Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    Where do you see a 10% loss in what I we were talking about? You said property value is going up about $100k a year. On a $1million dollar home that's a 10% increase in value. Subtract the $10k tax that leaves you with $90k profit which is a 9% net gain.

    The other items Tradewind brought up further emphasized why the $10k tax is not a deterrent. Investment property can mean many things to many people. Tradewind provided some extra examples.
    10k out of 100k is a 10% loss in gains.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  2. #42
    Elemental Lord callipygoustp's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    10k out of 100k is a 10% loss in gains.
    Seriously, are you on purpose ignoring the math behind the figures. That $100k is profit not the investment. Subtracting a $10k tax from that $100 profit leaves you with a $90k profit. On a $1million dollar property that's a 9% gain. There is no loss.

  3. #43
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    Seriously, are you on purpose ignoring the math behind the figures. That $100k is profit. Subtracting a $10k tax from that $100 profit leaves you with a $90k profit. On a $1million dollar property that's a 9% gain. There is no loss.
    10%. Loss. In. Gains.

    Not a complex concept.

    They currently make 100k a year on the investment. After this tax, they will be GAINING 10% less. A 10% loss in gains is NOT inconsequential.

    If you were told you were about to lose 10% of your gains in your investment are you seriously saying you wouldn't bat an eye at it and consider investing elsewhere? Some where else where you wouldn't potentially be losing the gains.
    Last edited by Tyrianth; 2016-11-11 at 01:04 AM.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    10%. Loss. In. Gains.

    Not a complex concept.

    They currently make 100k a year on the investment. After this tax, they will be GAINING 10% less. A 10% loss in gains is NOT inconsequential.
    No, but it's also nothing they need to really worry about. They're still making money hand over fist and not a damn thing in this world pays a 9% ROI that isn't simultaneously insanely illegal lol.

    The $10k "you lied" daily penalty might help though, but I'm dubious as to how well that'll be enforced. Or all they need to do is rent it out for absurd amounts and make more money, or they can then just say "yeah I can't find any tenants."
    "You six-piece Chicken McNobody."
    Quote Originally Posted by RICH816 View Post
    You are a legend thats why.

  5. #45
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Tradewind View Post
    No, but it's also nothing they need to really worry about. They're still making money hand over fist and not a damn thing in this world pays a 9% ROI that isn't simultaneously insanely illegal lol.

    The $10k "you lied" daily penalty might help though, but I'm dubious as to how well that'll be enforced. Or all they need to do is rent it out for absurd amounts and make more money, or they can then just say "yeah I can't find any tenants."
    But they will reconsider their investment. There are lots of places these foreigners can invest. Why invest in Vancouver where they will be losing 10% of their gains when they could be investing in say Montreal where they would only be losing 3% of their gains? Millionaires don't become millionaires for making poor investment decisions.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  6. #46
    There is a housing shortage in Vancouver where the common folk can no longer afford to live.
    Want to keep your million-dollar luxury pad in Vancouver empty?

    How does this affect "the common folk" exactly?

  7. #47
    Banned monkmastaeq's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Frozen wasteland
    Posts
    903
    This seems stupid, I paid my property tax , if i want my house to sit empty thats my call I paid for the bastard

  8. #48
    Elemental Lord callipygoustp's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    10%. Loss. In. Gains.

    Not a complex concept.


    They currently make 100k a year on the investment. After this tax, they will be GAINING 10% less. A 10% loss in gains is NOT inconsequential.
    Holy shit, I cannot believe what you are trying to argue for at this point. A 10% loss in gains is inconsequential when the net gain in gains is 90%. Find someone who would not be interested in that kind of return. Find someone who would be deterred from that investment opportunity. Go ahead, find them.

    Who cares, when investing, that your gains take a hit from time to time as long as your net gain is positive. Hell, my stocks and 401k go up and down all year I don't worry if they dip as long as the net value year over year is up.

    The FACT that the net investment is a 9% gain is what's important. A $90k, 9% net gain, is not a deterrent to owning property in Toronto.

  9. #49
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    Holy shit, I cannot believe what you are trying to argue for at this point. A 10% loss in gains is inconsequential when the net gain in gains is 90%. Find someone who would not be interested in that kind of return. Find someone who would be deterred from that investment opportunity. Go ahead, find them.

    Who cares, when investing, that your gains take a hit from time to time as long as your net gain is positive. Hell, my stocks and 401k go up and down all year I don't worry if they dip as long as the net value year over year is up.

    The FACT that the net investment is a 9% gain is what's important. A $90k, 9% net gain, is not a deterrent to owning property in Toronto.
    So you're saying you wouldn't bat an eye if your investments were guaranteed to take a 10% hit? You wouldn't consider buying investments in a different city where your gains weren't going to be hit as harshly? lol

    That's just poor investing.

    A 9% gain is a deterrent in Toronto if Vancouver would net you 10%.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    10%. Loss. In. Gains.

    Not a complex concept.

    They currently make 100k a year on the investment. After this tax, they will be GAINING 10% less. A 10% loss in gains is NOT inconsequential.

    If you were told you were about to lose 10% of your gains in your investment are you seriously saying you wouldn't bat an eye at it and consider investing elsewhere? Some where else where you wouldn't potentially be losing the gains.
    On an investment that's already very lucrative, a 10% loss in gains is not significant, al all. No-one is going to balk at their investment if their ROI drops from 10% to 9%. It's only when the margins are much thinner that it'll cause a major upset.

  11. #51
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Eats Compost View Post
    On an investment that's already very lucrative, a 10% loss in gains is not significant, al all. No-one is going to balk at their investment if their ROI drops from 10% to 9%. It's only when the margins are much thinner that it'll cause a major upset.
    That's poor investment. These foreigners are looking to make as much as possible. This tax has the potential to make other cities look more favourable than Vancouver.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  12. #52
    Elemental Lord callipygoustp's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    So you're saying you wouldn't bat an eye if your investments were guaranteed to take a 10% hit? You wouldn't consider buying investments in a different city where your gains weren't going to be hit as harshly? lol

    That's just poor investing.
    Of course its poor investing. However, I never said that. You're now not even following your own argument. You said a 10% loss in gains. That is NOT the same as a 10% hit to investments. Seriously, how can you not follow this simple math. Of course I would not be interested in a 10% loss. The scenario being discussed results in a 9% gain; no net loss. And yes, I would happily invest in an opportunity that resulted in a 9% gain.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    That's poor investment. These foreigners are looking to make as much as possible. This tax has the potential to make other cities look more favourable than Vancouver.
    9% ROI is not a poor investment. Find someone who thinks it is, please.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    So you're saying you wouldn't bat an eye if your investments were guaranteed to take a 10% hit? You wouldn't consider buying investments in a different city where your gains weren't going to be hit as harshly? lol

    That's just poor investing.

    A 9% gain is a deterrent in Toronto if Vancouver would net you 10%.
    I don't know if you've noticed, but lots of investments exist in things that aren't necessarily in THE most profitable thing. There are a range of reasons for that - costs involved in changing, proximity to investment, demand and competition, political climates, etc - but it seems absolutely absurd to say that a drop from 10% ROI to 9% is going to make it significantly less attractive. 10% and 9% are both very attractive numbers that will undoubtedly attract lots of investment.

  14. #54
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    Of course its poor investing. However, I never said that. You're now not even following your own argument. You said a 10% loss in gains. That is NOT the same as a 10% hit to investments. Seriously, how can you not follow this simple math. Of course I would not be interested in a 10% loss. The scenario being discussed results in a 9% gain; no net loss. And yes, I would happily invest in an opportunity that resulted in a 9% gain.
    Holy shit, my whole argument has been about 10% loss in your gains. I made one post about a 10% loss to investment which I obviously meant gains as I've said that in every other post.

    You would happily invest in an opportunity that resulted in a 9% gain over the exact same opportunity in a different city that results in a 9.5% gain? You wouldn't consider the 9.5% at all?
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    That's poor investment. These foreigners are looking to make as much as possible. This tax has the potential to make other cities look more favourable than Vancouver.
    See above. Lucrative investment doesn't grind to a screeching halt when something slightly more profitable exists. If it did, 99% of major cities would have zero property investment.

  16. #56
    Scarab Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Eats Compost View Post
    I don't know if you've noticed, but lots of investments exist in things that aren't necessarily in THE most profitable thing. There are a range of reasons for that - costs involved in changing, proximity to investment, demand and competition, political climates, etc - but it seems absolutely absurd to say that a drop from 10% ROI to 9% is going to make it significantly less attractive. 10% and 9% are both very attractive numbers that will undoubtedly attract lots of investment.
    You have a choice:

    Invest in property in Vancouver and get 9% gains.

    or

    Invest in property in Toronto and get 9.5% gains.

    You saying you wouldn't consider Toronto over Vancouver? These are foreign investors who have no intention of living in them.
    (This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)

  17. #57
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,080
    No problems here. People want to live in houses, not packed in like sardines in apartments. Wealthy people buying homes that people can't afford because they've driven up the prices so badly with doing just that and letting them sit is a blight upon the market.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    You have a choice:

    Invest in property in Vancouver and get 9% gains.

    or

    Invest in property in Toronto and get 9.5% gains.

    You saying you wouldn't consider Toronto over Vancouver? These are foreign investors who have no intention of living in them.
    Perhaps you could tell us more about your magical bubble where investing in property is a binary choice with only a single factor to decide upon?

  19. #59
    Elemental Lord callipygoustp's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    Holy shit, my whole argument has been about 10% loss in your gains. I made one post about a 10% loss to investment which I obviously meant gains as I've said that in every other post.
    Your whole argument has been that the $10k tax is a deterrent. It's not when the net gain, over all, is $90k. 10% loss in gains is meaningless. You can talk about loss on gains all you want. At the end of the day all that matters is the over all net. And in this case if the over all net is a 9% gain, its a win and definitely not a deterrent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrianth View Post
    You would happily invest in an opportunity that resulted in a 9% gain over the exact same opportunity in a different city that results in a 9.5% gain? You wouldn't consider the 9.5% at all?
    Please stop with the made up scenarios that detract from the article in the OP stating : the $10k is a deterrent.
    It's not and has nothing to do with what real estate market is the best for investing.
    Last edited by callipygoustp; 2016-11-11 at 01:26 AM.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    That doesn't change the fact that a 9% ROI is NOT a deterrent to buying property in Toronto.
    I'm on your side, "see above" referred to my own post, not the quote.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •