Connect with us

Business

Why tinkering with the capital gains exemption is the nuclear option for housing market intervention – Financial Post

Published

 on


‘You think it’s hard to get a home now, imagine if they bring in a new tax on home equity. People will simply stay in their homes longer, maybe to the last parts of their lives’

Article content

Canada’s housing market has finally gotten so crazy that it is prompting talk about something almost sacred to homeowners: the tax-free profits they realize when they sell their main residence.

To be clear: the federal government has not said it’s about to start tinkering with the principal residence exemption from capital gains tax. However, Canada’s housing market has gotten so hot that it is at least a topic of conversation again, showing just how intense the demand for residential real estate has gotten.

That flurry of buying and selling has been driven by factors such as rock-bottom interest rates and a COVID-19-related desire for more space, which are also prompting some buyers to move more quickly for fear of missing out on a chance to own a home. Soaring home prices are increasing speculation that policymakers will step in at some point to try to calm things down, as they have in the past.

Advertisement

Story continues below

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

“You’re seeing a reinvigorated debate on some of these sort of demand-side options,” said Jason Mercer, chief market analyst at the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board.

The preferred route TRREB and others in the real-estate industry would like policymakers to pursue is tackling the other side of the equation, by trying to boost limited housing supply that has also contributed to rising prices. That will take time, though, and the recent surge in home prices could translate into increased pressure for governments or regulators to intervene.

  1. Rather than buying stocks, invest in something a little more tangible such as real estate or an investment property.

    These tax changes could open up more options for real estate investors, homeowners and renters of all ages

  2. Investment is critical in generating new housing supply and for maintaining the structural integrity of existing housing stock.

    Why capital gains tax on principal residences is still a bad idea

Royal Bank of Canada economist Robert Hogue wrote this week that policymakers should do something about “overheating” housing markets, because they present a risk to the economy, suck capital away from more productive purposes and can worsen inequality. One thing Hogue suggested was that governments should re-examine the support they provide for home ownership.

“Policymakers should put everything on the table, including sacred cows like the principal residence exemption from capital gains tax,” Hogue wrote. “These considerations will be complex, controversial and no doubt fraught with unintended side-effects. Yet this support was largely designed during times when interest rates were much higher, and in some cases to counter the effect of high rates.”

Advertisement

Story continues below

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

A recent International Monetary Fund staff report on Canada didn’t mention the principal residence exemption by name, but it did reiterate the importance of policies that focus on “removing distortions” from housing markets.

“Even well-intended measures — like direct subsidies and tax deductions — can have perverse effects on housing affordability by favoring those that can already afford to buy a house at the long-term disadvantage of those that cannot, thus worsening existing inequalities,” the IMF report said.

In the United States, a couple can have capital gains of up to US$500,000 from the sale of their home excluded from their taxable income. Yet for Canadian policymakers, even just thinking about thinking about touching the capital gains tax exemption could leave them with few allies in the real estate industry.

“It will be an atom bomb on the retirement savings of Canada’s vast middle class,” said Tim Hudak, chief executive of the Ontario Real Estate Association. “Secondly, you think it’s hard to get a home now, imagine if they bring in a new tax on home equity. People will simply stay in their homes longer, maybe to the last parts of their lives, and that means that starter homes and move-up homes won’t come on the market.”

Even well-intended measures can have perverse effects on housing affordability

The exemption is one of the modern engines of Canadian homeownership and retirement planning, which may keep policymakers steering clear of messing with it in any fashion.

“Every single person says that at the end of the day, if I don’t stay in my own home, I can realize the entire fair market value on a tax-free basis, and then use that money to help fund or supplement my retirement,” said Jamie Golombek, a Financial Post writer and managing director, tax and estate planning with CIBC Private Wealth Management in Toronto.

Advertisement

Story continues below

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

A lot of people are also counting on that nest egg to continue to grow.

Consumer expectations about increasing house prices strengthened recently to the highest level ever seen in the history of a survey conducted for Mortgage Professionals Canada, an industry association representing brokerages, lenders and others.

“Even on the heels of a 15 per cent year-over-year growth, more people than ever have told us that they anticipate prices will go up,” said Paul Taylor, president and chief executive of Mortgage Professionals Canada. “And that is a bit of a speculative warning sign, if you like.”

Taylor also said that measures aimed at curbing housing demand are “really blunt instruments,” for which he and MPC are not advocating.

If measures such as capital gains tax on principal residences is being considered, there needs to be a “trade off” with that, he said, along the lines of, perhaps, a capital gains tax exemption for other types of investments.

“Because in and of itself, you’re not going to encourage people to put their money somewhere else,” Taylor said. “People still are going to want to buy a house.”

• Email: gzochodne@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

In-depth reporting on the innovation economy from The Logic, brought to you in partnership with the Financial Post.

Comments

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

CANADA STOCKS – TSX falls 0.14% to 19,201.28

Published

 on

* The Toronto Stock Exchange’s TSX falls 0.14 percent to 19,201.28

* Leading the index were Stantec Inc <STN.TO​>, up 3.4%, Imperial Oil Ltd​, up 3.3%, and Corus Entertainment Inc​, higher by 2.9%.

* Lagging shares were Aphria Inc​​, down 14.2%, Village Farms International Inc​, down 9.9%, and Aurora Cannabis Inc​, lower by 9.4%.

* On the TSX 91 issues rose and 134 fell as a 0.7-to-1 ratio favored decliners. There were 24 new highs and no new lows, with total volume of 228.0 million shares.

* The most heavily traded shares by volume were Toronto-dominion Bank, Royal Bank Of Canada and Suncor Energy Inc.

* The TSX’s energy group fell 0.32 points, or 0.3%, while the financials sector climbed 2.46 points, or 0.7%.

* West Texas Intermediate crude futures rose 0.52%, or $0.31, to $59.63 a barrel. Brent crude  rose 0.4%, or $0.25, to $63.2 [O/R]

* The TSX is up 10.1% for the year.

Continue Reading

Business

Air Canada signs C$5.9 billion government aid package, agrees to buy Airbus, Boeing jets

Published

 on

By David Ljunggren and Allison Lampert

OTTAWA/MONTREAL (Reuters) -Air Canada, struggling with a collapse in traffic due to the COVID-19 pandemic, reached a deal on Monday on a long-awaited aid package with the federal government that would allow it to access up to C$5.9 billion ($4.69 billion) in funds.

The agreement – the largest individual coronavirus-related loan that Ottawa has arranged with a company – was announced after the airline industry criticized Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government for dawdling. The United States and France acted much more quickly to help major carriers.

Canada‘s largest carrier, which last year cut over half its workforce, or 20,000 jobs, and other airlines have been negotiating with the government for months on a coronavirus aid package.

In February, Air Canada reported a net loss for 2020 of C$4.65 billion, compared with a 2019 profit of C$1.48 billion.

As part of the deal, Air Canada agreed to ban share buybacks and dividends, cap annual compensation for senior executives at C$1 million a year and preserve jobs at the current level, which is 14,859.

It will also proceed with planned purchases of 33 Airbus SE 220 airliners and 40 Boeing Co 737 MAX airliners.

Chris Murray, managing director, equity research at ATB Capital Markets, said the deal took into account the “specific needs of Air Canada in the short and medium term without being overly onerous.”

He added: “It gives them some flexibility in drawing down additional liquidity as needed.”

Transport Minister Omar Alghabra said the government was still in negotiations with other airlines about possible aid.

Canada, the world’s second-largest nation by area, depends heavily on civil aviation to keep remote communities connected.

Opposition politicians fretted that further delays in announcing aid could result in permanent damage to the country.

Air Canada said it would resume services on nearly all of the routes it had suspended because of COVID-19.

‘SIGNIFICANT LAYER OF INSURANCE’

The deal removes a potential political challenge for the Liberals, who insiders say are set to trigger an election later this year.

The government has agreed to buy C$500 million worth of shares in the airline, at C$23.1793 each, or a 14.2% discount to Monday’s close, a roughly 6% stake.

“Maintaining a competitive airline sector and good jobs is crucially important,” Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland told reporters, adding the equity stake would allow taxpayers to benefit when the airline’s fortunes recovered.

The Canadian government previously approved similar loans for four other companies worth up to C$1.billion, including up to C$375 million to low-cost airline Sunwing Vacations Inc. The government has paid out C$73.47 billion under its wage subsidy program and C$46.11 billion in loans to hard-hit small businesses.

Michael Rousseau, Air Canada‘s president and chief executive officer, said the liquidity “provides a significant layer of insurance for Air Canada.”

Jerry Dias, head of the Unifor private-sector union, described the announcement as “a good deal for everybody.”

Unifor represents more than 16,000 members working in the air transportation sector.

But the Canadian Union of Public Employees, which represents roughly 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants, said the package protected the jobs of current workers rather than the 7,500 members of its union who had been let go by the carrier.

($1=1.2567 Canadian dollars)

(Reporting by David Ljunggren in Ottawa and Allison Lampert in Montreal; Additional reporting by Julie Gordon in Ottawa and Munsif Vengattil in Bengaluru; Editing by Dan Grebler and Peter Cooney)

Continue Reading

Business

U.K. advises limiting AstraZeneca in under-30s amid clot worry

Published

 on

LONDON —
British authorities recommended Wednesday that the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine not be given to adults under 30 where possible because of strengthening evidence that the shot may be linked to rare blood clots.

The recommendation came as regulators both in the United Kingdom and the European Union emphasized that the benefits of receiving the vaccine continue to outweigh the risks for most people — even though the European Medicines Agency said it had found a “possible link” between the shot and the rare clots. British authorities recommended that people under 30 be offered alternatives to AstraZeneca. But the EMA advised no such age restrictions, leaving it up to its member-countries to decide whether to limit its use.

Several countries have already imposed limits on who can receive the vaccine, and any restrictions are closely watched since the vaccine, which is cheaper and easier to store than many others, is critical to global immunization campaigns and is a pillar of the UN-backed program known as COVAX that aims to get vaccines to some of the world’s poorest countries.

“This is a course correction, there’s no question about that,” Jonathan Van-Tam, England’s deputy chief medical officer, said during a press briefing. “But it is, in a sense, in medicine quite normal for physicians to alter their preferences for how patients are treated over time.”

Van-Tam said the effect on Britain’s vaccination timetable — one of the speediest in the world — should be “zero or negligible,” assuming the National Health Service receives expected deliveries of other vaccines, including those produced by Pfizer and Moderna.

EU and U.K. regulators held simultaneous press conferences Wednesday afternoon to announce the results of investigations into reports of blood clots that sparked concern about the rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

The EU agency described the clots as “very rare” side effects. Dr Sabine Straus, chair of EMA’s Safety Committee, said the best data is coming from Germany where there is one report of the rare clots for every 100,000 doses given, although she noted far fewer reports in the U.K. Still, that’s less than the clot risk that healthy women face from birth control pills, noted another expert, Dr. Peter Arlett.

The agency said most of the cases reported have occurred in women under 60 within two weeks of vaccination — but based on the currently available evidence, it was not able to identify specific risk factors. Experts reviewed several dozen cases that came mainly from Europe and the U.K., where around 25 million people have received the AstraZeneca vaccine.

“The reported cases of unusual blood clotting following vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine should be listed as possible side effects of the vaccine,” said Emer Cooke, the agency’s executive director. “The risk of mortality from COVID is much greater than the risk of mortality from these side effects.”

Arlett said there is no information suggesting an increased risk from the other major COVID-19 vaccines.

The EMA’s investigation focused on unusual types of blood clots that are occurring along with low blood platelets. One rare clot type appears in multiple blood vessels and the other in veins that drain blood from the brain.

While the benefits of the vaccine still outweigh the risks, that assessment is “more finely balanced” among younger people who are less likely to become seriously ill with COVID-19, the U.K’s Van-Tam said.

“We are not advising a stop to any vaccination for any individual in any age group,” said Wei Shen Lim, who chairs Britain’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization. “We are advising a preference for one vaccine over another vaccine for a particular age group, really out of the utmost caution rather than because we have any serious safety concerns.”

In March, more than a dozen countries, mostly in Europe, suspended their use of AstraZeneca over the blood clot issue. Most restarted — some with age restrictions — after the EMA said countries should continue using the potentially life-saving vaccine.

Britain, which relies heavily on AstraZeneca, however, continued to use it.

The suspensions were seen as particularly damaging for AstraZeneca because they came after repeated missteps in how the company reported data on the vaccine’s effectiveness and concerns over how well its shot worked in older people. That has led to frequently changing advice in some countries on who can take the vaccine, raising worries that AstraZeneca’s credibility could be permanently damaged, spurring more vaccine hesitancy and prolonging the pandemic.

Dr. Peter English, who formerly chaired the British Medical Association’s Public Health Medicine Committee, said the back-and-forth over the AstraZeneca vaccine globally could have serious consequences.

“We can’t afford not to use this vaccine if we are going to end the pandemic,” he said.

In some countries, authorities have already noted hesitance toward the AstraZeneca shot.

“People come and they are reluctant to take the AstraZeneca vaccine, they ask us if we also use anything else,” said Florentina Nastase, a doctor and co-ordinator at a vaccination centre in Bucharest, Romania. “There were cases in which people (scheduled for the AstraZeneca) didn’t show up, there were cases when people came to the centre and saw that we use only AstraZeneca and refused (to be inoculated).”

Meanwhile, the governor of Italy’s northern Veneto region had said earlier Wednesday that any decision to change the guidance on AstraZeneca would cause major disruptions to immunizations — at a time when Europe is already struggling to ramp them up — and could create more confusion about the shot.

“If they do like Germany, and allow Astra Zeneca only to people over 65, that would be absurd. Before it was only for people under 55. Put yourself in the place of citizens, it is hard to understand anything,” Luca Zaia told reporters.

The latest suspension of AstraZeneca came in Spain’s Castilla y Leon region, where health chief Veronica Casado said Wednesday that “the principle of prudence” drove her to put a temporary hold on the vaccine that she still backed as being both effective and necessary.

French health authorities had said they, too, were awaiting EMA’s conclusions, as were some officials in Asia.

On Wednesday, South Korea said it would temporarily suspend the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine in people 60 and younger. In that age group, the country is only currently vaccinating health workers and people in long-term care settings.

The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency said it would also pause a vaccine rollout to school nurses and teachers that was to begin on Thursday, while awaiting the outcome of the EMA’s review.

But some experts urged perspective. Prof Anthony Harnden, the deputy chair of Britain’s vaccination committee, said that the program has saved at least 6,000 lives in the first three months and will help pave the way back to normal life.

“What is clear it that for the vast majority of people the benefits of the Oxford AZ vaccine far outweigh any extremely small risk,” he said. “And the Oxford AZ vaccine will continue to save many from suffering the devastating effects that can result from a COVID infection.”

Source: – CTV News

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending