logo
GST relief on new homes could save 1st-time buyers up to $240 on mortgages: report

GST relief on new homes could save 1st-time buyers up to $240 on mortgages: report

CTV News21 hours ago

A new analysis says first-time Canadian homebuyers could save up to $240 on their mortgage payments through Ottawa's plan to waive the sales tax on new builds. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez)
OTTAWA — The Liberal plan to give first-time homebuyers a tax break on a newly built home could have substantial impacts on housing affordability — with a few caveats — a new analysis finds.
The Liberal government introduced legislation on June 5 to eliminate the GST portion from new home sales of up to $1 million for first-time buyers, which works out to as much as $50,000 off the cost of a new build or a substantially renovated unit.
For homes sold above $1 million, the GST relief is phased out as the price tag nears $1.5 million.
Desjardins Economics said in a report released Monday that first-time Canadian homebuyers could save up to $240 on their monthly mortgage payments if they were to buy a new home with an all-in, tax-included price of $1 million. The required down payment would also be somewhat smaller.
Some developers charge the sales tax upfront, so it's not rolled into the mortgage principal at the time of purchase.
'For these homes, eliminating the GST will help prospective buyers reduce upfront closing costs, helping them get their foot in the door sooner,' said the report, authored by Desjardins economist Kari Norman.
She argued the impact on housing affordability will be 'particularly strong' for buyers in Canada's more expensive markets, like Toronto and Vancouver, where homes are routinely priced above the $1-million mark.
The new policy takes a big step beyond the existing New Housing Rebate, which is open to more than just first-time buyers but has long been capped at homes priced up to $450,000.
Norman estimates that nearly 85 per cent of new builds in Canada would quality for the full $50,000 GST relief in the new proposal.
Roughly 92 per cent of new builds in Toronto are expected to qualify for full or partial tax relief for homes priced up to $1.5 million. Only 75 per cent of new units in Vancouver would qualify, however, as many top out of the qualifying price range.
Desjardins recommends that the new policy index the price of qualifying homes to inflation to avoid future erosions in affordability.
The federal government predicts the GST rebate will cost about $3.9 billion over five years, while the parliamentary budget officer estimates the price tag is closer to $2 billion over the same time frame.
Desjardins said the discrepancy between the figures could indicate the federal government anticipates more new buyers taking advantage of the rebate, and a bigger boom in homebuying and construction as a result.
It's possible that increased demand spurred by the policy also leads to a surge in new building in Canada, the report said.
The rebate also comes at a time when the Canadian construction industry faces serious obstacles to getting shovels in the ground: high financing and construction costs, regulatory delays, an aging workforce and uncertainty among buyers and builders tied to Canada's trade war with the United States.
The report also warns that some developers, foreseeing increased buying power, could raise their own costs for materials and labour in response to the policy, which would undermine any gains in affordability.
Higher demand for housing tied to the GST break could, in the near-term, push up home prices if not coupled with other efforts to boost supply and the pace of construction, the report said.
This might be the ideal time to introduce a policy that stokes demand for new builds, however, as Desjardins noted a particularly soft condo market in cities such as Toronto could benefit from an increase in buyer appetite.
Parliament has yet to pass the legislation, which would apply to homes bought between May 27 through to 2031. Construction on qualifying homes would need to start before 2031 and finish by 2036.
The measure, one of a suite of proposals included in the Liberal platform during the spring federal election, is packaged in the same legislation as the promised income tax cut, which is set to take effect July 1.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 9, 2025.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Canada, China, Mexico, Japan and EU urge Trump not to impose new airplane tariffs
Canada, China, Mexico, Japan and EU urge Trump not to impose new airplane tariffs

Globe and Mail

timean hour ago

  • Globe and Mail

Canada, China, Mexico, Japan and EU urge Trump not to impose new airplane tariffs

Five nations and the European Union, as well as airlines and aerospace firms worldwide, urged the Trump administration not to impose new national security tariffs on imported commercial planes and parts, documents released on Tuesday showed. Airlines and planemakers have been lobbying President Donald Trump to restore the tariff-free regime under the 1979 Civil Aircraft Agreement that has yielded an annual trade surplus of US$75 billion for the U.S. industry. The documents made public by the U.S. Commerce Department bared concerns over the fallout of possible new tariffs expressed by companies as well as nations such as Canada, China, Japan, Mexico and Switzerland, besides the European Union. 'As reliable trading partners, the European Union and United States should strengthen their trade regarding aircraft and aircraft parts, rather than hinder it by imposing trade restrictions,' the EU wrote. It would consider its options 'to ensure a level playing field,' it added. Trump has already imposed tariffs of 10 per cent on nearly all airplane and parts imports. 'No country or region should attempt to support the development of its domestic aircraft manufacturing industry by suppressing foreign competitors,' the Chinese government wrote. Separately, U.S. planemaker Boeing cited a recent trade deal unveiled in May with Britain that ensures tariff-free treatment for airplanes and parts. Opinion: Carney was right to not retaliate against Trump's latest tariffs 'The United States should ensure duty-free treatment for commercial aircraft and their parts in any negotiated trade agreement, similar to its efforts with the United Kingdom,' Boeing told the Commerce Department in a filing. Mexico said in 2024 it exported US$1.45 billion in aircraft parts, just a tenth of the total, to the United States. The EU said it took U.S. exports of aircraft worth roughly US$12 billion, while exporting about $8 billion of aircraft to the U.S. In early May, the Commerce Department launched a 'Section 232' national security investigation into imports of commercial aircraft, jet engines and parts that could form the basis for even higher tariffs on such imports. Last week, Delta Air Lines and major trade groups warned of tariffs' impact on ticket prices, aviation safety and supply chains. 'Current U.S. tariffs on aviation are putting domestic production of commercial aircraft at risk,' Airbus Americas CEO Robin Hayes said in a filing. 'It is not realistic or sensible today to create a 100 per cent domestic supply chain in any country.' Boeing said it had been increasing U.S. content in its airplanes over the last decade and its newest airplanes, the 737 MAX 10 and 777X, would have 'more than 88 per cent domestically-sourced content.' The United Auto Workers union, which represents 10,000 aerospace workers, said it supports tariffs and domestic production quotas, adding that U.S. aerospace employment has fallen to 510,000 in 2024 from 850,000 in 1990. 'To safeguard the entire aerospace supply chain across the commercial and defense sectors, comprehensive tariffs and production quotas on several products are needed,' it said. JetBlue Airways opposed new tariffs, however, saying, 'Trade policy should reinforce, not destabilize, the proven systems that keep our aircraft flying safely and affordably.'

Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds
Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds

Vancouver Sun

time2 hours ago

  • Vancouver Sun

Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. The U.S. Court of International Trade last month said Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. The ruling from the three-judge panel at the New York-based federal court in May said 'any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.' It said 'the challenged tariff orders will be vacated,' representing a nationwide injunction against any further imposition of the duties. Trump administration quickly was granted an emergency motion, essentially freezing the decision by the trade court that blocked the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs. The appeals court upheld that stay but noted the need for an expedited hearing, saying 'these cases present issues of exceptional importance warranting expedited en banc consideration.' A proposed schedule says arguments are expected in court by July 31. That means that countries will continue to be hit by those duties, for now. Stock markets have been in turmoil and supply chains have been upended as Trump used unprecedented presidential power to enact his tariffs. Up until Trump's return to the White House, IEEPA had never been used by a president to impose tariffs. Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country saying America's trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. The president walked back the most devastating duties a few hours later but left a 10 per cent universal tariff in place for most countries. Trump said the 90-day pause would give countries time to negotiate a deal. The president said if countries didn't comply he would simply set tariff rates himself. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this' and called the lower court's decision 'judicial overreach.' The appeal ruling will consider two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One included five American small businesses against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other stemmed from 12 states arguing against both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. At least seven lawsuits are challenging the tariffs. Lawyers for the businesses say IEEPA does not mention tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. They say Trump is misusing the statute. Lawyers for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont argued that tariffs make U.S. trade policy dependent on Trump's whims. Thirty-three senators also filed an amicus brief — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — in the case, saying the duties would cause harm to small- and medium-sized businesses while also grabbing powers that should be assigned to Congress. 'Small businesses do not have cash-on-hand or capital reserves to pay the increased tariffs, nor can they quickly adapt to them by modifying supply chains,' it said. 'If they cannot pass on the tariff costs to consumers — which would create additional harms for… constituents — many face letting employees go or filing for bankruptcy. Even a few weeks of additional tariffs means small businesses will suffer irreparable harm.' Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store