Why 84% of Canadian Retirees Are Keeping the House, Even as Prices Fall and Inventory Climbs
The ReMax survey released last month found that only 16% of British Columbians aged 65 and older plan to downsize in the next decade. That figure might sound like hesitation, but what it really represents is a financial calculation most retirees have already run in their heads. They looked at the numbers, saw what they would net after selling, and decided staying put costs less than moving.
The calculation starts with carrying costs. A retired couple in a Vancouver suburb owns a detached home worth $1.3 million, down from $1.45 million two years ago. Their property tax is $4,200 annually. Utilities run another $2,400. Maintenance averages $3,000 when you include painting, furnace service, and the roof fund. Total: $9,600 a year. Now compare that to what moving would cost. Real estate commissions on a $1.3 million sale are roughly $33,000. Legal fees, moving, overlap costs while they bridge to the next place, call it $45,000 all-in. They would recover that in less than five years by staying.
The problem is that the math assumes the replacement property costs meaningfully less. It often doesn't. BC Real Estate Association data from April 2026 shows the gap between detached and attached home prices has compressed province-wide. A couple selling a $1.3 million house in Burnaby to buy a $900,000 townhouse in Langley nets $400,000 before costs, not the $600,000 they expected when they first floated the idea. After commissions and fees, that $400,000 becomes $355,000. Meanwhile, they've traded a known cost structure for a strata with $450 monthly fees that can be raised without their vote.
The Equity Trap Moves Slower Than Prices
Prices in BC are forecast to fall 1.4% this year according to BCREA. Active listings hit a decade high in early 2026. For a seller, that should be bad news, more competition, softer pricing. But for retirees, the window has a frame around it. Selling at $1.3 million today feels worse than selling at $1.45 million two years ago, even though carrying costs during those two years exceeded $19,000. They are anchored to the higher number. Behaviorally, they will wait for a recovery that may or may not arrive before their timeline forces a decision.
What breaks the inertia is usually health, not price. A fall. A hospitalization. A spouse who can no longer drive. At that point the sale is urgent, the negotiating position is weaker, and the replacement housing is chosen under time pressure. The financial outcome is worse than it would have been with an earlier, planned move.
Alternatives to Moving That Retirees Aren't Using
Reverse mortgages are one option, though uptake is low. Rates in mid-2026 are in the 6.28% to 6.69% range, and the loan accrues against the home's value. A couple with a paid-off $1.3 million house could access $450,000 to $550,000 depending on age and lender. That buys time, covers shortfalls, and defers the downsizing decision. It also eats into equity at a rate many retirees find psychologically difficult to accept, even when the alternative is depleting RRSPs or living too lean.
Renting out part of the house is another path. A basement suite in Metro Vancouver rents for $1,800 to $2,400 monthly, enough to offset most carrying costs. The barrier is rarely financial, it's the loss of privacy and the administrative friction of being a landlord at 70.
The Timing Window Exists Because Inventory Does
Active listings are at levels not seen since 2015. Supply has returned to the market. Buyers have time to negotiate. A retiree selling now and replacing now benefits from both sides of that equation, they take a small haircut on the sale, but they also pay less for the replacement. The spread still works if the move is directionally correct. Waiting for prices to recover before selling means buying back in after prices have also recovered. The net position is often unchanged, but two more years of property tax, insurance, and deferred maintenance have been paid.
The 84% who are staying put are not making an irrational choice. They are making the choice that avoids immediate costs and immediate disruption. What they are not doing is accounting for the cost of the wait itself.
The ReMax survey released last month found that only 16% of British Columbians aged 65 and older plan to downsize in the next decade. That figure might sound like hesitation, but what it really represents is a financial calculation most retirees have already run in their heads. They looked at the numbers, saw what they would net after selling, and decided staying put costs less than moving.
The calculation starts with carrying costs. A retired couple in a Vancouver suburb owns a detached home worth $1.3 million, down from $1.45 million two years ago. Their property tax is $4,200 annually. Utilities run another $2,400. Maintenance averages $3,000 when you include painting, furnace service, and the roof fund. Total: $9,600 a year. Now compare that to what moving would cost. Real estate commissions on a $1.3 million sale are roughly $33,000. Legal fees, moving, overlap costs while they bridge to the next place, call it $45,000 all-in. They would recover that in less than five years by staying.
The problem is that the math assumes the replacement property costs meaningfully less. It often doesn't. BC Real Estate Association data from April 2026 shows the gap between detached and attached home prices has compressed province-wide. A couple selling a $1.3 million house in Burnaby to buy a $900,000 townhouse in Langley nets $400,000 before costs, not the $600,000 they expected when they first floated the idea. After commissions and fees, that $400,000 becomes $355,000. Meanwhile, they've traded a known cost structure for a strata with $450 monthly fees that can be raised without their vote.
The Equity Trap Moves Slower Than Prices
Prices in BC are forecast to fall 1.4% this year according to BCREA. Active listings hit a decade high in early 2026. For a seller, that should be bad news, more competition, softer pricing. But for retirees, the window has a frame around it. Selling at $1.3 million today feels worse than selling at $1.45 million two years ago, even though carrying costs during those two years exceeded $19,000. They are anchored to the higher number. Behaviorally, they will wait for a recovery that may or may not arrive before their timeline forces a decision.
What breaks the inertia is usually health, not price. A fall. A hospitalization. A spouse who can no longer drive. At that point the sale is urgent, the negotiating position is weaker, and the replacement housing is chosen under time pressure. The financial outcome is worse than it would have been with an earlier, planned move.
Alternatives to Moving That Retirees Aren't Using
Reverse mortgages are one option, though uptake is low. Rates in mid-2026 are in the 6.28% to 6.69% range, and the loan accrues against the home's value. A couple with a paid-off $1.3 million house could access $450,000 to $550,000 depending on age and lender. That buys time, covers shortfalls, and defers the downsizing decision. It also eats into equity at a rate many retirees find psychologically difficult to accept, even when the alternative is depleting RRSPs or living too lean.
Renting out part of the house is another path. A basement suite in Metro Vancouver rents for $1,800 to $2,400 monthly, enough to offset most carrying costs. The barrier is rarely financial, it's the loss of privacy and the administrative friction of being a landlord at 70.
The Timing Window Exists Because Inventory Does
Active listings are at levels not seen since 2015. Supply has returned to the market. Buyers have time to negotiate. A retiree selling now and replacing now benefits from both sides of that equation, they take a small haircut on the sale, but they also pay less for the replacement. The spread still works if the move is directionally correct. Waiting for prices to recover before selling means buying back in after prices have also recovered. The net position is often unchanged, but two more years of property tax, insurance, and deferred maintenance have been paid.
The 84% who are staying put are not making an irrational choice. They are making the choice that avoids immediate costs and immediate disruption. What they are not doing is accounting for the cost of the wait itself.
Read Next
Asset managers cut product portfolios to fund AI and outsourcing overhauls
ETFs now hold 42% of Canadian fund assets as OSC tightens crypto and liquidity rules
One in Five Canadian Parents Still Pays Bills for Kids in Their Late Thirties
Joint mortgages surge in Ontario and B.C. as first-time buyers face rising delinquency pressure