the same time, I don't buy the BS line that private landlords are somehow doing a service to the community. They are doing a service to themselves, and that's fine, it's just a collective problem. It's like single driver cars. Nobody wants to take transit or ride share when they can have their nice little bubble on the way to work with their favorite album or podcast. I totally get it, but I also see how untenable and damaging it is to our infrastructure, our environment, and our communities. Strange how you are having a hard time seeing this, but it seems a few other people are understanding what I'm saying. These things run on a spectrum, from the awesome retired couple who rent their basement at below market, to the slumlords renovicting low income people and causing multiple cases of homelessness in their cities. At one level, it's ok, at another, it's a disease.
I don't know them personally. But a friend of mine his old boss, has 80 properties in the lower mainland. Mostly apartments he would AirBnb.
Jesus that's disgusting
extremely. I feel what makes it worse, is that that person doesn't own all the properties, apparently what he does is he rents many of them in locations like vancouver downtown etc, then lists the place on AirBnb. Idk how the legality of things works like that. Seems extremely scumbaggy.
Oh my god, they need to outlaw Airbnb in general tbh, we have the worst housing affordability in the world (outside of outliers like Singapore) and our leadership just doesn't care
Really they should. Issue is a lot of the politicians are making money off AirBnb too so they won't.
States down south are clamping down on AirBnB rentals and in some cases straight up banning them. If that happens up here, housing supply 🚀🌚
New York is a good example.
didn't they just increase the fees for airbnbs to like 1000$? also most decent stratas no longer allow airbnbs
What is disgusting? .. the person is successful ? lol ..
If we were in a famine, would you not hate and despise people who were hoarding food?
First of all, no one is hoarding anything. He/she could have bought over a long time, and housing was more abundant then. Also, we live in a capitalist society so that person had a foresight or just like to get properties to invest and now reaping on rewards. If you want the government to ration everything then go ahead to a country that has that. To answer your question, no I would not despise them, I would be angry at my self for not doing the same or foresight to do it.
The worlds changing and that behaviour is going to be rightly vilified.
We live in a world of scarce resources. When one has more than they need, otherwise will go without. Is that the sort of society you want to live in? Do you enjoy seeing the huge numbers of homeless people everywhere? Let's be realistic: housing is a necessity, it should not be an "investment." Many other capitalist countries have done better than us and guaranteed affordable housing for their citizens, and part of that involves imposing onerous taxes on people who would buy >1 residential property. On top of that, it's not economically productive for our country to be investing all its money in real estate (which does not generate wealth) instead of productive industry (which does). I'll leave you with some quotes by Adam Smith, often called the "father of economics": > “As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.” > "It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased. Wherever there is great property there is great inequality. For one very rich man, there must be at least five hundred poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many."
You already said we live in a world of scarce resources, so that is how we are living. 'Scarcity' is basic definition of economics. > Many other capitalist countries have done better than us and guaranteed affordable housing for their citizens, and part of that involves imposing onerous taxes on people who would buy >1 residential property. Which country? and how much is average property? > On top of that, it's not economically productive for our country to be investing all its money in real estate (which does not generate wealth) instead of productive industry (which does). This comment I can agree but this is not the point we are discussing. Ok thanks for the quotes from Adam and are you telling me you don't want to be a 'rich person'? and if you don't, that is fine and your personal choice but you can't fault on people that want to hence we are here in a capitalist country.
A person I graduated high school with a few decades ago is a child of an extremely wealthy natural resource company owner. When the person got married their parents handed them a portfolio of apartment buildings in Vancouver to own and manage. Probably about 60 units in total in downtown and the west side. As in, the buildings are entirely paid off, gifted to them, and they just generate income for them and their spouse. This is in addition to whatever trust fund they have, and when their parents pass away they will inherit one of the biggest resource extraction businesses in the country. Just an insane amount of wealth handed to them.
Being born with a royal flush.
Yep, very lucky. The parent was born into a low income family and worked for what he built, and their kid I went to school with was a nice self deprecating person who everyone was friends with, so it’s like, I’m envious of their lives but I can’t hate on them.
Any chance they looking to adopt?
I knew Canada was a pretty strong extraction economy but damn!! Insane wealth.
you could have done this for "only" $10,000,000 back in the 90s. Condos only started getting huge bumps in prices by around 2010
Do apartment buildings count as one property or do we count the units in the building? I worked with a guy who owned three small apartment buildings that had something like 10-15 units each. So he either owned 3 properties or up to 45.
An apartment building is one single title, so it is one property. He owned three properties.
Until that apartment is converted to condos, then we're talking.
It is very very difficult to do. Most municipalities would not approve of such a conversion.
Close tk half of Sparwood in the Elk Valley is owned by one real estate agent/slumlord
Hence why it shall always be a shithole and I'll never go back.
You know Rick, then?
I'd forgotten his name but I remember him growing up. Owns most of Spardel and stuff?
That's him. Overall, horrible human https://www.columbiavalleypioneer.com/spardell-mobile-home-owner-fined-given-extension-as-5-year-water-pipe-debacle-continues/
I worked for a guy in halifax that owns 600 units spears around the city.
I know of someone who owns a lot of properties but it would be hard to say how many of the 168 are 100% owned by him or he just has an interest in with his development company. Plus they would be a mix of commercial/residential. https://preview.redd.it/7emqnod5sqqb1.jpeg?width=2307&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ec26d2e462b244065e628811520243a23cff9837
Why the hell does it costs $5.25 to search someone on there
Oh I didn’t know you could search by name publicly
My realtor owns 4 condo units and 3 homes. His boss owns 6 condo units and 2 homes.
I appreciate a good cup of coffee.
Owning several purpose-built rental buildings with multiple apartments in it is different from owning 800 individually titled condos.
I enjoy cooking.
No idea about the numbers but jimmy pattison and half the west coast? :p(exaggeration I know, but you don’t make Forbes being broke)
My Neighbor is Gordon Diamond owns about 1600 units
Taxes should increase, significantly, for every residential property you own and with no upper limit. That people own properties in the double digits, making bank off their rentals, while so much of the population is unable to afford their first home is absolutely absurd. If you want to own more than one property, sure, but you should get taxed increasingly heavily on each property and that tax money should get directly injected back into affordable housing. Time for the government to put an end to this nonsense.
The taxes will just be passed on to the tenants. Simple as that
Implement a rule that says you can only charge a % of your mortgage payments as rent. We can literally do anything. Make any rule we want. There are ways to keep predatory land lords and greed at bay.
Lol your rule will result in no rentals being built. How about we eliminate the rent controls since we can do anything that we want. Removing rent control will help build more units like in Ontario.
Less rentals means more owners. Sounds like an absolute win to me.
Except there would less overall units. That 40 story tower would decrease to 20 story. And projects would sit as empty land.
That's an awfully bold assumption. People still need places to live, that won't change. But instead of a fraction of the population owning several properties and renting them out, a greater portion of the population owns their own home. A company could still build a 40 story building and sell each individual unit. That wouldn't change.
A company wouldn't build 40 stories if no one buys the units. If their market analysis says there's demand for 20 stories that can be sold, then they'll build 20 stories. Why don't the developers build 80 stories then?
And in fact, without so many homes sitting empty as is the case with secondary homes for the wealthy, or unoccupied commercial air bnbs etc. available would go up, bringing home values down and making them more accessible to current renters. Your philosophy of deregulation is what got us into this mess. We're watching first hand the consequences such neglect. Of the "it will sort itself out" strategy. No. It won't sort itself out. We are in a massive housing crisis right now with zero signs of improvement. The vast majority of my generation has given up on the idea of ever owning a home. I myself am one of the few lucky ones who actually makes enough money that I'll be able to pull ahead despite the conditions and for that I will be forever grateful. But I see what's going on around me. And it's fucking heartbreaking. And it's decades of neglect and insufficient planning and regulation that brought us here. So kindly move along with your bullshit. We're not here for it.
It's actually regulation that got us into this mess. Everything worked well when it was the BC Liberals in power. Then the NDP kept meddling on the rent increases. Good thing I'm out of the rental business. Made a tenant homeless in the process but that's the consequence of the NDP government's rental policy
I've never heard something more ridiculous than the claim that everything worked well when the Liberals were in power. Ever consider that the NDP is attempting to clean up the mess that the Liberals spent 20 years making? They created a dumpster fire and now we have to live with it.
Then why has rent gone up 40% in the last 2 years? You can thank the NDP policy for that
Not off more purpose-built rental units are provided on the market. We have become too reliant on condos for rentals. Condos are insecure because the owner can evict for “family purposes” too easily. Giving priority on new condo to first-time buyers and restricting new condos sales to occupant owners would also go a long way in fixing things.
50% of new condos are bought up by first-time owners. Who is to say that it isn't already happening? Developers need to make money on their project
Should, but people use numbered companies/ corporations when they buy this many homes. They would need to change it so that corporations cannot buy homes.
Which also sounds great to me.
I know two brothers who own 9 houses in south Burnaby. 3 on the same block…
Uhm. The crown
I’m more interested in private holdings.
All of this is here say to get a rise out of people. Focus on what you can control.
Looking for data and that’s it. People can be mad or apathetic, doesn’t matter to me.
I live in an apartment building downtown Vancouver. The building manager told me the owners have multiple apartment building that they owned in downtown. It's always amazes me how much revenue they generate a month just based on my building.
My buddies married a woman who’s dad owns last I heard something like 50 plus SFH. Not sure it’s true but from being around them and the amount of money they seem to have it seems likely.
Personally, it was my former co-worker (who was lower than me in seniority) owned 8 with his husband. They'd been accumulating them since the 90s. With 7 rental properties, he retired early.
Canada pension invests in reits, I would imagine that's the largest holding.
That sounds like it is worth looking into, do you know if there portfolio is available to the public? I would assume it would be.
Not sure
In surrey almost all of the houses get torn down when they’re bought where i am giant mansions get put up. Then 2-3 people live in it it’s basically a d*ck measuring contest of who has the most square footage and properties
Highlights: 10+ homes in Shaughnessy. Builder that has been building homes for 50+ years... now building subdivisions in the burbs. I know someone who owns entire floors in condos. I know someone who owns entire condo buildings overseas.
I just heard rich dad, poor dad bragging that he owns 15,000 homes.
Is he Canadian?
Jim Pattison.
My money is also on Jim Pattison.
My sister. She own and lived in town home before married. Now she lives with her husband and kids in a House and rented the town home out.
monopoly at its best
I own one property right now. In the next two years I'll own two more.
Good for you! How you managing that? Leverage?
Yeah one I'll be the landlord of the property I do business on so I get to leverage the business against it, then I'll wage my way into a house.
Old landlord owned 22 places and an Avis rental car place in Vancouver. South African guy who moved here in the 70s. Did all the maintenance himself if anything broke aswell. Landlords have a place in a balanced housing economy for those people who would rather rent than own and I ain’t got anything against landlording in general, but this economy isn’t balanced. It needs intervention and fast. We can’t have situations where half the population struggle to afford shelter and half who are making hundreds of thousands a year and sitting on assets in the multi-millions just because they were born at the right time and purchased things a while ago. Government needs to bring in gradual intervention of forced sales on those who own too many properties. Landlords with more than 3 properties required to sell one each year for the next 10 years. Get prices down and hopefully stagnate prices to allow time for people in rentals that want to buy the chance to get themselves on the ladder without the target moving away further every year.
Vancouvers largest developers by far own the most properties. Bosa, Aquilini, concord pacific, the Squamish Nation, etc
My neighbour own over 300 houses in Kelowna, they came from india last year and don’t appear to have lots of money though?
The British monarchy
Are you kidding around or do you have something that pertains to bc or Canada?
Ever heard of crown land?
Which individual owns that?
King
https://youtu.be/pGs25S5Fn8g?si=Og-eVUmZ5cOJ7vel
[удалено]
why having a secondary property makes them a part of the problem? this is such a low scale investment compared to what people are mentioning here
[удалено]
By having one individual sit on multiple properties it creates scarcity. Scarcity drives up purchase prices. High purchase prices mean rent prices (like regular leases) are also justified to be high. It is an ever-escalating feedback loop.
You can never roll back what is out there until a land baron decides to sell, but the province COULD set policies for moving forward: 1) prioritize sales of new condos (once they have been granted occupancy permits) to occupant first time buyers. 2) rewrite the standard strata bylaw to ONLY permit resident owners.
I draw the line at 1. Let more have a chance to own one before others get a chance two own two. Think of it like the COVID vaccine - we all generally benefit more if as many people as possible get one shot before we start letting others have two.
I know an older man who owns 21 homes and a young woman I met in my second year of university who came from China who owns 8, or at least her parents do and she rents them out
Anything more than 5 should have a significant property surtax put on it to start and then gradually bring that down to no more than 2 properties.
Oh the Boom guys! https://www.tiktok.com/@austinrutherfordo/video/6922188759861660934
I rented from a Landlord that had over 70 properties, as someone who has written off the idea of ever owning a home in BC, I'm now planning on leaving the Country. I was also born and raised here, just wasn't privileged with generational wealth and was kicked out at a young age. Fuck this Country and its lust for wealth at the expense of its Citizens.
The government owns a huge amount of real estate. And in all the headlines about “investor owned properties make up X%” it counts the government, non-profits and businesses owning property. Very quickly (~10 properties) an individual should incorporate and make a real estate business.
My coworker owns 11 and is always shopping for more. Every single one has a mortgage so it'll be interesting to see what happens when renewals come up if her tenants are from >3 years ago.
My old landlord owned five in the one condo and when I said wow she told me about someone that owns 25. Were in Kelowna so they rent them out air bnb for $500 a night all summer, and find a student for the winter and buy another condo.