CIBC Deputy Chief Economist Benjamin Tal was recently interviewed by Larysa Harapyn of the Financial Post about the state of the housing market in the Greater Toronto Area. The message he delivers is pretty clear: "If you think that Toronto is unaffordable now, you wait." The long-term fundamentals in this market remain strong. Demand is outstripping supply and will likely continue to do so, which is why Tal also stresses the importance of delivering more purpose-built rental housing. If you can't see the video above, click here. (And with that, I think it's time to switch topics for tomorrow's post. That's enough Toronto housing for one week.)

At a high level there are two components to the value of a house. There's the value of the land and there's the value of all the improvements. That is, the bricks, wood, and other stuff that form the actual house. When a media outlet runs a sensational headline about some shack in Toronto selling for, oh I don't know, a million dollars, what it actually means is that the land in this particular area was just valued by somebody at this number. In fact, if the property is very clearly a "knock down" the improvements sitting on the land become a liability/cost rather than anything of value. Because whoever buys the land will almost certainly need to remove the improvements before they can build whatever it is they want to build.

This distinction between land and improvements is a valuable one for many reasons. Here's one example. In cases where the improvements aren't some shack, you may be faced with a scenario where a property can be valued in two different ways. You can value it based on the development potential of the underlying land or you can value it based on the income (either in-place or potential) that the improvements are generating, or could be generating with some hard work on your part. If the development value is greater than the value of the improvements, then there will be pressure to redevelop. Conversely, if the opposite is true, it is likely that not much will happen other than maybe capital expenditures applied to the existing building(s).

Of course, you could also run into a scenario where there's little development potential and there's zero ability to invest in the existing improvements, either because the market rents are too low in the area or because they're capped and/or controlled in some way. In this scenario, it's likely that not much will happen other than the normal and expected depreciation of the improvements. Maybe one day the development/investment math will work. But in the interim, you probably won't be seeing any of those sensational media headlines.

Photo by Andre Gaulin on Unsplash

Shaun Hildebrand (Urbanation) and Benjamin Tal (CIBC) published a report today called, “A Window Into the World of Condo Investors.” In it they revealed that last year (2017 data) no less than 48% of the Greater Toronto Area’s newly completed condo units were closed on by “rental investors.” In other words, almost half of the units became new rental supply.

This stat was not surprisingly turned into clickbait-y type headlines like, “Half of Toronto condos bought last year were by investors”; whereas an alternate headline might read: “Half of Toronto condos completed last year became new rental housing.” Not as jarring, I know.

In any event, there are a bunch of other interesting stats in the reports. Here are a few of them:

- 80% of all new home sales in the GTA last year were condo.

- Average resale condo prices (per square foot) increased by 26% last year and rents grew by 9%.

- Over 20% of condo investors purchased their property with no mortgage.

- Average down payment made by investors was 20%; non-investors were closer to 15%, likely because of mortgage insurance and other factors.

- Out of the condo investors who took possession in 2017 with a mortgage, no less than 44% are in a negative cash flow position – meaning their rental income isn’t covering their carrying costs. 

- The returns, which the report calls exceptional, have been coming in the form of price appreciation.

- As a stress test for the market – what if all these negative cash flow investors suddenly sold their condos? – the report also estimates that if you took all of the rental investors who closed in 2017 with a mortgage and who are in a negative cash flow position greater than $500 per month, it would represent only 3.4% of the total annual supply of condos (both new and resale product).

If you would like to check out the full report, you can do that over here.

Photo by Scott Webb on Unsplash