July 8, 2006

Fifteeen Years to Revert to the Mean

"If there is a real shift downward in housing demand, it would have a dramatic impact across the entire economy," said John Benjamin, a professor of finance and real estate at American University.

Millions of Americans have become dependent upon rising home values to support home-equity loans and mortgage refinancings, which can be used to pay for cars, remodeling projects, clothes and more.

"We live in a consumption economy that is financed by debt," which in turn largely rests upon our home foundations, Benjamin said.

The labor market, too, depends upon feeding the hunger for housing.

Since the beginning of the economic recovery in November 2001, employment in housing and housing-related industries has accounted for 43% of the increase in private-sector payrolls, according to Asha Bangalore, an economist for Northern Trust Corp.


Housing bubbles don’t collapse suddenly. They go through a long series of self-reinforcing deflationary stages that typically last five to seven years. Given the extreme and unprecedented nature of the current housing bubble, I expect a ten- to fifteen-year downturn to follow this boom. The government will step in with all manner of supports and bailouts along the way, similar to those that created the bubble in the first place, so the exact trajectory of the decline is impossible to predict. Here I estimate how and over what time period the decline may occur.   



Chart 1 above shows that housing prices are strongly correlated to the unemployment rate. Housing prices fall as unemployment rises, and vice versa. Given that 43% of all jobs created since 2001 are housing (bubble)-related, a decline in housing-related payrolls can be expected to reinforce housing price declines in the bust part of the cycle. The rate of home equity extraction is a good proxy for the housing market itself. Home equity extraction tends to rise in line with property values and declines on the way down; no home owner wants to borrow against a deflating asset, and no bank wants to secure a loan against one either.
   

 
                                                   Home Equity Extraction
                           Chart 2: Home Equity Extraction - Past and Predicted

   
We’ll use home equity extraction as our yardstick to project the bust. Thanks to my friend Paul Kasriel at Northern Trust for the original of Chart 2, which shows home equity extraction from 1950 until 2005. I have modified it to show a possible trajectory of home equity extraction decline in seven steps, A through G, from now until 2020. While I’m fairly confident in the length of the entire process, the length and timing of each step is subject to a wide range of error.

Step A: You are here. Whether the rate of home equity extraction implodes from here (as shown) or decreases more gradually is a matter of debate, although in past boom-bust cycles, the bust rate of decline has been significantly more rapid than the boom rate of growth. What is not debatable is whether the rate of home equity extraction will revert to the mean rate of about zero, from the current rate of more than $250 billion annually. It will.

In fact, the rate of home equity extraction will tend to overshoot the mean to reach an extreme negative rate of equity extraction (building equity) that’s twice the rate of positive extraction that occurred during the boom phase. This relationship occurred in the previous two cycles, which bottomed in 1982 and 1995, respectively. This implies negative equity extraction of minus $500 billion per year at the cycle trough. Chart 2 shows a more optimistic prediction of negative $250 billion occurring between 2015 and 2020. This more prosaic estimate accounts for government efforts to mitigate the impact and minimize the overshoot, by offering specialized loans, making direct purchases of securitized mortgage debt, and so on.

Step B: As housing prices begin to decline, sales will continue, though more slowly and less frequently. Old habits die slowly. One year into the decline, housing speculators will have left the market, but home owners will generally still believe that prices will either resume their rise or at least flatten out, not continue to decline. Remember the first year of the stock market bubble decline, when most people hung in there until they’d lost all of their money? The first lesson of behavioral finance is that the most common mistake made by market participants is to hang on too long and fail to cut losses.

While home owners at this stage will borrow less against their houses, and loans will be more difficult to come by, the average home owner will still make frequent trips to Home Depot or hire contractors to make home repairs and improvements, believing they’ll "get their money back" in an increase in the value of their home at least equal to the cost of fixing it. Some home owners will put their home up for sale—if they purchased early enough in the boom so that they can still realize a profit, even selling at five to twenty percent below the peak price.


Step C: After prices have declined for two years, large numbers of buyers who purchased near the top of the market will begin to feel the psychological effects of being underwater on their mortgage. They will be less inclined to borrow money, or to spend money fixing up their home, as home improvement value increases will be swallowed up by general market price declines. There will still be profits to be made by those who bought very early in the previous boom cycle, but fewer people will have this option.

As transaction volumes continue to fall, demand for housing-related employment will decline too. The first signs of labor market distress will start to show up, as more and more of that 43% of the private sector who found jobs in the housing industry are no longer needed. Coincidentally, major employers—such as the U.S. auto industry—will be going through major restructuring, adding to pressures on housing prices in some areas. Some home owners will need to sell at a loss in order to move to regions of the country where the labor picture is better, and will do this if they have enough equity and are not paying cash out of pocket to cover their remaining mortgage obligations. These sales will further depress home prices.

Step D: Three years into the decline, marginal home buyers will learn what owning a home really costs, versus renting when housing prices are declining and jobs are more scarce. Rent is a fixed cost, whereas home ownership presents many variable costs, including increased interest payments on ARMs, and rising tax, insurance, and energy costs. Also, upkeep for the average home typically costs five to ten percent of the price of the home, annually. As prices fall, homeowners will have less access to home equity loans. Many will not be able to afford repair and maintenance expenses. Homes in some neighborhoods—and in some cases, entire neighborhoods—will begin to look neglected, further depressing prices.

Step E: Five years into the downturn, rising unemployment will begin to more seriously affect the market, as indicated in Chart 1. As unemployment rises, homeowners will leave housing bust regions to move to areas where there are more jobs. Many houses will be sold at a loss, or even abandoned, as the market price falls below the loan value. Given the choice between paying cash out of pocket to sell their home or leaving the keys with the bank, many home owners will make the latter choice.

Step F: Ten years into the downturn, real estate will be widely regarded as a terrible, "can’t win" investment. McMansions will be subdivided for rental as multi-family homes.

Step G: Ten to fifteen years after the start of the decline in housing values, prices will bottom out, setting the stage for the next boom. Time to buy.

iTulip.com



Permalink • Print • Comment

Monthly Costs Outweigh Purchase Price

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) recently released a very interesting report on housing affordability; one that runs counter to most of the recent studies about this area of the economy.

The fourth annual National Housing Opportunity Pulse is conducted by the NAR’s Housing Opportunity Program which seeks to provide Realtors with the tools and information they need to promote community housing opportunities by encouraging local Realtor associations to help consumers gain access to housing.


The 2006 version of the study found that Americans overwhelmingly believe that it is not the purchase price of homes that provide an obstacle to home ownership, rather it is the monthly price of staying in that home. Furthermore, that concern is not necessarily based on the mortgage payment itself, but on the ancillary costs associated with home ownership. By a two-to-one margin Americans think that high monthly payments rather than down payments are the greatest obstacle to buying a home.

Surprisingly, rising property taxes were cited by 34 percent of survey respondents as the leading cost concern associated with owning a home. The second most frequently cited concern - mentioned by 28 percent of those surveyed, was the growing cost of energy. Only 14 percent said that rising interest rates would deter them from becoming homeowners.

The study said that in 2003 the average monthly mortgage payment, including principal and interest, was $840. By April 2005 that figure had risen to $1,015, an increase of 23.8 percent. One year later that figure had risen another 11.5 to $1,132. These are painful increases but they are just the beginning.

NAR quotes Energy Information Administration comparisons for February 2006 and February 2006: electric costs were up 12 percent for the period; natural gas increased 28 percent; home heating oil (the principal heating source in the Northeast) rose 25 percent. Furthermore, according to the Census Bureau, state and local property taxes which averaged $969 in fiscal 2002 and $985 in 2003 were $1,121 per person (sic) in 2004.

NAR found that more than 42 percent of Americans ranked the lack of affordable housing in their communities as one of their top three concerns. However, 82 percent cited high energy costs and 53 percent were concerned about the lack of affordable health care. Nearly one-third are concerned that they will never be able to buy a home and 58 percent feel that the cost of housing is becoming a drag on their local economy.

Americans are also concerned that their children or other family members will be shut out of housing in their own communities. Fifty seven percent cited this as a concern and 48 percent were worried that they or their family members will be forced to live in less desirable areas due to the cost of housing.

The concern about affordable housing is spilling over into rental property. Sixty eight percent of survey respondents feel that even renting a home is becoming too difficult for local families - an increase of 7 percent in a year. As a response to this, a remarkable 80 percent of Americans are now willing to support more affordable homes in their local communities and 68 percent would be more likely to vote for candidates who pledged to make housing more affordable. The latter is a six percent increase in the last two years.

USA Today, commenting on the NAR study said that "One big risk is that the affordability crisis could accelerate the growing chasm between rich and poor, making that gap harder to cross."

Mortgage Daily News

 



 

Permalink • Print • Comment

The Criminal Past Of Mitch Freifeld

In an article published by Origination News, Mitch Freifeild, president of Global Net Branch Solutions, admits to having a criminal background that involved charges for passing bad checks and credit card fraud. Freifeld also admitted to having been addicted to prescription drugs.

Although I find it admirable for him to come clean with his criminal past, I can’t help wonder about its timing. Freifeld and Ron Litt of Advantage Credit  launched the Coalition Against Broker Fraud during the NAMB convention in Philadelphia last week.




Permalink • Print • Comment