The decision to repeal the underused housing tax during a housing crisis is a difficult decision for us to understand. When this measure was first introduced, the Liberal government—a previous one, but of the same hue—described it as “a national, tax-based measure targeting the unproductive use of domestic housing that is owned by non-resident, non-Canadians.”
They argued that it would ensure that foreign owners who use Canada as a place to passively store wealth in housing “pay their fair share”, and it's working. There's a suite of measures adopted by this government and provincial governments, including mine in British Columbia, that are working to curb foreign investor demand in Canada's residential housing market, and it is working to reduce prices.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that the underused housing tax will raise almost $700 million over five years. We believe that repealing it means not only walking away from hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue that could be used to support affordable housing, municipal infrastructure and public priorities; it also means reversing the progress that has been made by adding demand to an already saturated housing market.
Finally, it also removes a policy lever designed to discourage vacant foreign investor-held properties at a time when Canadians are still struggling with some of the worst housing affordability challenges in our country's history.
I urge my colleagues to defeat these clauses.