New Zealand bans sales of homes to foreigners

[baydude]

When will cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay Area follow so foreigners from China can’t buy all the homes driving housing prices way up and no longer affordable?

New Zealand's parliament has banned many foreigners from buying existing homes in the country - a move aimed at making properties more affordable.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45199034

Here's why Chinese investors are so eager to buy homes in the US

https://www.businessinsider.com/her...rs-are-so-eager-to-buy-homes-in-the-us-2018-3

 

[nickqt]

When will the KnowNothing morons fuckoff and let the rest of us live in peace?

 

[KMFJD]

Ontario just relaxed their rules for foreign buyers once Dougie became premier

 

[Starbuck1975]

When will the KnowNothing morons fuckoff and let the rest of us live in peace?

I am not sure what morons have to do with artificially inflated housing demand and shortages of inventory due to wealthy Chinese parking their money in foreign real estate. In NYC, there is something ridiculous like 3 or 4 unocuppied investment properties for every homeless person.

 

[Exterous]

Came across this story yesterday and thought it was interesting - in part because I wouldn't mind living in NZ for a few years. So you can still buy property if you are a non-citizen with resident status (Or an Aussie or Singapore citizen) so there is hope for that dream still. Seems reasonably well targeted but should be a good test case to see if that is true

 

[compuwiz1]

Sometimes a little nationalist values are good. It's their country and how they want to run it and control it, is their business.

 

[fskimospy]

While I would be in favor of a non-resident tax, banning foreigners from buying property is a dumb idea.

Mostly cities like San Francisco are desperately trying to find any excuse as to why their housing is so expensive other than their choice to oppose building almost any new housing.

 

[K1052]

I am not sure what morons have to do with artificially inflated housing demand and shortages of inventory due to wealthy Chinese parking their money in foreign real estate. In NYC, there is something ridiculous like 3 or 4 unocuppied investment properties for every homeless person.

In part that's the city's own fault. In many cases high end condo developments can be built as of right. Denser apartment buildings will typically need city sign off and that process has been captured by NIMBYs who use the zoning process as a moat to keep new people out.

 

[vi edit]

Yeah this is one of those situations I'm not sure there is a right answer. I totally understand especially in a country like NZ that is small and has a finite amount of land you can develop. About the only middle ground is some sort of cap on purchases (cash sales in particular) that's indexed against the market growth.

For example - if normal value of a property is $100,000 and property values have averaged 3% growth per year over the last 5 years. Max offer is $103,000. It doesn't completely stop the problem but it does limit foreign cash rich investors from coming in and bidding 20% higher in cash than asking and taking away a home from someone that actually intends to live there.

 

[glenn1]

I am not sure what morons have to do with artificially inflated housing demand and shortages of inventory due to wealthy Chinese parking their money in foreign real estate. In NYC, there is something ridiculous like 3 or 4 unocuppied investment properties for every homeless person.

Yeah, it must be those darn foreigners keeping the homeless down instead of the unwillingness of the city and its taxpayers to provide housing for them. If only we could avoid a Chinese person buying a NYC loft then folks like @fskimospy would be willing to crack open their wallet rather than just saying "collective action problem" and waiting on a federal solution so that people in Montana could share the costs of addressing their city's problem.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, it must be those darn foreigners keeping the homeless down instead of the unwillingness of the city and its taxpayers to provide housing for them. If only we could avoid a Chinese person buying a NYC loft then folks like @fskimospy would be willing to crack open their wallet rather than just saying "collective action problem" and waiting on a federal solution so that people in Montana could share the costs of addressing their city's problem.

It’s weird that for all your ranting about collective action problems that you still don’t know what they are. Do you need me to explain it again?

Anyone with a brain knows that homelessness is a collective action problem but it’s not one that requires a federal solution - the city can and should do more by both forcing looser zoning restrictions and building more housing for the poor. I’m very willing to crack open my wallet for those things because unlike you I’m not a hypocrite. (Although again the funding part is less important than the zoning part)

 

[fskimospy]

Also, let’s have no money from Montana go to NYC and no money from NYC go to Montana and see how that works out for them, hahaha.

 

[vi edit]

Also, let’s have no money from Montana go to NYC and no money from NYC go to Montana and see how that works out for them, hahaha.

Mass exodus from California housing market is what helped fuel the market bubbles in Arizona, Colorado and parts of TX. People cashing out big in CA and buying up dirt cheap(relatively speaking) housing for cash above asking value in cheaper markets hurt existing residents trying to buy.

 

[soulcougher73]

Sounds like a good move. Why would you want to sell your countries land to foreigners?

 

[fskimospy]

Mass exodus from California housing market is what helped fuel the market bubbles in Arizona, Colorado and parts of TX. People cashing out big in CA and buying up dirt cheap(relatively speaking) housing for cash above asking value in cheaper markets hurt existing residents trying to buy.

That’s the pretty standard game plan I think. Make a lot of money in the rich coastal cities and then cash out and go buy a house somewhere cheap.

That works for relatively high earning people but NYC is a great example of the problem with that. Median household income for Brooklyn is somewhere around $50k and if you’re making that you’re not saving anything to move somewhere else given the cost of living here, and that cost is primarily driven by housing scarcity. That’s why we need to build radically more.

 

[Vic]

Sounds like a good move. Why would you want to sell your countries land to foreigners?

Because it limits the flow of new money into your domestic economy.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Yeah, it must be those darn foreigners keeping the homeless down instead of the unwillingness of the city and its taxpayers to provide housing for them. If only we could avoid a Chinese person buying a NYC loft then folks like @fskimospy would be willing to crack open their wallet rather than just saying "collective action problem" and waiting on a federal solution so that people in Montana could share the costs of addressing their city's problem.

wut? NIMBYism is certainly part of the problem, as are foreign investors.

Sometimes its both. In SoCal, someone brought Chinese investors by the bus load to protest building a homeless shelter near one of the communities that a lot of them are drawn to.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-homeless-asians-20180401-story.html?outputType=amp

Let that sink in. Rich immigrants fighting social services for American homeless. Looks like they learned how to navigate our culture very quickly.

 

[vi edit]

Because it limits the flow of new money into your domestic economy.

But at the cost of over inflating pricing in relation to the standard of living for those there. I mean the seller does ok as does the real estate groups. But at the expense of everyone else just trying to keep a roof over their head? Is that worth it?

 

[Indus]

wut? NIMBYism is certainly part of the problem, as are foreign investors.

Sometimes its both. In SoCal, someone brought Chinese investors by the bus load to protest building a homeless shelter near one of the communities that a lot of them are drawn to.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-homeless-asians-20180401-story.html?outputType=amp

Let that sink in. Rich immigrants fighting social services for American homeless. Looks like they learned how to navigate our culture very quickly.

Most people in general in my experience don't want homeless people next to them because what are the %'s of people who are homeless doing drugs and violence.

Even most homeless people don't stay in shelters because of fights that break out and often get people killed. That's why they'd rather sleep on the street in cardboard boxes.

It's a difficult problem to solve and the easiest thing to say is not on my block.

That said it does need a solution.. it just won't make everyone happy.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

While I would be in favor of a non-resident tax, banning foreigners from buying property is a dumb idea.

Mostly cities like San Francisco are desperately trying to find any excuse as to why their housing is so expensive other than their choice to oppose building almost any new housing.

Yeah but don't rich cities (as Starbuck indicated with NY) actually have tons of availability - it's just ridiculously inflated prices?

No one seems to give a shit about hobos in that regard.

 

[Vic]

Fun fact: the Chinese government strictly limits monetary transfers outside the country, currently ranging from about USD $15k to $50k per person per year depending on the transaction type. Because of this, Chinese citizens looking to invest internationally have to be very creative (and very cautious) about how they get their money out of China.
While you guys are worried about Chinese investors buying US property, the Chinese government is very worried about how their country is bleeding cash.

 

[Vic]

But at the cost of over inflating pricing in relation to the standard of living for those there. I mean the seller does ok as does the real estate groups. But at the expense of everyone else just trying to keep a roof over their head? Is that worth it?

I can agree that the wealth created by foreign investment in the US has been very unequal, but it is new wealth nonetheless. If we were to cut off that flow of money, like by prohibiting foreigners from buying US real estate, the overall effect would be negative. It would probably crash the California real estate market and plunge the entire country into recession.

 

[soulcougher73]

Because it limits the flow of new money into your domestic economy.

Cant say i care about that or find that important. /shrug

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah but don't rich cities (as Starbuck indicated with NY) actually have tons of availability - it's just ridiculously inflated prices?

No one seems to give a shit about hobos in that regard.

Not generally, no. There is a problem with rich people buying apartments they never live in at the very, very high end but overall occupancy is very high. NYC's vacancy rate for apartments is somewhere around 3% and that is also concentrated in the high end. The prices are inflated because people have to live somewhere and the supply is so low compared to the amount of people that want to live here that...well... rich people can afford to bid higher.

NYC needs to hugely increase its pace of construction but it's a slog as the NIMBYs make development harder and far more costly.

 

[Genx87]

Fun fact: the Chinese government strictly limits monetary transfers outside the country, currently ranging from about USD $15k to $50k per person per year depending on the transaction type. Because of this, Chinese citizens looking to invest internationally have to be very creative (and very cautious) about how they get their money out of China.
While you guys are worried about Chinese investors buying US property, the Chinese government is very worried about how their country is bleeding cash.

I was going to ask if the Chinese had lifted their restriction on foreign investment? I thought some of the reason why there are cities with nobody living within them is because the new chinese middle class cant invest in foreign markets. Thus they are forced to invest in ghost cities if they want a return on their money. It would be an interesting case study what would happen to China if they were allowed to invest in foreign markets. I suspect the ghost cities would suffer a horrible fate while the Chinese middle class would have more stable investment. And of course the rest of the world would also benefit from the influx of capital.