The following is a joint statement released on Oct. 27 by members of Ontario’s housing sector, including the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) and Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA).

Ontario is facing a housing emergency. Projects are stalling, builders are cancelling developments and families and individuals are being priced out of the market.

As the provincial and federal governments prepare to release their fall economic statement and budget respectively, our message is urgent: bold, coordinated action is needed to boost housing construction, lower costs and bring affordability back within reach for residents.

Housing is more than just shelter; it’s the foundation of our economy and the heart of our communities. Today, Ontario’s housing sector, from builders, Realtors, business groups, trade associations, not-for-profit organizations and rental providers, speaks with one clear voice. Together with governments at all levels, we must move swiftly to unlock housing supply, cut costs, and restore affordability by accelerating ownership and rental housing delivery.

We acknowledge the positive work done so far by the federal, provincial and municipal governments regarding policy developments, zoning reform and funding programs to encourage more housing construction, including the most recent provincial housing bill, Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, which signals the government’s intention to take further practical steps in cutting red tape, lowering construction costs and restoring confidence and investment in the rental housing market by speeding up slow resolution processes to adjudicate landlord and tenant disputes. Other efforts include the Housing Accelerator Fund, the Apartment Construction Loan Program, Build Canada Homes, the Building Ontario Fund, the Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program, reform to end exclusionary zoning and allow as-of-right construction of multi-plexes on single lots and the Building Faster Fund, among other projects. However, more action is still needed.

We also recognize that potential disruptions impacting the housing ecosystem that are outside the direct control of governments and industry, such as trade wars, geopolitical tensions and economic uncertainty, need to be considered as we navigate an uncertain environment at the macro level. 

Housing remains the backbone of Canada’s economy. It supports over 1.2 million jobs and contributes more than $143 billion in economic activity yearly to Canada’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, rising costs, difficult regulatory environments, economic uncertainty and constrained supply have slowed new housing starts and home purchases, putting tens of thousands of skilled trade jobs at risk. This will impact spin-off economic activity in related sectors and push both home ownership and rental housing further out of reach for many residents.

To meet Ontario and Canada’s housing challenge, a united focus on delivery is required. By reducing construction costs, attracting investments and aligning tax policy, zoning and approval systems, governments at all levels can restore confidence, protect jobs and support innovation at the speed and scale Canadians urgently need.

Policy priorities for immediate action

To restore affordability and confidence in the housing market, we are calling on municipal, provincial and federal governments to work collaboratively with the housing sector by adopting the following measures:

1. Position and profile housing as an economic driver: To ensure housing policy is economic policy, recognize housing construction and trade as a core driver of employment and GDP, adopt a framework to preserve the tremendous job creation that the housing industry generates, and acknowledge that housing unaffordability is also affecting our overall economic productivity, especially in the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA).

2. Modernize outdated tax rules: Extend the GST/HST exemption on new homes up to $1.5 million for homebuyers, reflecting current market realities, particularly in major urban centres, and encouraging new construction.

3. Cut costs for homebuyers: Align cost recovery with actual service delivery and housing goals to reduce barriers to construction and costs to homebuyers. Municipalities and provinces need to collaborate with industry to modernize the fee structure applied to new housing, which is currently inflating housing costs and constraining new supply.

4. Build faster through innovation in parallel to traditional building: Support the advent, inclusion and expansion of modern construction methods – including panelized systems, modular building, robotics and other emerging technologies that embrace productivity, reduce costs and construction time, and enable homebuilding at scale. These need to be supported by an innovation policy framework created in partnership with the industry that provides incentives for early adopters and customers of new solutions, as well as investments in Canadian companies providing new solutions. Scaling up pioneering methods should be done in addition to supporting the ongoing innovation and productivity of traditional construction techniques.

5. Free up land and end exclusionary zoning: Act decisively to end outdated zoning restrictions to permit gentle density and a wider mix of housing types, especially missing-middle and multi-unit dwellings in more communities.

6. Incentivize private capital: Encourage programs that incentivize private capital, both investment and philanthropic, for both rental and ownership housing to accelerate market and non-market construction. This should include reintroducing the Multiple Unit Residential Building (MURBS) tax incentive.

The housing sector stands ready to partner with every level of government. Together, we can reignite momentum, rebuild confidence, restore affordability through partnership, innovation and investment, and deliver the homes our communities urgently need.

Signed:

John DiMichele, CEO, Toronto Regional Real Estate Board

Luigi Favaro, CEO, Ontario Real Estate Association

Ene Underwood, CEO, Habitat for Humanity GTA

Michael Brooks, CEO, Real Property Association of Canada

George Carras, CEO, R-LABS Canada

Jonathan Nusbaum, CEO, Terra Modular

Marlon Bray, executive vice president, Clark Construction Management

Tony Irwin, president and CEO, Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario/Rental Housing Canada

Daryl Chong, president and CEO, Greater Toronto Apartment Association

Dave Wilkes, president and CEO, Building Industry and Land Development Association

Kathy Hogeveen, chief of operations, Assembly Corp.

Jude Tersigni, vice president of planning and development, Menkes Developments

Richard Lyall, president, Residential Construction Council of Ontario

Roselle Martino, executive vice president, policy and strategic affairs, Toronto Region Board of Trade

Frank Cairo, co-founder and CEO, Caivan Communities

Nhung Nguyen, CEO, Horizon Legacy

The post Ontario housing sector presents united front on supply, affordability appeared first on REM.

The annual PAC Days conference, to be held this year from Oct. 26 to 28, allows Realtors to advocate for housing policy recommendations. 

“Realtors live and work in every part of Canada. They are deeply invested in their communities, and when they come to Parliament Hill to talk about important housing issues, MPs listen,” said David Humphreys, CREA consultant and founding PAC Days organizer.

This year, Realtors will be urging the federal government to accelerate the construction of missing middle housing such as townhomes, duplexes and family-sized apartments, and to dedicate a share of the Build Canada Homes projects to these types of projects.

“When an MP hears directly from a constituent who lives and works in their riding, it resonates in a way no lobbyist ever could. That’s the enduring genius of PAC Days – local voices shaping national decisions,” said James Lorimer, CREA consultant and founding PAC Days organizer.

The first PAC Days in 1985 brought together about 100 association members to meet with 60 to 70 MPs. In 2024, more than 400 PAC reps from across Canada came together in Ottawa to meet with more than 120 MPs.

“For 40 years, PAC Days has shown the power of Realtors speaking with one voice. As we look ahead, that voice will be more important than ever in shaping policies that build more homes across the continuum, strengthen communities, and keep the pathway to homeownership within reach,” said Janice Myers, CREA CEO.

PAC Days programming features training, panels, educational sessions and speeches from experts.

The post CREA celebrates 40 years of PAC Days appeared first on REM.

The federal government has released a catalogue of standardized housing designs aimed at reducing costs and speeding up the construction of new homes across the country.

The Housing Design Catalogue includes 50 technical design packages for rowhouses, fourplexes, sixplexes and accessory dwelling units.

Each package contains architectural and engineering drawings, energy reporting templates, building performance reports, cost estimate summaries and a climate resiliency guide. The designs, categorized by region, were developed by local architects and engineers to comply with each province’s building codes.

In a press release issued Tuesday by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), officials said the designs support “gentle density” of Canadian neighbourhoods, and will cut red tape by reducing the time and expense of developing construction plans, making it easier for municipalities and builders to increase housing supply. 

The plans prioritize wood-frame construction to support local industries.

The initiative draws inspiration from design catalogues published by CMHC between the 1940s and 1970s, which were used to guide post-war housing development.

As of Tuesday, 14 municipalities have agreed to pre-review the catalogue’s designs to help speed up approvals. These include Burnaby, Kelowna, Vancouver, Edmonton, Regina, Ajax, Kitchener, Mississauga, Ottawa, Toronto, Saint John, Halifax Regional Municipality, Whitehorse and Yellowknife.

The catalogue is part of the federal government’s broader housing strategy, which aims to double the rate of home construction, improve affordability and reduce homelessness.

Officials say work is ongoing with more municipalities to encourage pre-approval of the designs and expand the program nationwide.

The post Ottawa unveils housing design catalogue to speed up construction appeared first on REM.

Until we start solving the right problems, all the money, headlines, and government promises in the world won’t get us anywhere near sustainable growth.

Getting to the root cause

Let’s start by unpacking the narrative. Across every level of government, housing has become the political scapegoat of choice. But blaming the housing “shortage” is like blaming a doctor shortage for long ER wait times—it sounds intuitive, but it’s fundamentally misleading. In health care, we don’t actually lack physicians; we lack compensation structures that reward patient throughput. 

Under Ontario’s Academic Funding Plan, for example, many doctors receive a salary rather than fee-for-service billing. There’s no financial incentive to increase volume. So waitlists grow, not for lack of supply, but for lack of systemic efficiency.

Sound familiar?

In real estate, we face the same false premise. There’s no actual shortage of land, materials, or interest from developers. 

What we lack is coordinated infrastructure, aligned policy, and a functional approval process. 

Kingston: A case study for collaboration

Take Kingston, Ont. as a case in point. The city already has the land capacity to meet growth projections with medium- and high-density housing. But the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is pushing expansion beyond the urban boundary anyway, forcing new infrastructure spending in areas that don’t need it. That’s not growth. That’s sprawl.

Even worse, when we do invest in infrastructure, we often do it in silos. Picture going to work and discovering that your entire organization has been building toward different goals, with different blueprints, timelines, and metrics. That’s how cities operate when housing policy is separated from transportation, utilities, schools, and health care planning. Everyone’s working hard, but no one’s working together.

That’s why it was so refreshing to see the City of Kingston take a different approach: aligning its updated Official Plan with the Integrated Transportation and Mobility Master Plan and utility infrastructure strategy. 

This is what real master planning should look like. For too long, “master-planned communities” have been a marketing slogan, not a reality. If you don’t believe me, go look at school bus routes. Many of our new subdivisions were built without long-term demographic logic. They fill quickly with young families and then age out, leaving brand-new schools half empty a decade later.

We should be building communities people can live in across every life stage—from first-time buyers to retirees—all in the same postal code. Instead, we’re spending more public dollars than ever, producing fewer homes, and pointing fingers at the wrong culprits.

“We need carrots, not sticks”

The truth? Government doesn’t need to get back into construction. It needs to get back into coordination. Growth can and should pay for growth. New tax revenue can fund social and affordable housing—if we allow development to happen on time, on budget, and in alignment with local infrastructure needs. But that only works if we stop penalizing builders with outdated fees and start incentivizing them to build efficiently.

The Housing Accelerator Fund made a great headline, but very few municipalities will see the money. Why? Because the targets tied to that funding are unrealistic. We need carrots, not sticks. Instead of dangling unreachable housing starts, why not eliminate development charges and redirect federal dollars toward infrastructure expansion? Why not reform the New Home Warranty Act to encourage emerging builders with completion-based incentives instead of regulatory gatekeeping?

The system isn’t broken. We’ve just stopped reading the rulebook—if we ever had one to begin with. Fixing this isn’t about grand reinventions. It’s about understanding how all the moving pieces fit together, and then holding people accountable for playing their part.

Let’s stop chasing housing headlines. And start solving infrastructure problems.

Joel Thompson

Joel Thompson is a real estate broker and housing advocate who believes the system isn’t broken—we’ve just never handed out the instructions. Actively engaged in municipal, provincial, and federal politics, Joel uses his platform to push for practical, inclusive solutions in housing, infrastructure, and industry reform.

The post OPINION: Canada’s housing crisis is really an infrastructure crisis appeared first on REM.

The post The industry on federal government’s new mortgage measures: CREA, CHBA, TRREB, CMBA appeared first on REM.

The post Ontario cottage country sees soaring prices amid new capital gains tax increase appeared first on REM.

Emma Caplan-Fisher

Emma Caplan-Fisher is an editor and writer for REM. She has over a decade of experience in various content types and topics, including real estate, housing, business, tech, and home & design. Emma’s work has also been featured in Cottage Life, the Vancouver Real Estate Podcast, the Chicago Tribune, Narcity Media, Healthline, and others. She holds a Certificate in Editing from Simon Fraser University.

The post Where stakeholders stand: Federal government housing plan and Budget 2024 support appeared first on REM.

The post Federal government announces 30-year mortgage amortization & other housing affordability measures appeared first on REM.

The document is decisively shorter than the one from the previous year. This year’s 304-page document uses the picture of a young family as its cover, in contrast to last year’s photo that had a woman and a child in face masks. This change could indicate that the government’s focus has shifted to households, probably young families that find it more challenging to cope with the present-day inflationary pressures.

Home prices have grown exponentially over the past two years. In February the average home price sold on MLS was over $816,000. This was a record-high figure, but it did not make a dominant news headline since records have been broken regularly over the past months.

A sigh of relief seems to have come with the latest CREA data that indicates a decline of nearly three per cent in the average price in March. Sales volume also dropped last month on a month-on-month basis. However, a better way to look at it is by comparing the figure with March 2021, and by that measure, total sales were down 16 per cent.

Can it be said that the housing market is heading toward correction? Considering a month’s figure cannot set any trend, some analysts would say no.

But many forces are attempting to rein in skyrocketing house prices, with the Bank of Canada using its monetary policy manoeuvres to make mortgages costlier for Canadians. Separately, the federal government’s budget for this fiscal year also targets the housing sector.

What are the intended measures, and will these have an impact? Let’s consider.

Budget 2022 has the word “affordability” written loud and clear for virtually every aspect. Housing features in its Foreword and the government has expressly conceded that Canada “does not have enough homes.” At the beginning of the document, the government declares it is building new homes, investing in rental housing and even halting purchases by foreigners to “make the market fairer for Canadians.”

Chapter 1 of the budget document, Making Housing More Affordable, talks about doubling the pace of construction of new houses over the next decade. Improving supply is arguably the best way to keep housing affordable for Canadians.

Last year’s budget included a plan to invest $2.5 billion in affordable housing units, with a view to supporting young and low-income families. However, any tangible impact is yet to be witnessed. Budget 2022 introduces a new accelerator fund with $4 billion over five years going to CMHC for building 100,000 homes.

Improving the housing supply is a long-term commitment but it is the short-term measures like incentives that can further real affordability. In this respect, this year’s budget has proposed a Multigenerational Home Renovation Tax Credit of $7,500 for building a secondary suite for eligible beneficiaries. A Tax-Free First Home Savings Account is highlighted with features that resemble an RRSP. The government will also double the First-Time Home Buyers’ Tax Credit, which it estimates would result in up to $1,500 benefits for eligible buyers.

From restricting foreign buyers from purchasing residential units for two years, to infusing “tax fairness” by taxing house flipping, to “reviewing” the role of corporate buyers in the housing market, measures are many. But Budget 2021 also promised “more affordable housing” and that does not seem to have had much impact on Canada’s housing market in 2022.

The problem is that though any fiscal year’s budget is a critical document, it often is only guidance for the future. Unaffordable housing in Canada is a real and ongoing issue that requires more than guidance and proposals. A direct support for people impacted by rising housing costs is a $500 “one-time” assistance to eligible beneficiaries. At a time when bidders are paying tens of thousands of dollars in excess to acquire a house, one may argue that a lot more can be done.

The Canadian government’s budget, however, cannot be brushed off in its entirety.  An improved supply, with restrictions on foreign and corporate buyers, can eventually pave the way for affordability, especially for young and low-income households. The March dip in average price and sales volume may indicate at least some correction in the near term, and more so as interest rates continue to rise.

Kunal Sawhney

Kunal Sawhney is the founder and CEO of Kalkine. An accomplished financial professional, he has extensive expertise in equity markets and adopts quantitative and qualitative stock selection practices.

kalkine.ca/

The post Will budget 2022 make housing affordable? appeared first on REM.

Historically, and before the current provincial Ford administration in Ontario, the Progressive Conservative party always appeared to be the most understanding or perhaps at least considerate of residential landlord issues. In my opinion, over the past four years or so all three main parties have essentially become “shades of the NDP.” All the parties have been making outlandish promises about arresting the housing crisis, specifically obtainability and affordability for both purchase and rental properties.

The Conservative Party’s Recovery Plan includes the party’s platform on housing affordability actions if they are elected, on pages 55 to 56. Here are my comments about their plan:

• While the capital gains deferral is mildly interesting, it’s still only a deferral. It remains to be paid and therefore is not much of an incentive. The time period to re-invest is missing too. If it’s only one or two years, then it’s relatively meaningless since it can take years to approve a new development, and years to find a financially viable purpose-built property for sale. Most sellers have no compelling reason to sell and there are many disincentives to selling, so current seller price expectations routinely far exceed most properties’ ability to be financed. Arguably, 85 per cent of residential rental properties are financed.
• Converting federal administration (office) properties to housing may seem like a good idea but many developers will tell you they tried that and ran into all kinds of real-life issues, especially related to natural light, environmental contamination tolerance levels, windowless floor plate size, mould, hidden deterioration and myriad other issues. Most of these converter-developers concluded that it’s much easier to tear down and re-build an office building rather than convert to residential.
• It may be politically advantageous to separate out a special initiative for Indigenous housing needs but there are a great many non-Indigenous Canadians who are suffering from the multi-year consequences of a debilitating pandemic that have left them in desperate financial straits and possibly without a place to live too.
• Incentives for land trusts to donate land seems nice but most of such lands are typically unserviced (no electricity, water, garbage removal and/or roads). It’s not land availability that’s needed. According to a government website, 87 per cent of Ontario is Crown land. What’s needed are serviced lands and reducing multi-year municipal zoning processes. Bylaw departments everywhere are militantly oblivious to the housing crisis, discouraging rentals at every turn “because that’s their job.” Anything done at the federal level ultimately needs provincial and municipal housing agencies to be on the same trajectory to resolving the housing crisis.

The Conservatives’ Recovery Plan appears to blame “corrupt” activities (which they don’t define) for driving up real estate prices. Forgive me, but that is utter nonsense. Establishing a beneficial ownership registry for residential property smacks of big brother and shades of the previously failed Rent Control Bureau. I recall that CMHC reported that foreign investors make up less than 0.5 per cent of Canada’s residential housing investments although I did find a statistic that non-residents owned 3.1 per cent of Toronto’s condos in 2020. Notwithstanding that, housing speculation – if that is what the Conservatives are calling “corrupt” practices – can ONLY exist when there’s high demand and low supply. Property “flipping,” assignments without ever owning the property and other price-increasing phenomena are symptoms of high demand and low supply. These practices would stop dead if supply increased such that buyers had other options than buying a quickly renovated or flipped home or the purchase of a multi-year delayed condo construction.

I like the idea of encouraging foreign investment in purpose-built rental housing but “… affordable to Canadians …” is a meaningless motherhood statement. It could also possibly be injurious to Canada’s long-term economy. Every foreign investor will calculate how much it costs to build and maintain a purpose-built property and then look at what profit they make. I believe invariably, it will be unattractive for all but large condo projects (and maybe not even then).

No one is building “missing middle” properties in particular today because they are deemed unprofitable. I don’t believe that’s true but rather that missing middle rental properties aren’t “highest and best use” for most serviced land and don’t offer the same economies of scale and return on investment as larger rental properties do. This is where government needs to create compelling incentives, but then property taxes would be much lower per square foot than a “condo-scraper” so it’s a vicious circle.

It’s socially unconscionable in my view to prevent immigrants from buying a home for a period of time by stating on the one had that housing is a human right and then denying that same right to newcomers who want to make a new life for themselves and contribute to this great country.

Reinstating the Conservatives’ “Housing First” initiative calls for creating more addiction centres. Once again, this is a response to symptoms, not cause(s). Fighting addiction must begin with regulating pharmaceutical companies and their distribution networks against distributing powerful and addictive opioids prescribed initially to combat chronic pain but which become incredibly addictive over a very short period of time – especially fentanyl. Legalizing drugs to me is a far better approach than “combating” drug abuse. It may or may not lessen the addiction but it would almost certainly lessen the criminal element and perhaps create a self-sustaining addiction-control business or industry. Was nothing learned from America’s Prohibition era?

The Canadian insurance industry ripped off Canadian consumers across the country in 2020, reporting one of its most successful and profitable years in recent history – in the middle of a global pandemic. The Competition Bureau said it couldn’t investigate unless it had a whistle blower so such profiteering abuse must be resolved by politicians. Indirectly related, I spoke to the Insurance Bureau of Canada and asked if they knew of any company that offered multi-year insurance plans. Not a single one. How about creating a multi-year insurance scheme for rental properties that gives some predictability for such costs?

Regarding mortgages, the best way by far to provide more affordable mortgages is to increase the amortization period. Even five more years (30-year) can have a dramatic effect on lowering monthly payments. The upside is that monthly and weekly mortgage payments are much more affordable. The downside is that it takes longer to build up equity, which could impact the country’s GDP-to-debt and lead to a slowing down of the economy (recession). Nevertheless, slow-building home equity is still much better than no-equity renting.

No mainstream Canadian banks to my knowledge offer greater than 25-year amortization and several don’t do more than 15 or 20 years. Banks generally don’t like longer amortization periods but CMHC insurance would make that push-back moot and it would drive consumers back into CMHC-insured mortgages after CMHC derailed itself and lost its significant market position last year. Banks strongly discourage their borrowers from obtaining CMHC insurance because the bank wants to keep the premium upside for themselves and the paperwork and qualification process with CMHC is incredibly onerous and unappealing.

Unlike most Realtors, lenders and real estate boards, I believe the stress test provides more positive benefits than negative. The problem is that those home buyers who don’t qualify because their ability to service their debt is too risky and are prevented from buying a home therefore typically remain in their rental unit. This results in a cascading “damming” effect that ultimately results in (a) more affluent people staying in their rental units longer and using rent control as a savings plan to buy a home and (b) locking out all the low-end renters and vulnerable groups who otherwise might have been able to move into the low-end of the rental market.

Providing incentives to build more purpose-built housing and second suites would break this log-jam such that a stress test might not be necessary at all. However, provincial residential housing legislation in B.C. and Ontario in particular, and to a lesser extent in Quebec, are brutal and would need to be addressed in some way for federal incentives to build rental properties to take root in these provinces.

Summary

In my opinion, the Conservative Party’s solutions in their Recovery Plan for resolving housing availability and affordability are ineffectual and demonstrate an ongoing failure to understand the root causes of the housing crisis.

I haven’t reviewed the Liberal and NDP parties’ plans but I’m fairly certain that the net result would be for a call by these other parties to massively increase government debt. This would ultimately weaken or undermine the perceived value of our currency, which would lead to a crippling recession in combination with already rapidly increasing inflation. If you think affordability is challenging today, especially for seniors and low-income earners, hyper-inflation combined with a recession would wipe out the savings of many Canadians.

I recently came to realize that most government initiatives seem to me to be about throwing available budgeted money at a problem (such as “build more houses”) rather than creating long-term self-sustaining vehicles and mechanisms that survive changes in government such as changing passive income corporate tax for rental property owners to active income or reducing amortization rates on residential rental housing capital costs.

A call for government to spend more money on constructing affordable social housing is, and always has been, fatally flawed. Rents are held artificially low and there’s no money saved for the inevitable capital costs, which is addressed by the reserve fund in condo corporations. Most social housing projects degrade over time to the point where they must be removed from the social housing inventory stock (such as Toronto’s 1,100 recently lost affordable units).

The question is then, which party should I vote for? The answer would have to lie with looking at each party’s plans of action for other top-of-mind non-housing issues and how you feel about their approach to resolving those issues. However, none of the parties to me have any idea about how to address the housing crisis.

Chris Seepe

Chris Seepe spent 35+ years in I.T. before entering commercial real estate a decade ago. He’s a published writer and author of two books on “landlording,” course instructor, president of the Landlords Association of Durham, and a commercial real estate broker of record at Aztech Realty in Toronto, specializing in income-generating and multi-residential investment properties. Call (416) 525-1558, or send him an email.

www.landlordingcourse.ca/

The post Opinion: Review of the Conservatives’ Recovery Plan for the housing crisis appeared first on REM.