Do you not think that the post sufficiently addressed this criticism? For example this point:

> "What about mortgage fraud/brampton mortgages, won't they simply do fraud like they've been doing?"

> - Interestingly, this legislation allows for an order forcing the house to be sold immediately. Unlike a fraudulent "Brampton mortgage", which creates a debt the person is likely to successfully pay and keep quiet about the fraud - this legislation creates a situation where the bank and its agents would lose out, so they have no incentive to help. Real Estate Agents similarly risk their commission being clawed back, loss of license, etc. In point of fact, if you sell a house to someone you could then report that person and walk away with the money, and refuse to pay closing costs to your real estate agent. It creates a one-sided unpredictable legal risk for which the realtor, banker, lawyer, all risk not being able to bill or recover money. It's a waste of their time.

It's a short law. Right after the section you quote is this:

"If a non-Canadian is convicted of having contravened section 4, the superior court of the province in which the residential property to which the contravention relates is situated may, on application of the Minister, order the residential property to be sold in the prescribed manner and under prescribed conditions."

Mine was a short comment, and I actually address the point you raise, but I'll recapitulate it. Namely, if one is a foreigner caught buying a Canadian residential property, one is certain to pay $10,000, but may be forced to sell it, if the Minister and provincial superior court can be bothered.

IANAL, but between the two sections we've excerpted, and the already-posted, short law, it doesn't seem particularly well-designed, except as a temporary budgetary boost to the government.

> if the Minister and provincial superior court can be bothered.

I know that for immigration and citizenship cases, officers at the border are called minister's delegates in certain contexts: they do things that the law authorizes the minister of immigration to do.

It's not like the minister has to get personally involved. It just means the ministry is in charge of referring cases to the court, so they will create and office and hire a bunch of bureaucrats to do this.

Nobody suggested that the Minister had to be personally involved. The point remains that the only certain effect of the law is that every foreign purchase will incur a $10,000 fine. If the overworked courts deign to get involved, the property might have to be sold, again!

Given the government's storied, multilateral, multi-decade unwillingness to do anything about the housing crisis (many MPs and MPPs are landlords!), I just don't see this law as anything but a $10,000 cost of doing business.

> Sure, there's some language later on which allows a province's superior court to order that the house be sold. Be sold. What a punishment! And unless it's some massive televised case, the superior courts don't have time for that.

1. I sincerely doubt that the courts will let the law remain unenforced. Let's agree to disagree on that.

2. The reddit post goes into details (which I agree with) about how this law changes the incentives, so real estate agents, sellers, lawyers, etc. are unlikely to want to aid foreign nationals in circumventing it.

3. Selling is a punishment. Everyone gets fined, the house is sold, and the seller cannot get any of the upside from the sale. At best, they break even (minus the fine).

> Marginal note:Paragraph (1)(c)

> (2) Regulations made under paragraph (1)(c) must provide that no non-Canadian receive from the proceeds that results from a sale of a residential property ordered under section 7 more than the purchase price they paid for the residential property.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-25.2/page-1.html

> 1. I sincerely doubt that the courts will let the law remain unenforced. Let's agree to disagree on that.

Then you don't know Canadian enforcement very well. I've been a Canadian for 35 years and I can say with conviction that most laws around real estate or commercial corruption aren't enforced.

Almost all my Chinese friends who aren't already wealthy let overseas "investors" use their accounts to transfer 50k/y. They open an account, and allow a lawyer/banker to do transfers in their behalf. Then the lawyer transfers 50k in it, transfers it to their client, leaves 2-3k. There have been dozens of lawyers and accountants that were caught aiding in this scheme, but the fine is around 70k, so it's just the cost of doing business.

Depends on the province, but in Ontario, only a lawyer can convey property in the land registry. It might be difficult for a foreigner to buy in that case.

"Unenforced"? No, no -- the $10,000 fine will be collected. It's just the forced sale that might not occur if the superior courts are busy (and they are!), and if it does occur, the foreign nearly-buyer will be out $10,000. There's no need to encourage baseless Reddit speculation, just read the law itself -- I've linked it, you've linked it -- and reason about how the government will act based on the last 30 years of government (in)action.

Again, I don't agree with your cynicism. But even if you are cynical, consider this: if the government appears soft on real estate prices, they will lose the next election (which may be as early as this spring) to Pierre Poilievre.

...that's a really good point, actually. I am in fact so cynical that in light of this point, I think I'm going to go around loudly praising this bold new law from the wise Liberals.