 |
| 30 Yr Fix |
6.37% |
0.02% |
| 15 Yr Fix |
5.91% |
-0.01% |
| 1 Yr ARM |
5.17% |
0.00% |
| 5/1 ARM |
5.82% |
0.04% |
| 30 Yr Tres |
4.47% |
-0.05% |
| Fed Prime |
5.00% |
-0.25% |
|
|
|
|
 |
Free Subscription To News Alerts
Stay up to date on breaking news with our free News
Alert Service. |
|
|
State Of The Nations Housing - Harvard Study
6253
Views - Printer Friendly - Email
This Story To A Friend
The Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies recently released its annual State
of the Nation's Housing report for 2007. It is dismal reading.
While it states that the longer-term outlook for housing is (more) upbeat,
the length and depth of the current correction will depend on the course of
employment growth and interest rates, as well as the speed with which builders
pare down excess supply. The influx of immigrants and their children has and
should continue to drive household growth between 2005 and 2015 and, with the
enormous increase in household wealth over the past 20 years, healthy income
growth will help propel residential spending to new heights.
That's the good news. The flip side is that basic housing affordability
remains a major problem. "In just one year, the number of households with
housing cost burdens in excess of 30 percent of income climbed by 2.3 million,
hitting a record 37.3 million in 2005."
The report reprises the run-up in housing demand and prices over the last few
years, placing much of the responsibility for both with falling interest rates
and the increased and probably inappropriate availability of credit in many
sectors of the market.
The State of the Nation's Housing pegs the beginning of the downturn
to late 2005 although it didn't show up in most economic reports until mid 2006.
According to the Joint Center by late 2005 the combined impact of rising mortgage
interest rates and higher house prices were beginning to force buyers out of
the market. Magnifying the problem was a growing number of foreclosed homes
returning to the market and investors seeing the end of the big show, beginning
to exit the market. At this time builders pulled back hard on production but
"the retrenchment came too late."
By the third quarter of 2006 the correction had begun to spread to numerous
metropolitan markets and 277 of these registered a falling rate of housing permits
in the fourth quarter of 2006 compared to the fourth quarter of 2005. 74 of
the 148 metro areas studied by the National Association of Realtors® (NAR)
showed a year-over-year decline in median home prices.
The report notes that, now that the downturn is in full swing,
the question of its depth and duration hangs over that market. While the economy,
interest rates, and credit availability will pay major roles in the outcome,
so will the rapidity with which builders can work off excess inventory.
The number of vacant homes for sale jumped by one-half million between the
end of 2005 and the end of 2006 but this figure may be misleading as some seasonal
or occasional use home may have been taken off the market until conditions improve.
Assuming this oversupply "overhang" as the study calls it, is correct,
this means that demand for new homes was running about a quarter-million units
below the 2 million plus production in 2004 and 2005. This translates to a sustainable
demand for houses of about 1.9 million homes during that pre-slump period. As
this was about the number of homes built (or in the case of manufactured housing,
placed) last year, no progress is being made toward cutting inventories. Any
meaningful progress in this area would require that production falls to 1.66
million and it would take at least two years to work off the excess inventory.
"In the most pessimistic view, the overhang may exceed 1 million units,
meaning some rental vacancies may need to be worked off as well."
But yet, the report concludes, the potential impact of the
slowdown on consumer and remodeling spending hasn't quite hit. Home prices are
bound to soften further as they follow the downturn in home sales and starts;
homes will stay on the market for longer periods, and motivated sellers, builders,
and investors will reduce their prices. This process only began in late 2006
and then only in some locations. It has a ways to go.
With house prices no longer appreciating at a break-neck price, the risks inherent
in subprime lending products will increase. As more and more borrowers risk
losing their homes to foreclosure an accompanying problem is the number of mortgage
companies that have been and will be driven into bankruptcy and those that will
increase their reserves against losses.
But the study emphasizes the growing lack of affordability of housing in the
United States. The stagnant income growth among those households in the bottom
half of the economic distribution as well as restrictive land use regulations
which discourage production of lower cost housing are both responsible for forcing
up home prices and rents. While federal tax credit programs contributed to the
addition of about 133,000 new and renovated units in 2005, the supply of affordable
rentals continues to shrink.
In one telling graphic, a map of the United States is colored to reflect the
hourly income necessary to afford a home - rented or owned
- across the country. With the exception of pockets along the coasts and in
resort areas in Colorado and the Southwest where incomes of up to or in excess
of $21.75 are needed to afford even modest rentals, the map is a uniform grey
indicating a required income of $7.25 to $14.49 per hour. The federal minimum
wage is currently $5.15 per hour although many states have implemented higher
rates. Even when or if the proposed new federal wage is fully phased in it will
not cover the bottom end of this requirement given only one income earner in
the household.
And, Harvard says, the pressures of high housing costs are moving up the income
scale. Severely cost-burdened households in the bottom expenditure quartile
had only $436 a month to cover all other non-housing needs in 2005. This is
not a lot to feed, clothe, school, and provide transportation for even the average
family of four. Because of these housing costs, more and more people are resorting
to long commutes or moving in with other family members. The study does not
address the possibility that households are trading heat, food, and certainly
health care for shelter.
Federal assistance to very low-income householders is currently reaching only
about 25% of renters and virtually no homeowners. Without some commitment from
state and local authorities to lower the barriers to affordable housing the
prospects for a reduction in the numbers of households that are suffering from
housing cost burdens is not likely to improve.
So, what of the future of housing? The study concludes that
it is too early to make many guesses. Prices have just begun to soften, risky
loans are just now hitting reset dates, and lenders are beginning to tighten
credit standards. Still, no matter how long it takes, the market will eventually
recover. "Once excess inventories and credit problems are worked out and balance
is restored, ongoing demand for new and improved homes promises to lift the
value of new construction and remodeling to new highs. Greater productivity
will help raise real incomes for many while record wealth will allow households
to spend more on housing." And, house prices will continue to move up.
Related Tags
Select a Tag for more information related to that Tag. (View
All Tags)
housing bubble foreclosures
|
Comments (15)
The fact is we have overspending ocurring at a Federal Government level, and they try to absorb or HIDE the spending, with mythical value increases in housing. It should have been virtually IMPOSSIBLE to see 15-20% increases in values, in a home in a one year time, so essentially, a FALSE sense of value was created by the movement of homes over the past 5 years, because the FEDS dropped the rates to HISTORICALLY low rates, and opened up the guidelines, again to stimulate spending.
In the US, so the economy didnt TANK right after 9/11...
We all know... what goes up, must come down, and we are going to see the 5 year inflated value period will have to correct itself.. and the time to look at is jan 1st 2003.. the feds realized with the war, and the overspending that something had to be done... we will see depreciation for the next 3 years until the market gets back to 3-5% over what values were at the time of Jan 2003. These are the facts. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Tim
| Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:46:47 EST |
This is not a shock, the feds have been dumping the National debt deficiencies into the housing market for years. It has gotten worse since the Bush Administration, which incidentally, gave people a FALSE sense of security, and financial strength after 9/11. They had to stimulate the economy then, so essentially the just prolonged the inevitable. The other fact is, that houses have now become UNAFFORDABLE. The values will have to drop.
I am a mortgage broker, and real estate agent as well. In order for FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS to qualify... the values are going to have to come down. There is NO WAY, a person coming out of college making 30K can purchase a home for 200K. The National Median price of homes HAS to come down, in order to Stimulate the purchase market again. As americans we have been borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, for too long. The problem stems, from deeper impacts than housing directly..... |
|
| Above Posted By:
Tim
| Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:37:53 EST |
| Todd, you said it all in a nutshell!!!
"I think that, as mentioned, there is less discretionary cash for the average person. The affordability of housing, both in terms of ownership and for renters, has grown disproportionately with that of one's growth in income. todd "
PERIOD!!!! |
|
| Above Posted By:
DONNA
| Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:28:31 EST |
| Renting is your trial run at owning-if you can't properly rent a home you sure can't be responsible enough to maintain your own piece of the American dream. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Tina
| Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:25:30 EST |
| America (cans) must learn to live with the consequences that they have brought on themselves. Take responsibility and live within your means in a city you can afford. Call your lanlord at the onset of a problem followed with a written letter detailing the circumstances. Handle the small items yourself, remember this is your home whether you make house payments or rental payments. (Continued) |
|
| Above Posted By:
Tina
| Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:25:08 EST |
| Consumers consume at a rate above and beyond what they can afford. We are seeing the proof in the pudding. People are not putting back an emergency fund (3-6 months living expenses) and instead opt to live in debt. Renters do not take care of the properties they reside (changing the AC fillter, keeping water off the bathroom floors) thus the rents increase to cover the costs that they themselves could prevent. (continued) |
|
| Above Posted By:
Tina
| Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:23:51 EST |
| Many appraisers have indicated to me that a 3-5 year wash out period to regain balance would not be out of the question. There does seem to be more stability in the 100k-200k price range of homes. However, I have typically seen this to be more of a minority market place. Good Story...Todd Mortgage Consultant/ Wealth manager 15 years. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Todd
| Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:17:13 EST |
| How long. Local property taxes in the northeast has also grown disportionately to one's income. Now that subprime lending is virtually gone this too will be a major issue for people who typically needed to refinance for debt consolidation, it is virtually impossible to do so in this current market. Many of these people have little to no equity and many also took the option arm programs that add negative amortization to their priciple balance will this last? |
|
| Above Posted By:
Todd
| Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:16:51 EST |
| I think it would be an interesting study to determine the demand for housing over that of health care. I think that, as mentioned, there is less discretionary cash for the average person. The affordability of housing, both in terms of ownership and for renters, has grown disproportionately with that of one's growth in income. todd |
|
| Above Posted By:
Todd
| Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:15:43 EST |
| Affordability of housing is very much a factor of where one chooses to live. Eight years ago we built a primary residence in the north Georgia mountains, about 1-1/2 hours north of Atlanta. Land and construction costs totalled $135K. Two years ago we sold, at the peak of the boom, to Floridians who wanted a "second" home ... for $235K. We moved to Kingsport, TN (one of the Tri-Cities), and paid $135K cash for a solid and beautiful 1939-vintage home in Kingsport's historic district. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Roger
| Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:03:52 EST |
| In 2003, I sold my 3,000 sq. ft. Home in suburban Ventura County California.
I thought I was doing the right thing.
We traveled for three years.
Back in California again, making about 175K per year, a Home in my old neighborhood, is priced at 1.2 MM.
At my income, I can't afford to by that Home.
Rhetorically, what middle American family can actually afford to buy a 30 year old house at 600 K plus? |
|
| Above Posted By:
Mike
| Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:35:31 EST |
| After all, does it make sense to purchase a home for investment purposes when the mortgage, insurance and taxes are $3,500/mo. but market rent for the property is only $2,000/mo.? Of course not, yet it took place every day in Florida. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Patrick West
| Sat, 23 Jun 2007 18:23:40 EST |
| Very good article with a much more comprehensive economic view than others I've read. Everyone seems to be looking for an economist with physic abilities to tell them precisely when the residential market will turn around. Watch for a return to the fundamentals that make real estate a solid investment and you'll be on target. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Patrick West
| Sat, 23 Jun 2007 18:22:21 EST |
| Marcelo, that is a very good point. As long as our population keeps growing so will housing prices. Simple supply and demand. Most people only look at interest rates as driving housing prices, they do not realize that human population is the backbone of what steadily drives prices up. We can weather high interest rates, but if tomorrow half the population was gone, we would be in a lot of trouble. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Carlson
| Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:38:14 EST |
| I would like to point out 1 thing: Everthing will continue to go up in prices, this is the nature of economics, with limited resources (such as land) and growing demand (such as the human pupulation), of course housing prices will go up at some point in time,. This is all long run forecasts, not very helpful to people who are alive now with limited time. As Keynes so nicely put it "In the long run we are all dead" |
|
| Above Posted By:
Marcelo
| Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:47:06 EST |
Post A Comment
Please fill out the form below to submit a comment.
|
 |
NEW VIDEO
|
 |
|
Trump Talks Economy, Oil and Real Estate
|
 |
|
New Evidence of Deceptive Practices at Countrywide
|
|
Why doesn't someone start taking responsibility for this mess, everyone is busy pointing fingers at loan officers, title companys,...
Read
|
There is enough blame for everyone in the housing crisis. The borrowers should understand what they are getting into - ignorace is...
Read
|
Throwing more laws at the problem a only a bandage for a gushing wound. I am a Florida lawyer working with more and more people ev...
Read
|
|