fraserinstitute.org
FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 1
FRASER
RESEARCH
BULLETIN
August 2017
One often-overlooked contributing factor
to rising home prices in Canada is mortgage
interest rates.
Between 2000 and 2016, the prevailing
mortgage interest rate declined from 7.0 per-
cent to 2.7 percent. This decline resulted in a
52.9 percent increase in the mortgage borrow-
ing power (maximum eligible mortgage size) of
potential home buyers.
Based on average family incomes in 2000,
falling interest rates resulted in increased
mortgage borrowing power in the four main
regions over the same period: Vancouver from
$183,751 to $280,893; Calgary from $221,214 to
$352,671; Toronto from $221,214 to $338,161; and
Montreal from $171,692 to $262,459.
Average family incomes also increased from
2000 to 2014. Specically, average nominal
before-tax family income for Canada as a whole
increased 53.0 percent over this period with
changes in the four metropolitan areas as fol-
lows: Vancouver incomes increased by 47.8 per-
cent; Calgary by 76.8 percent; Toronto by 35.2
percent; and Montreal by 45.5 percent.
Rising average family income coupled with
decreasing interest rates resulted in a pro-
nounced increase in the ability of potential
home buyers to borrow. Specically, the in-
crease in nominal mortgage borrowing power
for Canada as a whole was 126.1 percent.
The four metropolitan areas ranged from a
high of 161.2 percent in Calgary to a low of 99.7
percent in Toronto with both Vancouver and
Montreal recording similar increases of 118.4
percent and 115.0 percent, respectively.
Summary
by Josef Filipowicz, Jason Clemens, and Matthew Lau
Interest Rates and
Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 2
Introduction
Rising home prices in Canada have spurred in-
terest in the potential causes and consequenc-
es of the increases. Like most goods, housing
prices reect the complex interaction of sup-
ply and demand and are driven by the innu-
merable motivations of buyers and sellers. For
many buyers, the purchase of a home is the
single largest investment they ever make, and is
typically funded through a combination of sav-
ings (for a down payment) and borrowing, nor-
mally through a mortgage loan. The size of the
mortgage for which borrowers can ultimately
qualify depends on a number of factors includ-
ing income, other debts, and the interest rate at
which they can borrow.
This research bulletin explores how one of
these factors, interest rates, inuences mort-
gage borrowing power (ie., maximum eligible
mortgage size), and therefore housing demand
in Canada. The rates at which individuals and
families can borrow are historically low,
1
mean-
ing that larger loans and/or less expensive in-
terest costs are available to them now more
than at any other time in recent decades. Given
the powerful effect interest rates have on the
amount of borrowing individuals and families
can undertake it is particularly surprising how
little public attention this aspect of housing
prices has received in recent years.
The approach used in this study is neither a de-
nitive nor an overly complex analysis of the
interaction between interest rates and mort-
gage borrowing power. Rather, it is a simple
overview aiming to raise awareness on the
manner in which lower interest rates increase
the amount of borrowing individuals and fami-
lies can secure. The resulting boost in mortgage
1
For more on the potential causes of low interest
rates, see Walker (2016).
borrowing power likely plays a role in rising
home prices observed across much of Canada.
The link between interest rates,
borrowing, and home prices
Before analyzing the link between interest rates
and the ability to borrow, it is important to un-
derstand the general concept and its effect on
home prices. The primary goal of lenders is to
have borrowers return their capital plus the
interest charged on loans. This is the principle
behind the guidelines that lenders use to deter-
mine how much money they are willing to lend a
borrower based on his or her income and assets.
A decline in interest rates reduces the amount
borrowers must dedicate to interest payments,
creating more room for them to repay the prin-
cipal amount they owe. This in turn gives bor-
rowers greater capacity to borrow with the
same amount of income.
The increased capacity to borrow means that
larger mortgages become available to home
buyers, which has an important impact on
housing markets. Without any increase in in-
come or repayment requirements, potential
home buyers can afford to borrow more money,
enabling them to bid up the price of an under-
lying asset—in this case, housing.
2
The simple analysis that follows assumes that
the supply of housing is not immediately re-
sponsive to changes in demand. This is reason-
able given the time it takes for home builders
to assemble land, acquire permits and approv-
als, secure necessary resources, and actually
build homes. The degree to which housing sup-
ply is responsive to changes in housing demand
2
For more on the way interest rates and liquidity
constraints affect consumer behaviour, see Gross
and Souleles (2002).
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 3
could partially mitigate the bidding up of hous-
ing prices.
3
The eect of lower interest rates on
mortgage borrowing power
To estimate how interest rates inuence mort-
gage borrowing power, we used a standard
mortgage qualication calculation at the pre-
vailing market interest rates (see Appendix 1 for
details on the data, formula, and assumptions
used) for a standard xed-rate mortgage.
4
The
analysis uses the average Canadian family in-
3
For an in-depth analysis of housing supply respon-
siveness in Canada, see Green, Filipowicz, Laeur,
and Herzog (2016).
4
We assume a monthly payment frequency over a
25-year amortization period (see Appendix 1).
come
5
in 2000 of $50,785. This calculation es-
timates the maximum amount of lending avail-
able to a family earning the national average
income in 2000 at different interest rates.
6
Figure 1 shows both the prevailing interest rate
7
for each year and the maximum amount of eli-
5
Average incomes presented in this study are cal-
culated using CANSIM Table 111-0014: Family Char-
acteristics, by Family Type and Sources of Income,
Annual, by dividing “Amount of income” by “Number
in family type.” For Statistics Canada’s denition of
Census families, see hp://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-
recensement/2011/ref/dict/fam004-eng.cfm.
6
This approach follows the preliminary mortgage
payment estimates that many lending institutions
offer (see Appendix 1), not the specic methods ulti-
mately used in nal mortgage agreements.
7
To build our average annual interest rate estimates,
we used chartered bank ve-year conventional mort-
Figure 1: Estimated Mortgage Borrowing Power with Average Canadian Family
Income, 2000 (at 2000 – 2016 interest rates)
* Based on the Canadian average income of $50,785.
Source: Statistics Canada, 2017a and 2017b; Mortgage Professionals Canada; calculations by authors.
7.0%
2.7%
$180,949
$276,610
$150,000
$170,000
$190,000
$210,000
$230,000
$250,000
$270,000
$290,000
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Average discounted mortgage interest rate
Maximum mortgage size - Canada*
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 4
gible mortgage a family could secure based on
a static income of $50,785.
8
As the gure illus-
trates, the prevailing interest rate fell from 7.0
gage rates, obtained from Statistics Canada. As these
are ofcial posted rates, they do not reect typical
rates at which Canadians can ultimately borrow for
home loans. As such, we obtained the average spread
between posted rates and real rates from annual
surveys published by Mortgage Professionals Canada
(formerly the Canadian Association of Accredited
Mortgage Professionals) between 2005 and 2016. For
2000 to 2004, we applied the 2005 spread retroac-
tively. Though less accurate, this approach is conser-
vative, as spreads between posted interest rates and
real interest rates grew considerably over that period
(Allen, Clark, and Houde, 2011).
8
Average incomes are not necessarily representa-
tive of the typical home buyer. Home owners repre-
percent in 2000 to 2.7 percent in 2016, a decline
of 61.3 percent.
When interest rates fall, the same individual or
family with the same income ($50,785) can bor-
row more money. Specically, the maximum
amount this family could borrow increased
from $180,949 based on prevailing rates in
2000, to $276,610 at 2016 rates, an increase of
52.9 percent. It is important to remember that
the resulting estimates represent maximum
mortgage loan eligibility, not home prices.
Figure 2 moves beyond the hypothetical national
analysis and specically examines Canada’s four
largest metropolitan areas: Vancouver (British
sent just over two-thirds of Canadian households in
2011 (National Household Survey, 2011).
Figure 2: Estimated Mortgage Borrowing Power in Major Metropolitan Areas Based
on 2000 Average Incomes
* Based on the Metro Vancouver average income of $51,572; ** Based on the Greater Calgary average income of $64,750;
***Based on the Greater Toronto average income of $62,086; ****Based on the Greater Montreal average income of $48,187.
Source: Statistics Canada, 2017a; Mortgage Professionals Canada; Statistics Canada, 2017b; calculations by authors.
$183,751
$280,893
$230,706
$352,671
$221,214
$338,161
$171,692
$262,459
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Maximum mortgage size - Metro Vancouver*
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Calgary**
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Toronto***
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Montreal****
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 5
Columbia), Calgary (Alberta), Toronto (Ontario),
and Montreal (Quebec). The analysis from gure
1 is replicated for gure 2; the difference is that
average incomes are regional.
In 2000, the average gross family income
9
in
Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Montre-
al could have supported borrowing of up to
$183,751, $230,706, $221,214, and $171,692, re-
spectively, given the prevailing interest rate for
mortgages that year (7.0 percent). The variation
in the mortgage amounts is driven entirely by
the differences in average family income be-
tween the four cities in 2000: $51,572 in Van-
couver, $64,750 in Calgary, $62,086 in Toronto,
and $48,187 in Montreal.
If the income levels are kept constant, but in-
terest rates are allowed to drop from 7.0 per-
cent, where they were in 2000, to 2.7 percent,
where they were in 2016, potential home buyers
see a marked increase in their ability to borrow.
Specically, the same level of average income
in Vancouver, for instance ($51,572), could sup-
port borrowing of up to $280,893 in 2016, an
9
Gross debt service (GDS) ratios are calculated
based on gross income (See Appendix 1). As such,
this analysis does not account for after-tax income.
increase of almost 53 percent. The three other
metropolitan areas see the same proportionate
increases: Calgary rises to $352,671, Toronto to
$338,161, and Montreal increases to $262,459.
How rising incomes amplify the eect of
lower interest rates
The previous section examined the effect of
interest rates on mortgage borrowing power
when income remained constant. This sec-
tion adjusts average incomes to reect the fact
that between 2000 and 2014, the latest year of
available data, average family incomes in the
key metropolitan areas examined increased. In-
deed, average total incomes for Canadian fami-
lies as a whole grew by 53 percent in nominal
terms between 2000 and 2014 (18.5 percent in
real terms).
Table 1 shows the growth in average family in-
comes in the four metropolitan areas analyzed
between 2000 and 2014. Figure 3 depicts the
growth in the maximum mortgage borrowing
power by major metropolitan region between
2000 and 2014 based on both the change in av-
erage family income and the falling interest rate
(from 7.0 percent to 3.0 percent).
Once the calculations allow for rising incomes,
it is clear that the maximum mortgage bor-
rowing power increases beyond the 52.9 per-
cent observed when only the decline in interest
rates was accounted for. Calgary experienced
the largest increase in mortgage borrowing
power between 2000 and 2014 (rising 161.2 per-
cent). The Greater Toronto Area experienced
the smallest increase in mortgage borrow-
ing power (though still showed a marked in-
crease of 99.7 percent). Mortgage borrowing
power increased by 118.4 percent in Vancou-
ver and by only slightly less in Montreal (115.0
percent). Across Canada, mortgage borrow-
Table 1: Growth in Family Income by
Major Metropolitan Centre (2000 - 2014)
Vancouver 47.8% (17.8% in real terms)
Calgary 76.8% (25.4% in real terms)
Toronto 35.2% (1.6% in real terms)
Montreal 45.5% (13.0% in real terms)
Canada 53.0% (18.5% in real terms)
Source: Stascs Canada, 2017b and 2017c.
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 6
ing power rose by 126.1 percent. Put differently,
the growth in average family income coupled
with the decline in prevailing interest rates for
mortgages increased Canadians’ ability to bor-
row for mortgages by 126.1 percent, more than
doubling the nominal amount they could bor-
row in 2000.
Conclusion
Historically low interest rates present a number
of opportunities for potential home buyers. If
they can borrow at lower interest rates, a small-
er portion of their mortgage payments is dedi-
cated to interest and a larger portion to princi-
pal loan repayment. These savings qualify buyers
for larger loans, or they can be channeled to
other household priorities. However, increased
borrowing power also affects home prices.
The decline in mortgage interest rates between
2000 and 2016 was estimated to result in a 52.9
percent increase in mortgage borrowing power.
This effect is amplied when increases in fam-
ily incomes are taken into account. Specically,
the increase in average family incomes coupled
with the noted decline in interest rates result-
ed in a marked increase in mortgage borrowing
power across all four metropolitan areas ana-
lyzed: Vancouver (118.4%), Calgary (161.2%), To-
ronto (99.7%) and Montreal (115.0%). For Cana-
da as a whole, the combination of the increase
in average family incomes plus the decline in
interest rates resulted in an increase in mort-
gage borrowing power of 126.1 percent.
Housing prices reect the interaction of sup-
ply and demand, and the signicant increase in
mortgage borrowing power attributable to low-
er interest rates plays a role in this interaction.
As such, the extent to which increased mort-
gage borrowing power inuences home prices
deserves closer consideration by Canadians
and their policy makers.
Figure 3: Estimated Mortgage Borrowing Power in Major Metropolitan Areas,
Including Income Growth (2000-2014)
Source: Statistics Canada, 2017a; Mortgage Professionals Canada; Statistics Canada, 2017b; calculations by authors.
$183,751
$401,395
$230,706
$602,700
$221,214
$441,846
$171,692
$369,188
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Maximum mortgage size - Metro Vancouver*
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Calgary**
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Toronto***
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Montreal****
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
Appendix 1: Mortgage Calculation
To produce the estimates in this study, we used the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s
monthly mortgage payment calculation (CMHC, 2017a) with the following formula and assumptions:
Formula
Assumptions
» Monthly payment frequency
» 25-year amortization period
» Fixed interest rate throughout duration of loan
*
Maximum monthly payment estimates
Maximum monthly payments were calculated using the gross debt service (GDS) ratio, a commonly
used tool in mortgage lending. Lenders use this ratio as an initial threshold whereby the amount of
debt a potential borrower desires is compared to their income to ensure that the repayment sched-
ule is sustainable. This approach, formulated below, adds the monthly payments required by the
mortgage loan (principal plus interest), plus property taxes and heating.
**
In order to qualify for a
mortgage, an applicant’s GDS ratio must typically be 35 percent
***
or lower (CMHC, 2017b), which
means that a borrower’s home-related and mortgage servicing costs
****
cannot exceed 35 percent of
their total annual income. It is a method that lenders use to ensure borrowers only accumulate debt
within reasonable and serviceable constraints.
GDS calculation
For the purposes of this study, monthly payments on property taxes and heating were estimated at
5 percent of gross monthly income.
+
This approach does not account for variation across munici-
palities, regions, and housing types.
++
*
Holding the interest rate xed throughout the duration of the loan is a conservative approach, as rates are often revised down at the
end of each mortgage term.
**
Where applicable, 50 percent of monthly condominium fees are also included.
***
Some lenders use a GDS ratio of 32 percent.
****
Lenders also use the total debt service (TDS) ratio to incorporate other household expenses.
+
Green, Jackson, Herzog and Palacios (2016) estimate that energy spending represents 2.6 percent of total household spending across
Canada in 2013, and Chawla and Wannell (2003) estimate that property taxes represented 1.8 percent of income for Canadian families
earning $100,000 and above.
++
Without property-specic information on non-mortgage housing costs, dierent authors use dierent assumptions to produce broad
comparisons. Masson (2013) assumes annual non-mortgage housing costs are equal to 5 percent of the mortgage amount.
Monthly payment x
monthly interest rate
number of paymen
1
ts
numbe
monthly interest rate x monthly interest rate
1
1
r of payments
Principal Interest Taxes Heat
Gross Annual Income
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 8
Appendix 2: Increases in mortgage
borrowing power
Figure A2.1 gives some additional context. It
shows increases in mortgage borrowing power
based on average monthly mortgage payments
in four metropolitan areas in 2016. The Canada
Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC)
provided these averages.
This gure clearly indicates the difference in
mortgage borrowing behavior across the vari-
ous regions. For example, Metro Vancouverites
make the largest monthly payments of the four
regions, even though they earn less than To-
rontonians and Calgarians, on average.
Figure A2.1: Estimated Mortgage Borrowing Power in Major Metropolitan Areas, by
Average Monthly Mortgage Payment in 2016
* Based on the Metro Vancouver average of $2,010 monthly; ** Based on the Greater Calgary average of $1,533 monthly;
***Based on the Greater Toronto average of $1,755 monthly; ****Based on the Greater Montreal average of $1,093 monthly.
Source: Statistics Canada, 2017a; Mortgage Professionals Canada; CMHC, 2017c; calculations by authors.
$286,425
$437,848
$218,464
$333,959
$250,096
$382,313
$155,843
$238,232
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Maximum mortgage size - Metro Vancouver*
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Calgary**
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Toronto***
Maximum mortgage size - Greater Montreal****
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 9
References
Allen, Jason, Robert Clark, and Jean-François Houde
(2011). Discounting in Mortgage Markets. Work-
ing Paper 2011-3. Bank of Canada. <http://www.
bankofcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/
wp11-3.pdf>, as of July 19, 2017.
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation [CMHC]
(2017a). Mortgage Payment Calculator. On-line cal-
culator. CMHC. <https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/
en/co/buho/buho_021.cfm>, as of July 19, 2017.
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation [CMHC]
(2017b). Calculating GDS/TDS. On-line calculator.
CMHC. <https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/ho-
clincl/moloin/hopr/mupr_015.cfm>, as of July
19, 2017.
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation [CMHC]
(2017c). Average Scheduled Monthly Payments for
New Mortgage Loans ($), Canada, Provinces and
CMAs 2012 Q3 to 2016 Q4. Homeowners’ Debt at a
Glance Data Tables. Web page. <https://www.cm-
hc-schl.gc.ca/en/hoclincl/homain/stda/data/
data_018.cfm>, as of July 19, 2017.
Chawla, Raj K. (2017). The distribution of mort-
gage debt in Canada. Statistics Canada. <http://
www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2011002/
article/11429-eng.htm>
Chawla, Raj K., and Ted Wannell (2003). Property
Taxes. Perspectives on Labour and Income 4, 7.
Statistics Canada. <http://www.statcan.gc.ca/
pub/75-001-x/00703/6578-eng.html>, as of July
19, 2017.
Green, Kenneth P., Josef Filipowicz, Steve Laeur,
and Ian Herzog (2016). The Impact of Land-Use
Regulation on Housing Supply in Canada. Fraser
Institute. <https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/
default/les/impact-of-land-use-regulation-on-
housing-supply-in-canada.pdf>, as of July 19, 2017.
Green, Kenneth P., Taylor Jackson, Ian Herzog, and
Milagros Palacios (2016). Energy Costs and Can-
adian Households: How Much Are We Spending?
Fraser Institute. <https://www.fraserinstitute.
org/sites/default/les/energy-costs-and-cana-
dian-households.pdf>, as of July 19, 2017.
Gross, David B., and Nicholas Souleles (2002). Do Li-
quidity Constraints and Interest Rates Matter for
Consumer Behavior? Evidence from Credit Card
Data. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, 1: 149–185.
Masson, Paul R. (2013). The Dangers of an Extend-
ed Period of Low Interest Rates: Why the Bank
of Canada Should Start Raising Them Now. CD
Howe Commentary No. 381. CD Howe Institute.
<https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/les/
attachments/research_papers/mixed/Commen-
tary_381_0.pdf>, as of July 19, 2017.
Mortgage Professionals Canada (various years,
2006–2016). Annual State of the Residential Mort-
gage Market in Canada. Ratehub.ca. <https://
www.ratehub.ca/canadian-mortgage-reports>, as
of July 19, 2017.
Statistics Canada (2013). National Household Sur-
vey (NHS) Prole: Canada. 2011 National Household
Survey. Catalogue no. 99-004-XWE. Government
of Canada. <http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-
enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E
&Geo1=PR&Code1=01&Data=Count&SearchText=C
anada&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&A1=All&
B1=All&Custom=&TABID=1>, as of July 19, 2017.
Statistics Canada (2017a). Table 176-0043: Finan-
cial Market Statistics, Last Wednesday Unless Oth-
erwise Stated, Bank of Canada. Government of
Canada. <http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/
a26?id=1760043>, as of July 5, 2017.
Statistics Canada (2017b). Table 111-0014: Characteris-
tics of Families, Sources of Income by Census Family
Type. Government of Canada. <http://www5.stat-
can.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=1110014>, as
of July 31, 2017.
Statistics Canada (2017c). Table 326-0020: Consumer
Price Index (CPI) Monthly (2002 = 100).. Govern-
ment of Canada. <http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/
cansim/a26?id=3260020>, as of July 19, 2017.
Walker, Michael (2016). Why Are Interest Rates So
Low? A Framework for Modeling Current Global Fi-
nancial Developments. Fraser Institute. <https://
www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/les/why-
are-interest-rates-so-low.pdf>, as of July 19, 2017.
Interest Rates and Mortgage Borrowing Power in Canada
fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 10
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the anonymous
reviewers for their comments and sugges-
tions on this paper.
As the researchers have worked indepen-
dently, the views and conclusions expressed
in this paper do not necessarily reect
those of the Board of Directors of the Fraser
Institute, the staff, or supporters.
Copyright © 2017 by the Fraser Institute. All rights re-
served. Without written permission, only brief passag-
es may be quoted in critical articles and reviews.
ISSN 2291-8620
Media queries: For media enquiries, please contact
our communications department via e-mail: commu-
[email protected]; telephone: 604.714.4582.
Support the Institute: call 1.800.665.3558, ext. 574
or e-mail: development@fraserinstitute.org
Visit our website: www.fraserinstitute.org
Matthew Lau was a research intern
with the Fraser Institute in 2016.
He holds a Bachelor of Commerce
with a specialization in nance and
economics from the University of
Toronto.
Jason Clemens is the Executive Vice
President of the Fraser Institute. He
has an Honors Bachelors Degree of
Commerce and a Master’s Degree in
Business Administration from the
University of Windsor as well as a
Post Baccalaureate Degree in Eco-
nomics from Simon Fraser Univer-
sity. He has published over 70 major
studies on a wide range of topics,
including taxation and entrepre-
neurship. He has published over 300
shorter articles in US, Canadian,
and international newspapers.
Josef Filipowicz is a Senior Policy
Analyst in the Centre for Municipal
Studies at the Fraser Institute. He
holds an M.A. in Political Science
from Wilfrid Laurier University,
and a Bachelor of Urban and Re-
gional Planning from Ryerson Uni-
versity. His work with the Fraser
Institute includes the New Homes
and Red Tape series focusing on the
regulatory landscape surrounding
home-building in Canada’s mu-
nicipalities, as well as analysis of
the impact land-use regulation has
on the housing supply in Canada’s
largest cities.
