Housing Market Anomalies -- Late Summer, 2010

Ancillary Fees (& Taxes) Loom Larger

If you have to ask how much something costs . . . you can't afford it.

--Author unknown

One of the anomalies of today's housing market is more properties discounted to the point where their purchase price is suddenly very attractive -- the more so with interest rates seemingly falling through the floor.

However, they come with vestigial "ancillary costs" -- a ball-and-chain, if you will -- that are still pegged to the old asking price, deterring many of those same buyers.

Out-of-Whack Property Taxes

So, in Minneapolis alone, I can think of a dozen-plus homes whose asking price has now dropped from $1 million-plus to the high six figures.

However, they still carry an annual property tax bill that in many cases still runs $15k or more.

That's a problem -- financially and psychologically -- because the move-up Buyers for these homes most likely now own homes worth $400k-$600km, and are accustomed to property tax bills that are a fraction of that.

Even though the property taxes should re-set when a deal is consummated, there are no guaranties -- and the lag can be up to 2 years.

The same phenomenon can be a hurdle for properties that carry an association fee.

When mortgages are so cheap, suddenly that $300 -- or $800 -- monthly maintenance fee looms larger.

P.S.: Hey, fellow Realtors! Here's a freebie: instead of paying for the Buyer's closing costs, maybe such Sellers should contemplate paying down the property taxes for the first two years.

You read it here first!

Housing Market Hindsight

Low Interest Rates -- Then & Now

Three (four?) years into the housing market downturn, what conclusion is it possible to draw?

In retrospect, it seems obvious (at least to me) that it was a liquidity-driven phenomenon.

Add a tsunami of cash, subtract any vestige of underwriting standards, and real estate will go up.

Subtract liquidity, and tighten lending standards . . . and it goes down.

No Pop from Low Rates

Astute market watchers will point out that, if cheap money drives real estate upwards, it should be positively flying now, because mortgage rates are at record lows.

What that analysis ignores is: 1) the cheap money is itself a symptom of the downturn, as the Fed is using cheap money (free to the banks) as its weapon of choice to support housing (the so-called "hair of the dog" cure); and 2) to qualify for a cheap mortgage, you must have good credit and a job.

If you're a move-up Buyer, you also need some equity for a downpayment.

The Plight of the "Move-down Buyer"

Stuck in Place

A healthy housing market functions like a gigantic escalator.

The bottom rungs are occupied by first-time Buyers. As they purchase entry-level homes, the Sellers of those homes ("Move-up Buyers") typically buy larger homes, enabling Sellers of those homes to buy even bigger homes.

And so on, and so on.

One of the most remarked consequences of the housing bear market the last three(?) years is that falling real estate prices have clobbered the equity of move-up Buyers.

So, the money they need for a downpayment to buy a bigger home is either diminished -- or gone.

In the most distressed housing markets -- places like Florida and Las Vegas -- many people who bought at the peak are now "underwater" (they owe more than their home is worth) to the tune of tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars.

Voila! No more moving escalator.

Stranded at the "Top of the Food Chain"

All of the foregoing is now very-well documented.

Less remarked is the plight of the "move-down Buyer" -- the owner of a bigger home, typically close to retirement age, who is ready for a smaller dwelling, but is unable to sell (also known as a "down-sizer").

If move-down Buyers are lucky, they bought decades ago, and have so much equity that even a 30% drop in housing prices still leaves them able to sell (and they've been prudent enough -- and financially secure enough -- to leave that equity untapped through the years).

It's also true that financial products like reverse mortgages can help move-down Buyers (at least the ones over 62 years old) transition to a smaller home.

However, the flip side of buying a bigger home decades ago is that the same home today could easily require hundreds of thousands of dollars of updating and remodeling to appeal to today's (financially hamstrung) Buyers.

Even if those Buyers can still muster a six-figure downpayment and qualify for a jumbo mortgage, coming up with a couple hundred grand for remodeling, out-of-pocket is (often) the kiss of death.

So what happens?

Nothing.

Move-down Buyers can't sell, which means that the owners of homes at lower price rungs can't sell -- and so on, and so on.

Public Policy Implications

The foregoing dynamic suggests that the best way to unfreeze the housing market isn't to buttress first-time Buyers, as policymakers have done so far.

Rather, the smarter approach is to help move-down Buyers.

That could be done by making a pot of cheap money available to Buyers undertaking major remodeling (cheap purchase money, courtesy of the Fed, doesn't do it); by giving tax credits to Buyers who tackle such projects; or even by giving incentives to investors to buy and remodel such homes.

Such a strategy not only would unlock the housing market's frozen upper brackets, but it would have a huge ripple (multiplier) effect as billions of dollars spent on labor and materials coursed through the economy.

Which all makes eminent, common sense.

After all, as everyone knows, a working escalator needs to go down as well as up.

Missed the Tax Credit? Lucky You

Did the Late Bird Get the Worm??

Although I take issue with some of the math underlying the analysis, there's no denying that the drop in interest rates since April 30 -- thanks to the Eurozone crisis -- has at least partially offset the benefit(s) associated with now-expired home buyer tax credits.

Missing the tax credit deadline might have seemed like a big mistake to some home buyers, but waiting could have been the smartest thing to do. Interest rates have fallen so dramatically since April 30th that the typical purchaser of a $350,000 home, financed with a $280,000 mortgage, would have saved a bundle by waiting until May.

At April’s average rate of 5.34 percent, a home buyer would have locked in a 30-year fixed rate loan with a monthly payment of $1,561.82. The same borrower could have snagged a 30-year fixed rate loan at a rate of 4.625 percent in May and paid $1,439.59 per month. That’s a $1,467 annual savings. Over 30 years, it’s a $44,003 savings, dwarfing the tax credit.

--"Post-Tax Credit Buyers May Save Money"; Daily Real Estate News (5/27/2010)

So what's wrong/incomplete about the above analysis (at least if you live in the Twin Cities)?

Three things.

One. The average home sale in the Twin Cities currently is about half the $350,000 cited in the foregoing excerpt (no doubt written by a journalist in New York or LA).

So, cut the monthly mortgage savings from $95 to $47.50 -- making the tax credit that much more valuable.

Two. The average home buyer doesn't stay in their home for 30 years.

In fact, seven years is more typical.

Three. The calculations don't discount for the time value of money (why people prefer "a bird in the hand to two in the bush").

In plain English, most first-time home Buyers would rather have an immediate $8,000 (or $6,500, for move-up Buyers) than an extra $95 every month for 30 years.

However, the whole episode does serve to underscore that the decision to buy a home depends on many variables, including interest rates, prevailing home prices, financial incentives, etc.

Vicissitudes of Timing

The post-tax credit drop in interest rates also shows how (fickle) market conditions can trump . . . everything else.

Case in point: I worked with a client last year whose plan was to buy a newer, bigger home, then sell their existing home. That strategy made sense because their current home needed quite a bit of updating -- work that, realistically, could only happen once it was vacant.

Part one went off without a hitch: my client got a great deal on a very nice Plymouth home, and proceeded to move in.

However, part two suffered delay after delay.

So, instead of having their home ready for sale in February, at the beginning of the "Spring" selling season, my client's home wasn't on the market until May.

Did the delay hurt them?

On the contrary, several homes that were competing with my client's home all got snatched up in the interim.

As a result, my clients were able to raise their asking price -- and got it, in the first two weeks!

(More) Naked Swimmers

"Botttom's Up" Real Estate Recovery

You don't know who's swimming naked until the tides goes out.
--Warren Buffett

3,500 FSF is the new 5,000 FSF.
--Ross Kaplan

The housing recovery is happening from the bottom up.

As any active Realtor can readily report, the lower the price bracket, the stronger the housing market; the higher, the weaker.

Clearly, that's why Congress is now extending tax incentives to so-called move-up Buyers, rather than just first-time Buyers.

Upper Bracket Woes

So where does that leave owners of upper bracket homes? (In the Twin Cities, three years ago I would have put the threshold for upper bracket homes around $800k; now . . . it's a lot lower.)

In many cases, straining under too-big mortgages on houses that have depreciated in value.

Most at risk are those who bought roughly between 2004-2007, using a lot of leverage; who have jobs or are in businesses most exposed to the recession; and whose other assets, like stocks, are down significantly (although less than last Spring!).

For those folks, the tide is continuing to run out.

That's why I expect the foreclosure pain to continue moving "up market," at least in the short run.

P.S.: one more aggravating factor for would-be sellers of larger, upper bracket homes: Americans' love affair with "big, bigger, biggest" is at least temporarily on hold. I call this phenomenon, "3,500 (square feet) is the new 5,000."

$6,500 Tax Credit & The Move-Up Market

$6,500 Tax Credit

Move-Up Market

Entry-Level Market


Helping the Move-up Market

The $8,000 tax credit for first-time home Buyers worked so well that the government has extended it to move-up Buyers, too (albeit in slightly less generous form).

Beginning Dec. 1, eligible Buyers who've occupied their existing home for 5 out of the last 8 years qualify for a $6,500 tax credit of their own.

The idea is to leverage strength in the lower rungs of the housing market to help more expensive housing.

If tax incentives actually buoy the move-up market, guess which homes, in which market segment, are likely to be targeted next?

Hint: it takes jumbo mortgages to buy them.

Tax Credit Extension/Expansion

(Almost) Done Deal!

The Senate passed the bill 98-0 yesterday; the House followed suit today.

President to sign tonight/tomorrow.

Highlights per Steve Mohabir, City Lakes' in-house loan officer:

One provision will continue for five months a popular $8,000 credit for many first-time home buyers, which was to expire Nov. 30, and create a $6,500 credit for some homeowners who want to buy a new residence.

The move-up provision looks like if you have owned and lived in a residence 5 of the last 8 years and buy a new place, it looks like the $6,500 would apply. Other than that same as before with higher income limits for the 1st time home buyer.

Bottom line: this will be a big booster shot for the 2010 housing market, especially move-up Buyers.