Doug Porter, Chief Economist, BMO Financial Group

“The impact of these measures will be mixed but with an overall dampening impact on the housing market, with a bigger bite in higher-priced detached markets in Toronto and Vancouver. ... At the margin, this significant move by the regulator acts as a de-facto tightening and reduces the amount of additional Bank of Canada rate hikes required in 2018.”

Phil Soper, CEO, Royal LePage:

The new OSFI mortgage regulations should mitigate the runaway mega-city prices risk, but they do introduce new challenges. ...The new government policy will land squarely on move-up buyers looking to use their home’s equity to finance a new purchase. Some will not be able to get the home they had intended and will withdraw from the market. Others may look to less expensive properties, driving activity and prices in the lower-end of the market."

Tim Hudak, CEO, Ontario Real Estate Association:

"While realtors support a sensibly regulated real estate market, OSFI’s new stress test for uninsured mortgages is overkill. These changes will hurt middle class families and punish careful savers the most, forcing them to take on more debt and higher interest payments. It’s time for governments to hit the brakes on more demand side policy interventions and take a wait and see approach."

David Madani, Senior Canada Economist, Capital Economics:

"This will have a far greater impact on house prices than the Bank of Canada recent interest rate hikes."

Brian DePratto, Senior Economist, TD Economics:

"Broadening the stress test will likely further slow housing activity, depressing demand by five per cent to 10 per cent once implemented, with some pull-forward of activity likely to take place ahead of the January 1st implementation date. Price growth will also be impacted, with these changes expected to exert a drag of between two per cent and four per cent over 2018."

Will Dunning, Chief Economist, Mortgage Professionals Canada:

"Let's say this policy reduces housing activity by 10-15 per cent — which is a standard estimate. That would mean, two years from now, there would be fewer jobs than there would otherwise be. So, 100,000-150,000 fewer jobs than would otherwise have been as a result of this policy."