MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Policy Forum: Foreign Buyers and Local Housing Affordability—Indications from Vancouver

2025· article· en· W4415151347 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Thomas Davidoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Tax Journal/Revue fiscale canadienne · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasualPoint (geometry)Foreign policyHouse pricePublic housing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With condominium construction stalled despite severe housing affordability problems in Vancouver and particularly Toronto, attention has turned to the question of whether foreign buyer taxes may have overshot the goal of making homes more affordable for domestic residents, to the point of reducing affordability by making condo development unprofitable. In this article, a model that simplifies the foundational analysis in Favilukis and Van Nieuwerburgh (2021) shows that foreign buyers help or hinder domestic affordability depending on whether housing supply is elastic or inelastic, whether foreign buyers overpay for units in the same buildings as locals, how intense foreign demand is, and whether foreign buyers occupy units or instead rent them to locals or flip pre-construction contracts near building completion. Casual data analysis and back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that, in the absence of empty homes taxes, foreign buyers in Greater Vancouver and Toronto likely hindered local affordability, but that, in the presence of empty homes taxes, foreign buyer bans or taxes may worsen affordability for locals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Tax Journal/Revue fiscale canadienne→Same topicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism→French-language works237,207→