No it isn't. You're trying to make the argument that it makes sense to make less money so you have to pay less tax. Why would you not rent out that same unit, make money on it, pay the tax, and STILL come out ahead? It's like saying you don't want a raise at work because you have to pay additional tax.
Hmmm... I personally don't fully understand the tax implications since I don't do this, but I'm thinking it's more like saying you don't want a raise at work because it would also mean more work to get that raise and you also would have to pay additional tax.
In fact, I'm in that scenario right now. I am essentially working 110% for 115% of my original pay. The 10% is additional work I do for my workplace that isn't part of my original job description. Initially I kinda liked it because for 10% extra work, I make 15% extra money. However, after several years of this, I'm not keen on doing it anymore, because it's still 10% extra work, and that extra work is taxed at my highest tax bracket. At this point, I'd rather just have the free time. Unfortunately, it's hard to unring that bell now. My enlightened colleagues aren't interested in the extra work either despite the extra pay, so for the time being I'm stuck with it.
You would get revenue from renting out a unit, but even with a management company, it can be a major headache at times. When my friends rented out their condos, they'd get management companies to do it. The management companies would get 1 month's rent per year as payment, but my friends would still have to pay extra to get things done like painting walls, repairing/replacing appliances, cleaning/replacing carpets, etc. Also, sometimes the units were just sitting empty for a few months. And they'd still have to rent hotel rooms or guest suites when they came to the city. And there's always the risk of nightmare tenants. So in the end they just said screw it, and stopped renting them out, and just keep them for their own use.
I was actually joking. Yes, I agree, some units are Pied a terres...but some are just sitting empty waiting to be sold. Frankly, none of us have any real numbers but it wouldn't be a topic if it didn't happen. The units could sit idle for a 6 months or 2 years. I know a few units in my building that are owned and empty. You see this with new condos. While it may not make sense to you or me to buy property and leave it empty...it makes sense to some investors.
I just have a problem with someone (DearSummer) wanting real numbers for something that is very difficult to track. My "data" or evidence is anecdotal...as is yours..so where do we go from here? *paging DearSummer*
My point was that although I'm sure a few empty units are intentionally kept empty just for flipping, the number is definitely a lot lower than what a lot of popular press thinks it is. I've seen that 25% (actually 23%) number thrown around so many times, with no background. It's like the myth schizophrenia means split personality like multiple personality disorder, or the myth that we only use 10% of our brains (see movie Lucy).
I'm not an expert on Vancouver by any means, but I did know that Coal Harbour is a very popular place for wealthy Chinese to buy these pied-a-terres, although actually some of them are their primary homes. (Some don't want big detached homes, but would rather have multiple condos in multiple cities, with Vancouver as the main base.) But the other point I wanted to emphasize is that many of these wealthy Chinese aren't even "foreign", since many are actually Canadian citizens.
