Archive for the 'Real Estate/Housing' Category

US Housing Update

On CBC Radio this morning, I heard that Canfor will be closing the mill in the small town of Mackenzie, BC, home to 5,000 people, because of “reduced demand due to a slowed housing starts in the US.” Another article said “Canfor, like most forest companies, is facing mounting pressures including a strengthening Canadian dollar and a slumping U.S. building market.”

Not sure if anyone noticed, but there were articles out recently about new economic data from the States, including a huge drop in median housing prices: “the median price of a new home sold last month fell to $229,100, a record 11.1 per cent decline from March that indicated builders are slashing prices in an effort to move a huge overhang of unsold homes.” Apparently, “the median price dropped by the largest amount on record.” Further, “the drop in median prices in April compared with March was a record one-month decline. If the April sales price was compared to the sales price a year ago, the decline was 10.9 per cent, the biggest year-over-year drop since 1970.”

Popularity: 17% [?]

Family Housing Story From 1982

I just had an interesting conversation with my dad a while back about the housing bust of 1981. They bought their house in 1977 for about $40,000 with a $471 monthly mortgage payment for a 25 year mortgage (Those numbers don’t work out quite right for an interest rate of approximately 10% at the time, but it doesn’t matter). They somehow also managed to put down 10% of the house’s original value every year (I think their tax rebate due to RRSPs may have helped out here), so in 1981 when the crash hit they were ok. When they went to renew their mortgage in 1982, they were quoted a 18.5% interest rate (just shy of the 20% peak). They didn’t have that much left on their mortgage after paying down 10% of the principal every year for the past 5 years, so they went to my grandfather (my dad’s father) for a loan. He loaned them about $10,000 at 14.5%. He was definitely not gouging them though; this was worse than the 19% he could get on Canada Savings Bonds at the time. They then took out a line of credit and paid the rest of the mortgage off using that. That was supposedly done to simplify the repayment terms (no longer stuck with a mortgage, can switch between loan-from-dad and line of credit more easily, and can pay down more principal whenever they wanted).

I don’t really have anything insightful to say there. Just that it’s an interesting story. The only thing I will bring up though is that I think everyone should consider the possibility of borrowing from a family member, or lending to a family member. You should be careful and think about that negative consequences if the borrower was unable to pay back the loan or make their payments. My parents payed back the loan to my grandpa, and then when they bought a rental property in the 1990s as an investment they borrowed money from my grandpa again. So it worked out well for them.

Popularity: 22% [?]

12-Year Old Financial Blogger

You gotta see this. There is a 12-year kid giving financial advice on his blog http://www.funnymunny.ca.

Some of his advice is questionable, like this one:

“Ya, hi, I’m over 150,000 in debt, not including my mortgage. I’m fearing that I’ll have to give up my lifestyle and everything I own. Is there anything I can do?” Well, I do have one piece of very good advice, find a really tall building… No, I’m just kidding! but seriously, the one thing you can do to take evasive action on that kind of debt is to, hold your applause, go further into debt! Ya, as crazy as it sounds, if you go another 300,000 dollars in debt and buy a condo, you can rent it out and slowly pay of that debt, plus the mortgage with the rent. And once you’re almost out of your financial rut, you can sell the condo for a profit and be completely debt free!

That seems like a sure-fire way to make your situation worse rather than better. Especially in today’s housing market. The guy is $150,000 in debt, plus he has a mortgage (let’s say $200,000 left), and he’s suggesting to take on another $300,000 in debt (if you can get approved for that, which is doubtful with the debt load he/she already has). Good luck trying to rent that condo for enough to make up for the mortgage (let alone having extra to apply against the $150,000 debt). And good luck selling the condo for a profit if housing prices tank (which they will).

He sort of explains himself in his next post, but there are still some assumptions I don’t like, like the one where the second house grows from $400,000 to $500,000 (timeframe not given).

Either way, this kid is one smart cookie and I’ll be keeping my eye on him.

Popularity: 20% [?]

Hot Labour Market

The hot labour market just got even hotter. Check out these recent numbers from the Vancouver Housing Blog.

Wow! Check out the leap in the employment rate and the sharp drop in the unemployment rate. With seasonal adjustments, weird weather, etc., it’s hard to know what to make of month-to-month jumps in these figures. But still. Unprecedented.

What do I mean by unprecedented? Check out the graph going back to 1976.

Since things on the national front look similar, I think you can kiss good-bye to any hopes for B-o-C cuts anytime soon.

Canadian Financial Stuff had a post a while ago about unemployment numbers going up in Canada. I don’t think that small upward blip in January is an indication of an upward trend. If you look at his graph the trend is clearly downward and there are upward blips (some larger than the January one) all over the place. If the numbers were taken every 5 months instead of every month, his headline would be the opposite, “Unemployment down in January.”

The discussion quickly turned to housing. I’ll copy & paste a few interesting comments below:

Someone named dave said:

lj - yep, I hear you. OTOH it’s worth remembering what happened to Isaac Newton during the South Sea Bubble. He saw the crash coming and sold in time, making some good coin. But when everyone else continued making money he bought back in, and of course got nailed in the crash. The crash is happening now in some of the previously hot markets south of the border. The early warning signs are everywhere else, including in Canada. Will it be different in Vancouver? Heck, anything is possible. But it isn’t that likely, especially given BC’s boom/bust history.

fcf said::

Remember, there IS a huge demand for RE “ownership” but NOT for shelter. There is a big difference there. Real rents have been stagnant for years. That tells me there is no true demand for shelter above new supply. The huge demand for ownership based on the thinking that it’s the greatest-can’t-lose-investment-ever is what the boom has been all about (and its a global phenomenon). Price/rent ratios are way too high. It costs nearly twice as much to own than to rent. This disparity can’t last. People have been making more money on their homes than in their jobs! This is what’s been fueling this bubble. It amazes me that even rational analysts are predicting long term RE price growths of 5% a year. What the heck for? Are rents going up by that much?

I have a friend in Sacramento who owns 4 houses. He is obsessed with RE. He intends to buy more since the prices there have dropped a tad. I urged him to sell but he thinks I am retarded. He quotes the usual myopic RE bull arguments, “they are not making enough land anymore…etc”. I said to him, if there is such huge demand for housing, how come rents haven been stagnant. He just can’t fathom that. He equates price increases with demand for housing. In fact one of his houses has been empty for a year. He doesn’t care because its been going up far more than the carrying costs.

Renters, stay cool. Don’t make the mistake Isaac Newton did. After his investment loss he was quoted to have said “… I can predict the motion of planets and stars but not the madness of men…”.

Martin said:

I must say that I don’t fully understand the despair of the reluctant bulls. If purchase prices belong where they are, then rent and get the deal of the century, and put your money in another investment. No skin off your nose.

alpha_bear said in reply to betamax’s comment:

“…i would be more miffed at waiting on the sidelines for 10 years for the perfect moment to buy (saving a $100,000 in the process) and putting my life on hold in the meantime. life is short.”

I don’t understand why the bulls equate renting with sitting on the sidelines. It seems to me that the bulls are the ones whose life is on hold, while they pray for housing prices to rise.

I’m so happy renting that I don’t care if it takes 10 years or more for the inevitable crash. I’ll buy back into the market when prices are more justifiable. In the meantime, my capital is working for me, and I have more cash available than I did when I rented the money to “buy” my last house from the bank.

Life is too short to spend underwater in a large mortgage.

Popularity: 10% [?]

The Home Buyers’ Plan (HBP)

A few weekends ago I was at a taxation seminar put on by a local accounting firm and they were pretty much saying that you should use the HBP. They mentioned it several times. They even went on to say that if you currently have some other debt, say a student line of credit, you should be concentrating on paying that off rather than contributing to an RRSP. Well I don’t know if I agree with that, especially if your line of credit is at prime, as ours is. Not only that, but contributing to an RRSP gives a tax rebate (which you can then throw onto the debt after having maxed out your RRSPs); paying down debt doesn’t. They were pretty insistent that paying off debt should be the first priority. But, they said, you should contribute to your RRSP up to the $20,000 so that you can take advantage of the Home Buyers’ Plan. Huh? They really made it sound like you should contribute just $20,000 to your RRSP, then ignore it and continue paying down debt. It didn’t really make any sense to me.

At one point I raised my hand and asked: “Can you compare withdrawing $20,000 from a line of credit to pay for a down payment vs. withdrawing $20,000 from my RRSP? for example, if my line of credit is at 6% or so and my RRSP is earning maybe 8 or 9%?” Their argument was that they thought I would have to have a much larger return in our RRSP compared to our line of credit to make it worthwhile. Their second argument was that you never know what will happen to interest rates in the future. Their answers weren’t that satisfactory and I expected a bit more from accountants. To make a long story short, after I got home, I started reading about the Home Buyer’s Plan.

The Home Buyers’ Plan is often touted as a magical way to get $20,000 needed for a down payment. I say “magical” because it is often explained in a very simple way without discussing the disadvantages, or any discussion of the alternatives. Here are some examples of what I am talking about:

  1. Assumption Life makes the assumption that The Home Buyers’ Plan (HBP) is a “winning formula.” “This winning formula can thus help you fulfil your dream to own while also making it possible to maximize your RRSP contributions.”
  2. This TD article “A Larger Down Payment Means Greater Savings
  3. This article from North Shore Credit Union talks about the Home Buyer’s and lists the only downside as being “If the $20,000 were left in the RRSP for 15 years, given an annual 3% rate of return, it would grow to approximately $31,200.” 3%!!! I hope that is real return!

As for #1 above, I think the HBP actually makes it harder to maximize your RRSPs. You will now owe money back to your RRSP and you may be saddled with a fat mortgage on a house that is slightly more expensive than what you might have normally bought had you not taken money out of your RRSPs. You might have a tough time paying off that big mortgage, paying of your RRSPs, and maxing them out every year going forward.

Contrary to what TD says in #2 above, although a down payment means greater savings, I don’t think the HBP necessarily means “great savings.” Here is a comparison between HBP and non-HBP using actual numbers (10% compound return in RRSP, 8% interest on mortgage). It works out roughly the same.

#3 is just laughable. I don’t know where they get their 3% rate of return from. They also claim that “if the homebuyer doesn’t use the RRSP, he/she will acquire a larger mortgage and may possibly even need to purchase mortgage insurance for a high-ratio home loan, which is 3.75% of the mortgage amount.” First of all, 3.75% is wrong, the max is 3.25% or 2.90% (I can’t figure out which, I think it was just lowered though). Perhaps their numbers are out of date. Second of all, if you’re buying a house on the North Shore (North Vancouver), $20,000 isn’t going to lead to a 3.75% premium (from 0%), although it may move you from a lower premium bracket (3.25%) to a higher one (3.75%).

Here’s what I see as the basic alternative to the HBP: Leave the $20,000 in your RRSP and add an extra $20,000 on to your house’s mortgage. This might leave you short of the 25% mark required for you to be exempt from the CMHC premium (of up to 2.75%). Or, it might move you from one CMHC premium bracket to another. This leaves you with a few alternatives, hold off on buying a home until you’ve saved up another $20,000 or take out a loan for $20,000, thus avoiding the CMHC premium (actually I am not sure if the CMHC looks at your other debt or not, if they do consider your other debts, what I just said may not work). You can get everything in between here. In the case where you have 0% down payment you could, again, take out a $20,000 loan or just increase your mortgage by $20,000.

I’d also like to remind you how little $20,000 is nowadays, especially if you are living in Vancouver and buying a condo for $400,000. A 25% down payment would be $100,000. If I get $20,000 of that from my RRSP or from a loan, it not too significant. If you are a couple, the Home Buyer’s plan allows you to take $20,000 from each RRSP which makes it a bit more significant.

The big downside of the Home Buyer’s Plan is that the rates of return from the equities and fixed-income investments in your RRSP may be much better than the interest rate on your mortgage. The amount of lost gains in your RRSP from taking out the $20,000 may be more than the amount of interest you save by reducing the size of your mortgage. The main upside of the home buyer’s plan is that it might allow you to reduce the amount of your CMHC premium. However, another way to reduce the amount of your CMHC premium would be to take out a loan and apply it to your mortgage. In this case, the same logic I used in the beginning of this paragraph also applies. Your RRSP’s rate of return might be higher than the interest rate on your loan. Another downside of HBP is that it can be a disadvantage to have your RRSP descend from $20,000 to $0, let’s say. First of all, when you have $25,000 or more in an RRSP, at some institutions this means you are except from the $125 annual RRSP management fee. Secondly, at E*Trade, for example, when you hit $50,000 in assets your commissions are reduced from $19.99 to $9.99/trade. Lastly, if a bear market is just winding down, that is the worst time to be selling $20,000 in equities from your RRSP.

There is a book from the CMHC called “Impact of the Home Buyers’ Plan on Housing Demand.” It says that “even when the individual has to borrow to make the repayments to the RRSP, there is still a net financial gain.” I think what they are trying to say is that taking money out of the RRSP under the HBP and then paying it back into the RRSP by taking out a loan. I would like to see their actual numbers but I can’t get the report to download.

Popularity: 13% [?]

Calgary Real Estate Update

In an earlier article, I quoted a Calgary Contrarian article (note that Calgary Contrarian has moved) that said:

if you want an excellent predictor of timing, continue to follow the inventory situation. . . Right now we are just below 2000 active listings, which is extremely low by historical standards. If you see that number start to climb back to “normal” levels of between 5000-6000 you can expect prices to slow down or even begin to drop slightly. As the number goes much above that level, you should see prices begin to decline. That is the pattern we have seen in many US cities. Once a bubble market exhausts itself, there is a rapid climb in inventory levels, followed by prices beginning to decline.

I noted that back in July, inventory was at 3,600. Now, if you check the Calgary Real Estate Board’s home page on the top-right, you will see that inventory is now at 6,852. Here’s the Calgary Contrarian’s inventory update:

Pretty crazy stuff. I was in a wedding near Calgary a while ago and couple people told me that prices have fallen about 25% in some cases. And someone else was telling how he knows many people who used the rise in their house’s price to sell and put a down-payment on a larger house than what they had. Now they are stuck with some hefty mortgages.

Popularity: 13% [?]

Of Bubbles and Olympics

Last week, at two different social functions, I heard more people spewing the same old Vancouver talk about how the Olympics have fueled the rise in real estate prices. One person bought a place the day before the Olympic city for 2010 was announced and that was hailed by another as “the best possible day to buy.” Another talked about hopefully leaving Vancouver right before the Olympics (clearly the best time to sell right?). The funny thing about bubbles is that many people start talking like they are living in one. Well the Vancouver Housing Blogger has a lot to say on the topic (see here and here). You don’t have to be the Vancouver Housing Blogger to figure out that the Olympics have had very little to do with the rise in housing prices in Vancouver. Just look around and get out of your bubble for a bit. Just look at this graph of Calgary’s housing prices since 1970:

Oh right, but their housing boom has been caused by the oil sands right? There’s a housing boom in the UK as well:

Well that’s the UK, everything is always expensive over there, right? We can’t forget about the average US housing prices:

Remember what “average” means. It means it is the average of all cities that are hosting the Olympics in 2010 and those that aren’t. Oh, no cities in the States are having the Olympics in 2010 you say? Then why the housing bubble down there? Hmmm… By the way, Peter Mansbridge said last week on the National (CBC) that US had it’s first downward y-o-y (year-over-year) decline in housing prices following months of decreased sales (I didn’t watch the news until today, had it “taped”) which I thought was an interesting statistic.

Popularity: 18% [?]

Real Estate Prices Will Fall In Vancouver

Anyone who has any doubt that housing prices will fall in Vancouver should get their head out of the sand. More articles today from van-housing blogger:
Ozzie has the Scoop
Your Daily Doom & Gloom

When the Globe & Mail starts coming out with articles like these you can forget about confirmation bias among the doom & gloomers.

Interesting comment here:

Vanblogger I’ve been following your site with interest. I’m a native Vancouverite in my fifties and I’ve owned two homes on Vancouver’s westside, the most recent of which I sold in late 2005 anticipating a correction.

What I find most interesting about comments here and also in the MSM is how little credence is given to Greater Vancouver’s price history since the late 70’s (i.e. the chart at the top of your blog).

I have a more detailed chart and what it shows is:

1. There have been a number of run-ups in Vancouver, but none more prolonged as this one, and only one more steep.
2. There has never been an instance of a significant run-up followed by a plateau or a less steep upward curve. They have always been followed by a down slope - read, correction.
3. There has never been a correction of less than 15% and its never taken more than 18 months for a drop of this magnitude.

Unless we believe that Vancouver can defy gravity or that history is no guide, we are in for a correction, and in fact, we’ve already started. How far it drops will be a function of how far ahead price increases have eclipsed fundamentals. We all know from credible economic reports that this is a very large gap, ergo, the potential exists for a large drop. My own prediction is 20% minimum.

Your blog isn’t far from being vindicated and the same applies for real estate cheerleaders in terms of vilification.

Here’s a link to the picture at the top of van-housing blogger’s blog.

These are interesting times. I’m looking forward to watching what will happen from the side-lines. It’s not even a question of staying out of the real estate market right now because I think they are overpriced or because I think they will crash (which they will). If I walk into a bank today and ask how big of a mortgage they’ll approve me for, I would have to live in a smaller place than the one I am renting now. Even when prices do come down, it still may not be economical to buy for the square footage we require.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Historical Housing Prices Since 1890

I have to agree with the Van Housing Blogger, “I just can’t get enough of this graph“:

A History of Home Values

It’s great to see a graph that goes back so far and that also factors out the effects of inflation. Look like the annualized performance of homes since 1890 is: 100 \left(e^{\left(\frac{log(199/100)}{2006-1890}\right)}-1\right)=0.59\% (real return). Since 1950 it would be 100 \left(e^{\left(\frac{log(199/100)}{2006-1950}\right)}-1\right)=1.24\% (real return).

Here’s an comment to the Van Housing Blogger’s post by “rentah”. He/she says:

As freako has pointed out in prior threads, we need to know more about the ‘equivalent standard house’ to which Shiller refers. If it’s gotten smaller over the years because of increased density, or if it is now on less land, the Shiller analysis underestimates real RE returns.

I’m reiterating this even though I really like the Shiller graph and my own bias is that people overestimate how good an investment RE actually is, largely because they don’t have any other investments to speak of.

David Chilton is that you? That last part sounds a lot like the Weathy Barber, the fact that for some people their home is their only investment, or in some cases their own “good” investment that they have ever made.

“rentah” continues:

Regarding RE returns these next 5 years, well, the graph alone doesn’t tell us whether the crash will come in those 5 years, BUT the fact that we already know how much US housing has slowed, suggests the spike would be shown to have already turned on an updated chart, and when needle-spikes turn, they CRASH.
>50% correction coming up, Vancouver not exempt.

Popularity: 23% [?]

Housing Price Growth Rates in Vancouver

I just found some interesting estate price statistics for Vancouver from one of the forums at realestatetalks.com. Interesting stuff there. A couple of figures of note:

  • The nominal growth rate of house prices from 1976 to 2005 in Vancouver is 8.04% (real is only 3%).
  • The nominal growth rate of house prices from 1985 to 2005 in Vancouver is just over 5% (real looks to be about 4%).

I have always looked for good past statistics on housing price growth rates and found them difficult to find. Now I have some better numbers to use as a rough estimate of future growth, when doing simulations.

Popularity: 8% [?]




www.financialwebring.com