Recently, the city of Hangzhou in Zhejiang Province launched a limited-time promotion called “Buy a House + Consumption Voucher,” offering a 100,000 RMB consumption voucher for the purchase of a new house in specific areas. This move is seen by the public as a new rescue measure by the local government during a sluggish real estate market. However, financial analysts have issued stern warnings, stating that such policies, seemingly beneficial to residents, are actually pitfalls set by local governments to shift the high inventory risk.
On the afternoon of October 24th, the Housing Security and Housing Administration of Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, announced that the Fuyang District, Lin’an District, Tonglu County, Chun’an County, and Jiande City will soon launch the “Buy a House + Consumption Voucher” limited-time subsidy activity. Under specified conditions, buyers can receive a 100,000 RMB consumption voucher for each house purchased.
The promotion in Fuyang District, offering a consumption voucher for house purchases, will run from October 27th to December 31st this year. The timing of the house purchase is based on the records of the online signing system. Those who purchase new residential properties participating in the “consumption voucher” event in Fuyang District during this period and complete the online signing as individual owners (excluding legal entities) will each receive a 100,000 RMB consumption voucher, with a total of 20 million RMB allocated for the promotion.
Additionally, the consumption vouchers are valid for use from January 20, 2026, to March 31, 2026, distributed through Alipay platform, including a 50,000 RMB general voucher (usable at relevant merchants citywide in Hangzhou) and a 50,000 RMB mini voucher (usable at relevant merchants in Fuyang District).
Upon receipt of the consumption vouchers, refunds for unused vouchers are generally not allowed if a buyer decides to cancel the house purchase. Unused vouchers will automatically expire, and used vouchers must be refunded in full before cancellation procedures can be completed.
With a total amount of 20 million RMB allocated, only 200 people can receive the 100,000 RMB consumption voucher.
The announcements for Lin’an District, Tonglu County, Chun’an County, and Jiande City are similar to the Fuyang District’s promotion, with varying total amounts allocated for the consumption vouchers. Lin’an District and Tonglu County jointly offer 12 million RMB in consumption vouchers, while Chun’an County provides 11 million RMB, and Jiande City has a total of 1 million RMB available for the promotion.
Financial blogger “Tom” analyzed the tactics employed by the Hangzhou authorities in a video program. He noted that buyers must purchase houses within the specified time and designated areas set by the officials to qualify for a 100,000 RMB consumption voucher, rather than receiving direct cash. Furthermore, the 100,000 RMB is divided into two 50,000 RMB general consumption vouchers, with restrictions on merchants and products for usage.
“Tom” believes that although this policy appears to be a welfare measure, it is actually trapping buyers without any real attractiveness.
He explained that the key flaw lies in incentivizing consumption vouchers without sincerity, employing various tactics. Crucially, the areas encouraging citizens to buy houses in Hangzhou’s outskirts like Fuyang District and Lin’an District share a common issue: a vast inventory of new houses that are difficult to sell.
Hangzhou’s “buy a house and receive a 100,000 RMB consumption voucher” strategy, under the guise of subsidies, pushes citizens into becoming cannon fodder, contributing to the massive inventory to benefit developers. This allows the municipal government to survive on land finance by enticing citizens to buy, sustaining a flawed approach.
In fact, before Hangzhou, several local governments had implemented so-called subsidy measures to encourage property purchases. For instance, in 2022, the Finance Bureau of Dongxihu District in Wuhan, Hubei Province, issued a notice on a scheme for distributing housing allocation subsidies, offering a one-time 150,000 RMB pre-distribution subsidy to qualified administrative staff purchasing housing within the Dongxihu District.
On March 31st this year, Nanjing introduced the “Seven New Regulations on Housing,” featuring a “trade-in for a new one” policy. Authorities in Zhengzhou launched a housing ticket policy last October—official documents stated that the Zhengzhou Airport Economic Zone, Zhengdong New District, Zhengzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone, and the five districts within the city would initiate housing ticket placement work.
Various regions nationwide had experimented with housing ticket placement measures. Chinese media pointed out that while housing tickets seemed to be an “ideal” solution, achieving simultaneous goals of urban village relocation, real estate inventory reduction, and market stabilization is not easy.
“Tom” emphasized that whether in Hangzhou, Wuhan, Nanjing, or Zhengzhou, the approach remains consistent, exploiting citizens under the guise of subsidies and benefits. Citizens venturing to buy properties outside the central urban areas and diving in with leverage might end up in dire straits, ultimately making losses on their purchased properties.
As the Chinese real estate market enters a downward trend, housing prices continue to decline nationwide, shattering the myth of “real estate always appreciating.” Publicly reported data for the first three quarters of 2025 showed that national residential sales amounted to 6.3 trillion RMB, a 7.9% year-on-year decrease; with a more significant 12.4% drop in September. Second and third-tier cities struggle, with cities like Hefei and Nantong in the Yangtze River Delta leading the decline, and third- and fourth-tier cities facing challenges—some with inventory depletion cycles as long as 47.6 months.
The collapse in confidence has entangled the market in a vicious cycle. A survey from Shanghai University of Finance and Economics revealed that only 28.2% of people consider it suitable to buy property now, with 43.2% of young people preferring to rent. These figures unveil the true face of deep industry adjustments.
Despite the introduction of market rescue policies in multiple regions, the effectiveness has been limited. Many small and medium-sized real estate companies are struggling and facing closures, leading to a surge in foreclosed properties.
“Tom” pointed out that with the deepening of the trade tensions between China and the United States, if domestic demand cannot be bolstered, and in a scenario where properties lose their financial appeal coupled with an economic downturn, price reductions become the only way out. This aligns with the economic laws of operation. Currently, the property market faces oversupply issues, with urbanization rates nearing 70% and household leverage exceeding 65%. The number of new customers is dwindling, leaving only existing customers with trade-up demands.
“Tom” stressed that a significant concern is the declining incomes of residents amid the existing economic environment’s failure to address the issue. The visible pressures faced by people living in China over recent years are palpable. He highlighted the reality where over 200 million people engage in precarious employment, leading to unemployment even among university graduates—an illustration of social realities. Quoting a netizen, he said, “A bowl of plain noodles is enough, just enough to fill the stomach.”
“Tom” issued a warning, emphasizing the importance of residents safeguarding their lives during an economic downturn. Particularly when considering property purchases, individuals should ask themselves vital questions before making decisions: Do you genuinely need to buy a house? How much can you withstand property price declines? Do you have sufficient monthly payments? Can you guarantee job security in the coming years?
In conclusion, he urged vigilance against the government’s tactics.