Canada’s housing affordability crisis is not new, but a new national initiative, Build Canada Homes, aims to tackle it head-on. Set to launch later in 2025, the program is part of a larger federal strategy to double the country’s annual housing output to 500,000 homes per year. The government plans to act as a developer itself, building homes directly on public lands, financing affordable projects at below-market rates, and fast-tracking modular and mass-timber construction across Canada.
This represents a major departure from Canada’s traditional reliance on municipal and provincial governments, and the private sector, to build housing. Instead, the federal government is stepping back into the role of housing builder, a position it hasn’t meaningfully occupied since the postwar period.
But while the ambition is bold, the execution will be everything. There are reasons to be optimistic, and many reasons to be cautious.
Why This Program Matters
One of the most pressing issues in the Canadian housing market over the last few years has been affordable supply. For years, demand has far outstripped new construction, particularly in population-dense cities like Toronto. However, interest rate hikes have dramatically cooled price growth and substantially increased temporary supply. But this is not a long-term solution and doesn’t solve the underlying problem: too few homes, especially in the affordable segment.
Build Canada Homes attempts to address that gap directly. If successful, it could not only increase housing availability but also improve affordability for first-time buyers, renters, and low- to middle-income families. It could also help stabilize the market by providing long-term inventory growth—something the private sector alone has struggled to achieve.
Potential Benefits for Buyers
One of the clearest advantages for homebuyers is increased access. More inventory means less competition and fewer bidding wars, particularly in overheated markets like Toronto, Kitchener-Waterloo, and Ottawa. That could put downward pressure on entry-level home prices.
Additionally, the proposed GST rebate on new homes up to $1 million—if enacted—could significantly reduce upfront costs for first-time buyers. This would make new construction
a far more viable option, especially in urban areas where older resale homes often require extensive renovation.
There’s also promise in the program’s use of modular and prefabricated construction methods, which could reduce build times and improve environmental performance. These homes can often be delivered more quickly and at a lower cost than traditional builds, offering a pathway to affordability without sacrificing quality.
Legal and Practical Risks to Consider
Despite its potential, the Build Canada Homes initiative is not without significant risks—particularly for buyers who may rush into the market without understanding the fine print.
First, there’s the issue of implementation lag. While the program may be announced in 2025, large-scale development takes time. Land assembly, zoning approvals, and servicing infrastructure are complex, often jurisdictional matters. Buyers expecting immediate relief could be disappointed if projects are delayed by red tape, intergovernmental conflict, or supply chain bottlenecks.
Second, there’s a question of market distortion. Injecting billions of dollars in subsidized financing into the housing sector could unintentionally distort pricing, crowd out private builders, or shift risk onto taxpayers if government-backed developments underperform or face financial shortfalls.
Third, buyers should be cautious about contractual terms in new-build projects. Builders working under public-private partnerships may impose unusual clauses related to construction timelines, cancellation rights, or HST/GST liability. Without legal review, buyers could find themselves on the wrong side of a one-sided agreement—especially if government policy shifts mid-project.
Finally, there is the risk of political and policy volatility. Major housing initiatives often change shape—or stall entirely—depending on economic conditions or electoral cycles. Buyers making decisions based on proposed rebates or eligibility criteria should ensure flexibility in their contracts and consider legal safeguards such as subject-to-clause protections.
What Buyers Should Do Now
For Ontario buyers, Build Canada Homes could unlock new opportunities—if approached with strategic foresight. Now is the time to prepare. Understand your rights and responsibilities in pre-construction purchases. Stay informed about changes to HST treatment on new homes. And most importantly, work with a legal advisor who can guide you through the complexities of new government-backed developments.
At Rabideau Law, we help clients navigate Ontario’s real estate landscape with clarity and precision. Whether you’re planning to purchase a new-build, considering an assignment sale, or exploring whether you qualify for an HST rebate, we provide the legal insight to ensure you close with confidence.
The Build Canada Homes initiative marks a rare moment of federal re-engagement in housing development. But like any major program, it brings risks as well as opportunities. The buyers who benefit most will be those who take a clear-eyed, informed approach to the changes ahead.
519.957.1001
info@rabideaulaw.ca
www.rabideaulaw.ca
Real estate closings across Ontario. Virtual services available.
Mortgage Defaults and Enforcement in Ontario: What You Need to Know About Power of Sale, Foreclosure, and Credit Impact
/in Blog, Real Estate /by Geoff RabideauThe Early Signs: Late or Skipped Payments
Missing a mortgage payment doesn’t automatically trigger enforcement, but it does start a chain of potential consequences:
Impact on Credit: The first missed payment can drop a borrower’s credit score by 80–100 points. These notations (e.g., M2 or R2) remain on a borrower’s credit report for six years.
Default & Demand
When defaults continue, lenders will issue a Demand Letter, often citing additional defaults such as:
Power of Sale vs. Foreclosure: What’s the Difference?
Power of Sale: Lender sells the property, Former owner may get surplus proceeds, Typical duration: 6 months, Preferred where equity exists.
Foreclosure: Lender takes title to the property, Owner loses all equity, Can take over a year, Courts reluctant unless no equity.
Most lenders opt for Power of Sale, as it’s quicker and allows the borrower a chance to redeem the mortgage.
Step-by-Step: The Power of Sale Process
Credit Consequences of Enforcement
A court judgment will impact the borrower’s credit for:
If a lender suffers a shortfall after the sale, they may pursue deficiency enforcement against other borrower assets (e.g., bank accounts).
Distributing Sale Proceeds
Funds are applied in this order:
1. Property tax and condo arrears
2. Sale and legal costs
3. Outstanding mortgage balance
4. Other creditors
5. Borrower (if anything remains)
Don’t forget about super priorities like HST and source deductions—they can trump secured creditors.
Buying Under Power of Sale: Know the Risks
Buyers often assume these sales are “bargain deals”—they aren’t.
Liens & Tenancies: What Buyers and Brokers Must Know
Commercial Tenancies: A registered lease may bind the mortgagee. If not registered, the mortgagee usually has priority.
Borrower Redemption: It’s Not Over Until Closing
Even if an Agreement of Purchase and Sale is signed, borrowers retain a right to redeem the mortgage until the day before closing, per the Hornstein v. Gardena Properties Inc. ruling. Lenders typically include clauses allowing them to cancel the sale if the borrower pays out.
Final Note: Fixed-Fee Enforcement Matters
At Rabideau Law, we’ve handled thousands of real estate closings and enforcement matters. We offer fixed-fee pricing, evening/weekend signings, and proactive support for brokers, lenders, and borrowers. Unlike most firms, we don’t charge hidden disbursements—just transparent, reliable service.
Have Questions About Enforcement?
Whether you’re a borrower under pressure, a broker trying to salvage a deal, or a lender facing default, our experienced team is here to help.
Visit: www.rabideaulaw.ca
Contact: info@rabideaulaw.ca
Call: 519-957-1001
Mutual Fund Trusts: A Powerful Tool for Tax-Efficient Investing in Canada
/in Corporate /by Geoff RabideauPrivate equity investors and fund managers alike are increasingly turning to Mutual Fund Trusts (MFTs) as part of their investment structuring strategy — and for good reason. These trusts offer a unique blend of flexibility, tax efficiency, and investor appeal, making them an ideal tool to pool capital while minimizing tax drag.
What Is a Mutual Fund Trust?
A Mutual Fund Trust is a flow-through investment vehicle recognized under the Income Tax Act (Canada). Unlike a corporation, an MFT does not pay income tax at the trust level if it distributes all of its income to unitholders annually. Instead, the tax burden flows through to the individual investors, enabling deferral or efficient treatment of gains depending on their own tax profile.
Why Use an MFT in Private Equity?
Typical Use Cases
Regulatory Considerations
To qualify as a Mutual Fund Trust under the ITA, certain conditions must be met:
At Rabideau Law, we regularly advise clients on how to structure their investment vehicles using MFTs, whether as standalone products or paired with Limited Partnerships for added flexibility.
Want to set up a Mutual Fund Trust or learn how it can fit within your investment structure?
Contact Rabideau Law to get started with a custom legal strategy that meets your fundraising goals while staying tax-smart.
What a Homeowner Must Do Before Using Force in Canada
/in Blog, Real Estate, Uncategorized /by Geoff RabideauUnlike the U.S. castle doctrine, Canadian law does not presume that a homeowner can automatically use force when an intruder enters. Instead, the Criminal Code (ss. 34–35) requires that several conditions be met.
1. Assess the Situation
The homeowner must first believe, on reasonable grounds, that they or another person are being threatened with force, or that property is at risk of being damaged or stolen. Mere trespass, without threat, does not usually justify force.
2. Attempt to Avoid Violence (If Possible)
While Canada does not impose a strict “duty to retreat,” courts expect homeowners to consider non-violent options first:
If a homeowner rushes to violence without trying other measures, the use of force may later be found unreasonable.
3. Use Only the Force Necessary
If force becomes unavoidable, the law requires it to be reasonable and proportionate to the threat.
4. Deadly Force = Last Resort
Lethal force may only be used if the homeowner reasonably believes it is the only way to stop a threat of death or grievous bodily harm. Protecting property alone (like a vehicle, electronics, or cash) never justifies deadly force under Canadian law.
Judicial Considerations
When courts evaluate a homeowner’s actions, they look at factors such as:
These checks mean Canadian law emphasizes restraint and necessity, not a blanket right to defend property at all costs.
Canadian Case Examples
Canadian courts have already faced difficult decisions in homeowner defence cases. Here are two examples that illustrate the limits of the law:
Example 1 – Homeowner Found Not Guilty
In R. v. Khill, 2021 SCC 37, a Hamilton-area homeowner was charged with second-degree murder after fatally shooting an intruder who was trying to break into his truck at night. The Supreme Court of Canada ultimately ordered a new trial but emphasized that self-defence is highly context-dependent: the jury must consider what the accused reasonably perceived at the time. While Khill was not outright acquitted at the SCC level, the case reflects how a homeowner can successfully argue they acted in defence of themselves and their property when they reasonably feared for their safety.
Example 2 – Homeowner Found Guilty
In R. v. Deegan, 2007 ONCA 81, an Ontario man shot and killed an unarmed intruder who had broken into his home. The intruder posed no immediate lethal threat, and the court found the homeowner’s response to be disproportionate. Deegan was convicted of manslaughter, showing that Canadian courts draw a firm line: force may be used to defend property, but not deadly force unless there is a clear threat to life.
Conclusion
Canadian law makes it clear: defending your home is not the same as having an automatic right to use force. Before acting, homeowners must assess the situation, consider non-violent alternatives, and ensure that any force used is both necessary and proportionate. Deadly force remains an absolute last resort, available only when life or serious safety is immediately at risk.
Cases like Khill and Deegan highlight the fine line Canadian courts draw between justifiable self-defence and criminal liability. For property owners, the lesson is simple: while your home may feel like your castle, the law requires restraint and responsibility before force can be used.
At Rabideau Law, we help homeowners, landlords, and investors understand not only their real estate rights, but also how those rights interact with broader Canadian laws. If you have questions about protecting your property and your interests, our team is here to guide you.
The “Stand on Guard Doctrine”: Could Canada Adopt a Castle Doctrine for Real Estate?
/in Blog, News, Real Estate, Wills & Estates /by Geoff RabideauAt Rabideau Law, we spend much of our time helping clients secure and protect their real estate. For many Canadians, their home is their most important asset—financially and emotionally. But when it comes to defending that property from intruders, Canadian law takes a very different approach than the United States.
In the U.S., most states have adopted the castle doctrine, which presumes that a homeowner is justified in using force, even deadly force, against an unlawful intruder. Canada does not have such a law. But what if Canada introduced its own version, a “Stand on Guard Doctrine”? What would need to change, and how might it affect real estate ownership?
How Canadian Law Currently Treats Defence of Property
Under the Criminal Code of Canada (s.35), a person may use reasonable force to prevent someone from entering or trespassing on their property. However:
From a real estate law perspective, this means that property rights are not absolute. Ownership gives you the right to exclude others, but not to use unlimited force to do so.
For more information on what a homeowner must do before using force in Canada check out this blog.
What a “Stand on Guard Doctrine” Would Look Like
If Canada adopted a Stand on Guard Doctrine, the legal landscape for real estate owners would change significantly. Such a doctrine would:
This would give homeowners stronger legal tools to defend not just their families, but their real estate investment itself.
The Laws That Would Need to Change
For Canada to adopt a Stand on Guard Doctrine, Parliament would need to amend the Criminal Code:
Create a statutory presumption that force—including deadly force—is justified against intruders inside a dwelling.
Clarify that proportionality does not apply in the same way when a homeowner is defending their residence.
Enact rules preventing trespassers or their families from suing property owners in civil court for injuries sustained during an unlawful entry.
Decide whether the doctrine would apply only to private dwellings, or also to cottages, farmland, rental properties, or even commercial real estate.
Real Estate Implications
For homeowners and investors, a Stand on Guard Doctrine would:
In other words, it wouldn’t just be a criminal law change—it would ripple across Canada’s real estate system
Conclusion
Canada does not currently have a castle doctrine. Any Canadian equivalent, the Stand on Guard Doctrine, would require rewriting our self-defence and property-defence laws. For now, Canadians can defend their homes, but only within the framework of reasonable, proportional force.
As real estate lawyers, we often remind clients that owning property in Canada means balancing strong property rights with equally strong legal limits. Until Parliament changes the law, Canadians should remember that while their home may feel like a castle, the law does not yet treat it that way.
Why the LP/GP Structure Is the Gold Standard in Private Equity
/in Corporate /by Geoff RabideauWhen it comes to launching a private investment fund, one structure stands out: the Limited Partnership (LP) with a General Partner (GP). It’s flexible, investor-friendly, and — when done right — highly tax efficient.
At Rabideau Law, we help clients build these structures from the ground up to raise capital, protect the general partner, and stay compliant with Canadian tax and securities law.
What Is an LP/GP Structure?
A Limited Partnership consists of two types of parties:
Their liability is limited to their investment.
The GP is often set up as a corporation to shield personal liability — something we strongly recommend and assist with at Rabideau Law.
How It Works (Simplified Flow):
This setup allows for:
Why Investors Prefer It
Why the GP Matters
The GP plays a critical legal and operational role. It must:
Rabideau Law regularly drafts LP Agreements that reflect your deal terms while ensuring the GP is protected.
Common Use Cases for LP/GP Structures
Ready to Start? We’re Your Legal Partner.
Whether you’re launching your first fund or expanding an existing one, Rabideau Law provides:
Book your strategy call today. Build it right, from the ground up.
What Is Private Equity, and Why Is It Booming in Canada?
/in Corporate /by Geoff RabideauPrivate equity isn’t just a buzzword thrown around on Bay Street — it’s a powerful investment model that’s reshaping how Canadians build wealth, fund businesses, and diversify portfolios.
At Rabideau Law, we help clients cut through the complexity and launch investment structures designed for long-term success. Whether you’re an entrepreneur raising capital or an investor seeking returns beyond the stock market, understanding private equity is the first step.
What Is Private Equity?
Private equity refers to capital investments made directly into private companies — companies that are not publicly traded on a stock exchange. Investors provide funds in exchange for ownership, often through structured vehicles like limited partnerships (LPs) or mutual fund trusts (MFTs).
These investments are typically:
Why Is Private Equity Booming in Canada?
1. Low Interest Rates & Market Volatility
Traditional investments (like bonds or index funds) haven’t been yielding high returns. Private equity offers a compelling alternative — one where investors have more control and upside.
2. Tax-Efficient Structures
Canadian law supports tax-efficient entities like LPs and MFTs. Investors can defer taxes or reduce exposure through customized structures — something we regularly advise on at Rabideau Law.
3. Innovation & Startups
Canada’s startup ecosystem is thriving. From tech to real estate, private equity is fueling the next generation of growth.
4. Institutional Momentum
Pension funds, family offices, and HNWIs are allocating more to private equity than ever before. This trend is trickling down to emerging fund managers and experienced entrepreneurs alike.
How Can You Participate?
To get involved, you need more than capital — you need the right legal structure to protect your interests, attract investors, and stay compliant with tax and securities laws.
The most popular structure? The LP/GP model — which we’ll explore in detail in our next blog.
How Rabideau Law Can Help
We’ve helped clients across Canada structure:
Let us help you build the foundation — from setting up the GP to drafting your Limited Partnership Agreement to registering your Mutual Fund Trust with CRA.
Book a consultation today. Let’s turn your vision into a fund.
Can You Buy a Home in Ontario After Separation But Before Divorce Is Finalized?
/in Blog, Family Law, Real Estate /by Geoff RabideauSeparation marks a major transition, not just emotionally, but also financially and legally. One of the most common questions we receive is whether someone can buy a new home in Ontario after separation but before a divorce is finalized, especially when no separation agreement has been signed.
The short answer is yes. Yes, you can legally buy a home after separation. But the long answer is that you need to proceed with caution. Without proper planning, you could face complications with mortgage approval, property division, or even tax exposure down the road.
Can You Buy a Home Without a Separation Agreement?
Under Ontario law, there’s no legal restriction preventing someone from purchasing a new home after separation, even if the divorce is not yet finalized or a separation agreement hasn’t been signed. However, banks and mortgage lenders often require a signed separation agreement to approve financing. This is because lenders want to understand your ongoing financial obligations, such as spousal or child support, as well as how existing property (like the matrimonial home) is being dealt with.
Why the Separation Date Matters
In Ontario, the division of property is governed by the Family Law Act. The value of each spouse’s net family property is calculated as of the date of separation. Any asset acquired after this date is generally not subject to division. However, if there’s no formal agreement, disputes about the actual separation date can arise, putting your newly purchased property at risk of being included in the division of assets. See: Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3 – https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90f03
Can You Be Added to a New Partner’s Property While Separated?
It’s not uncommon for someone who is separated to move in with a new partner and consider being added to their property title. While this may seem like a fresh start, it carries potential legal and financial risks.
If you’re added to your partner’s title before your divorce is finalized and without a separation agreement in place, your ownership interest in the new property could be included in the equalization process, especially if your ex-spouse disputes the separation date.
There’s also the risk that your ex-spouse could allege that joint marital funds were used to support expenses or renovations on the new property, potentially triggering a resulting or constructive trust claim.
To protect both parties, we strongly recommend executing a cohabitation agreement before being added to a partner’s title. This agreement should outline your respective ownership interests and financial obligations, which helps clarify intent and prevent future disputes.
Capital Gains Tax Implications When You Own Two Homes
If you purchase a new home while still owning the former matrimonial home, you may unintentionally trigger a future capital gains tax. This is because the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) allows only one property per family unit to be designated as a principal residence for each tax year. See: https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/personal-income/line-12700-capital-gains/principal-residence.html
However, there is a helpful transition rule often referred to as the ‘plus one rule.’ This rule allows a taxpayer to treat both the old and new properties as eligible for the principal residence exemption in the same year, but only if, one home is sold and another is acquired in that same calendar year. For example, if you sell your previous home in 2025 and purchase a new one that same year, the CRA allows you to designate the sold property as your principal residence for all the years it was owned, including 2025, even though you also lived in the newly acquired home during that year. This essentially gives you one tax year where both homes qualify for the exemption, avoiding partial capital gains exposure during the transition.
Important caveats:
Misunderstanding this rule could result in unexpected tax liability. Always consult with a tax advisor to correctly report the sale and strategically plan your principal residence designations. Source: CRA Principal Residence Exemption – https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/personal-income/line-12700-capital-gains/principal-residence.html
Practical Considerations Before Buying a Home Post-Separation
Final Thoughts
Yes, you can legally buy a home in Ontario after separating from your spouse, but without a finalized divorce or a signed separation agreement, you must be extremely careful. Issues related to mortgage qualification, property division, and tax exposure can all complicate what should be a fresh start. As a real estate lawyer, I regularly assist clients navigating the overlap between separation and property acquisition. If you are considering buying a home or being added to someone else’s title while separated, we can help ensure your interests are protected and structured properly.
Contact Rabideau Law today to book a consultation.
Supporting GST Reform: What Proposed Changes to the New Home Rebate Could Mean for Ontario Buyers
/in Blog, News, Real Estate /by Geoff RabideauAs housing affordability continues to dominate national headlines, one proposed federal measure could offer immediate relief for many homebuyers: a full GST rebate on newly built homes priced up to $1 million. If enacted, this would represent a major update to Canada’s long-standing Goods and Services Tax (GST) housing rebate rules under the Excise Tax Act, and could mean thousands in direct savings for Ontario buyers.
At Rabideau Law, we support this potential reform. A streamlined, expanded rebate would directly reduce closing costs and promote access to more affordable, newly built homes, especially in markets like the Greater Toronto Area, where the average cost of a new-build often disqualifies buyers from receiving the full rebate under current rules.
We also believe the Province of Ontario should follow suit. The provincial portion of the HST New Housing Rebate, which currently uses similar price thresholds, should be updated in tandem to reflect today’s pricing realities. Without provincial alignment, buyers could still face substantial closing costs even if the federal portion is modernized.
Current Law: How the GST New Housing Rebate Works
Under the Excise Tax Act, RSC 1985, c E-15, purchasers of a newly constructed or substantially renovated home may be eligible for a GST New Housing Rebate under section 254. The rebate refunds a portion of the 5% federal GST paid on the purchase of:
To qualify, the home must be used as the primary place of residence by the purchaser or a close relative.
Under current law:
The provincial portion of the HST rebate in Ontario follows a similar structure, offering a 75% rebate of the Ontario portion of the HST (up to $24,000) but capping eligibility at $350,000 with a sliding scale up to $450,000, beyond which the provincial rebate is eliminated entirely.
How Much Could Buyers Save?
Let’s compare potential scenarios for a buyer purchasing a new-build home at $749,000:
Under Current Rules:
Under Proposed Federal Reform:
If the provincial government matched this structure:
Total savings if both levels align: potentially over $37,000 on a $749,000 purchase—an amount that could cover legal fees, land transfer tax, and closing adjustments entirely.
Why the Current Rules Are Outdated
The existing thresholds were introduced in an era when $450,000 could buy a fully detached home. In 2024, the average price of a new home in Ontario, particularly in major cities like Toronto, Kitchener-Waterloo, or Ottawa, often exceeds $800,000. Even townhouses and starter condos now fall outside the rebate range, effectively excluding the very buyers these rebates were designed to support.
Without an update, the HST system penalizes affordability: new homes come with a full 13% HST burden, while resale homes are exempt. This discourages new development and disproportionately affects first-time buyers who are looking at newly built entry-level housing.
Rabideau Law’s Position
We fully support the proposed federal reform to extend the GST New Housing Rebate to homes priced up to $1 million. It reflects a much-needed modernization of the Excise Tax Act and would bring the rebate system in line with today’s housing market.
We also call on the Province of Ontario to update the provincial rebate structure to match the proposed federal changes. Without provincial alignment, buyers will still face significant closing costs and financial uncertainty, even under a revised federal framework.
What Buyers Should Know
If these changes are adopted, buyers of homes of up to $1 million will benefit from:
But until changes are formally passed and proclaimed, buyers must structure agreements carefully. At Rabideau Law, we review builder contracts to ensure buyers are protected regardless of whether the rebate changes move forward.
Buying Pre-Construction? Let’s Talk Strategy
We offer:
info@rabideaulaw.ca | www.rabideaulaw.ca | 519.957.1001
Will Build Canada Homes Be Any Different?
/in Blog, News, Real Estate /by Geoff RabideauThe new Build Canada Homes initiative signals a return to direct federal participation—on public land, with federal coordination and financing, and through partnerships with private builders. While the details are still emerging, the core promise is bold: to double the country’s homebuilding output.
But will it work?
The answer depends on several key factors:
1. Scale and Coordination
The postwar programs worked because they were nationally coordinated and locally executed. If the new initiative fails to work seamlessly with provincial approval processes or municipal zoning, it could get bogged down—especially in Ontario, where local red tape is a known issue.
2. Speed of Delivery
In the current market, timing matters. Even if funding is secured and land is allocated, homes take years to approve and build. If the rollout is too slow, it risks missing the window where it could actually cool demand or meaningfully expand supply.
3. Market Response
There’s a risk of oversaturation in areas where public housing projects are concentrated—especially if units are not aligned with actual buyer preferences or if resale and rental conditions are constrained. The private sector must remain engaged for mixed-use and economically diverse communities to thrive.
4. Execution Consistency
Unlike CMHC programs, which spanned decades, this initiative’s long-term viability depends on political continuity. If the next government scraps or underfunds the program, it may collapse mid-build—leaving unfinished homes and stranded buyers.
Legal Insight: What Buyers Should Consider
From a legal standpoint, federally-backed housing projects may come with unique contractual frameworks, particularly around tax treatment (e.g., GST/HST exemptions), restrictions on resale, or public-private development terms. Buyers considering participation in future Build Canada Homes projects should have their agreements of purchase and sale reviewed carefully, especially where affordability covenants or rebate eligibility is involved.
At Rabideau Law, we assist clients across Ontario with all aspects of residential and pre-construction purchases, including government-incentivized housing and layered title arrangements involving public land. Our role is to ensure that buyers remain protected, informed, and contractually sound in an evolving regulatory landscape.
Final Thoughts: Will It Work This Time?
History suggests that federal intervention can work—but only under the right conditions. Where past programs succeeded, it was because they were paired with strong local coordination, clear objectives, and long-term commitment. Where they failed, it was due to poor planning, top-down policies, or a lack of community integration.
If Build Canada Homes stays focused on enabling—not replacing—the private market, and removes key obstacles like zoning and approval delays, it could ease the supply crisis. But buyers should temper expectations: this is not a quick fix, and the legal and regulatory frameworks will need careful navigation.
Need legal guidance on pre-construction or public-private housing deals?
Connect with Rabideau Law to ensure your real estate purchase aligns with today’s—and tomorrow’s—housing policy shifts.
Serving clients across Ontario | Virtual closings available info@rabideaulaw.ca | www.rabideaulaw.ca
Build Canada Homes: What the New Federal Housing Program Means for Ontario Buyers
/in Blog, News, Real Estate /by Geoff RabideauCanada’s housing affordability crisis is not new, but a new national initiative, Build Canada Homes, aims to tackle it head-on. Set to launch later in 2025, the program is part of a larger federal strategy to double the country’s annual housing output to 500,000 homes per year. The government plans to act as a developer itself, building homes directly on public lands, financing affordable projects at below-market rates, and fast-tracking modular and mass-timber construction across Canada.
This represents a major departure from Canada’s traditional reliance on municipal and provincial governments, and the private sector, to build housing. Instead, the federal government is stepping back into the role of housing builder, a position it hasn’t meaningfully occupied since the postwar period.
But while the ambition is bold, the execution will be everything. There are reasons to be optimistic, and many reasons to be cautious.
Why This Program Matters
One of the most pressing issues in the Canadian housing market over the last few years has been affordable supply. For years, demand has far outstripped new construction, particularly in population-dense cities like Toronto. However, interest rate hikes have dramatically cooled price growth and substantially increased temporary supply. But this is not a long-term solution and doesn’t solve the underlying problem: too few homes, especially in the affordable segment.
Build Canada Homes attempts to address that gap directly. If successful, it could not only increase housing availability but also improve affordability for first-time buyers, renters, and low- to middle-income families. It could also help stabilize the market by providing long-term inventory growth—something the private sector alone has struggled to achieve.
Potential Benefits for Buyers
One of the clearest advantages for homebuyers is increased access. More inventory means less competition and fewer bidding wars, particularly in overheated markets like Toronto, Kitchener-Waterloo, and Ottawa. That could put downward pressure on entry-level home prices.
Additionally, the proposed GST rebate on new homes up to $1 million—if enacted—could significantly reduce upfront costs for first-time buyers. This would make new construction
a far more viable option, especially in urban areas where older resale homes often require extensive renovation.
There’s also promise in the program’s use of modular and prefabricated construction methods, which could reduce build times and improve environmental performance. These homes can often be delivered more quickly and at a lower cost than traditional builds, offering a pathway to affordability without sacrificing quality.
Legal and Practical Risks to Consider
Despite its potential, the Build Canada Homes initiative is not without significant risks—particularly for buyers who may rush into the market without understanding the fine print.
First, there’s the issue of implementation lag. While the program may be announced in 2025, large-scale development takes time. Land assembly, zoning approvals, and servicing infrastructure are complex, often jurisdictional matters. Buyers expecting immediate relief could be disappointed if projects are delayed by red tape, intergovernmental conflict, or supply chain bottlenecks.
Second, there’s a question of market distortion. Injecting billions of dollars in subsidized financing into the housing sector could unintentionally distort pricing, crowd out private builders, or shift risk onto taxpayers if government-backed developments underperform or face financial shortfalls.
Third, buyers should be cautious about contractual terms in new-build projects. Builders working under public-private partnerships may impose unusual clauses related to construction timelines, cancellation rights, or HST/GST liability. Without legal review, buyers could find themselves on the wrong side of a one-sided agreement—especially if government policy shifts mid-project.
Finally, there is the risk of political and policy volatility. Major housing initiatives often change shape—or stall entirely—depending on economic conditions or electoral cycles. Buyers making decisions based on proposed rebates or eligibility criteria should ensure flexibility in their contracts and consider legal safeguards such as subject-to-clause protections.
What Buyers Should Do Now
For Ontario buyers, Build Canada Homes could unlock new opportunities—if approached with strategic foresight. Now is the time to prepare. Understand your rights and responsibilities in pre-construction purchases. Stay informed about changes to HST treatment on new homes. And most importantly, work with a legal advisor who can guide you through the complexities of new government-backed developments.
At Rabideau Law, we help clients navigate Ontario’s real estate landscape with clarity and precision. Whether you’re planning to purchase a new-build, considering an assignment sale, or exploring whether you qualify for an HST rebate, we provide the legal insight to ensure you close with confidence.
The Build Canada Homes initiative marks a rare moment of federal re-engagement in housing development. But like any major program, it brings risks as well as opportunities. The buyers who benefit most will be those who take a clear-eyed, informed approach to the changes ahead.
519.957.1001
info@rabideaulaw.ca
www.rabideaulaw.ca
Real estate closings across Ontario. Virtual services available.