Showing posts with label Global Housing Watch. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
From the IMF’s latest report on Malaysia:
“The authorities continue to closely monitor risks emanating from the housing market, although the risks are deemed manageable (…). House price growth has declined from 6.5 percent in 2017 to 3 percent in 2018H1, and the volume of transactions has also declined. The number of unsold housing units that have been completed or are currently under construction is increasing and is mostly concentrated in high-rise buildings. Banks’ direct exposure to developers remain small and is closely monitored by the BNM. According to BNM stress tests, potential bank losses originating from a possible sharp real estate price adjustment and shocks to income and interest rates are small relative to the banks’ capital buffers. The BNM, MOF, and Ministry of Housing and Local Government have introduced new measures that help reduce the cost of property or of contracting a mortgage loan, with the objective to strengthen the demand for housing and facilitate leasing, and therefore gradually reduce the supply overhang. The impact of these measures should be evaluated on an ongoing basis to ensure effectiveness and correct potential distortions.
As systemic risks from the housing market dissipate, the residency-based differentiation in the real estate measures introduced in 2014 should be gradually phased out. Given banks’ sizable exposure to mortgage lending and to the construction industry, a real estate market price correction, through a reduction in household and corporate wealth, and these agents’ debt servicing capacity, could have a significant impact on growth and financial stability as NPLs rise. During 2012–13, the Malaysian House Price Index (MHPI) grew by a cumulative 24 percent, well-above its long-run annual average of 6 percent and, in 2014, amid further significant price increases, the number of transactions by non-citizens surged by 30 percent (…). The measures introduced in 2014 helped cool down the market (cutting growth in property purchases by non-citizens by over 50 percent in 2015 and by another 38.9 percent in 2016, and slowing the growth rate of MHPI to 9.4 and 7.4 percent in 2014 and 2015, respectively), avoid significant price adjustments, and reduce the rate of future debt build-up, thus reducing the probability of systemic distress. In the absence of a capital inflow surge for the time-being, but still high household leverage, gradually removing the residency-based differentiation in both measures is recommended as systemic risk dissipates. Carefully calibrated changes to the measures could have the additional benefits of helping to reduce the excess supply of high-end housing where nonresident buyers are concentrated and thereby the probability of a sharp downward price correction. Should the activity in certain segments again threaten financial stability, the authorities may consider macroprudential measures that target the specific segments, without a differentiated treatment of non-residents.”
From the IMF’s latest report on Malaysia:
“The authorities continue to closely monitor risks emanating from the housing market, although the risks are deemed manageable (…). House price growth has declined from 6.5 percent in 2017 to 3 percent in 2018H1, and the volume of transactions has also declined. The number of unsold housing units that have been completed or are currently under construction is increasing and is mostly concentrated in high-rise buildings.
Posted by at 9:20 AM
Labels: Global Housing Watch
Friday, March 8, 2019
On the US:
On other countries:
On the US:
Posted by at 5:00 AM
Labels: Global Housing Watch
Friday, March 1, 2019
From the IMF’s latest report on Malta:
“Rapidly rising house prices and rents may eventually pose financial stability risks while putting some vulnerable households at risk of poverty. Policies that help mitigate the rapid increase of house prices and make rents more affordable while strengthening households and banks’ balance sheets should be encouraged.
Strong demand for housing has continued to push up property prices. While some signs of overvaluation have started to emerge, recent house price trends can largely be explained by fundamentals such as e.g., strong immigration flows, rising disposable income, portfolio rebalancing towards property investment and a delayed supply response. Other factors such as the extension of the first-time home-buyer stamp duty relief, the reduced tax rate on rental income, surging demand for tourist accommodation and, for the high-end segment, the IIP may also have played a role (but are not directly controlled for in the empirical analysis conducted in Annex I).
Banks’ exposure to housing-market-related risks is high and increasing, and the introduction of macroprudential measures should proceed as planned. All the more so that households’ indebtedness is relatively high, low income households are vulnerable to housing price corrections and flexible interest rate on mortgages are prevalent.7 Against this backdrop, recent efforts to close data gaps (loan-level data collection) and the planned introduction of borrowerbased macroprudential measures such as caps to loan-to-value (LTV) ratios at origin, stressed debt service-to-income (DSTI) limits, and amortization requirements are steps in the right direction (see text table).
To be more effective, the new borrower-based measures could be refined in due course and exemptions to the LTV limit could be narrowed. To avoid excessive risk concentration, speed limits should be defined in terms of the total value of new loans, not in terms of the number of new loans, and speed limits for loans against secondary and buy-to-let properties, the likely most speculative segment, should be lowered as soon as concerns about any initial disruptions dissipate. Finally, the scope of the new borrower-based measures should be extended to also cover non-bank mortgage loans.
Rapidly rising housing costs are affecting vulnerable households. The government recently relaxed the eligibility requirements for rent subsidies, but the scheme should be periodically reviewed to ensure it remains targeted on low-income households. Further efforts should also be envisaged to accelerate the provision of social housing, including by fiscally incentivizing private investments.
Authorities’ Views
Rapidly rising property prices are viewed by the authorities as mainly reflecting economic fundamentals. Inflows of foreign labor and higher income in general are fueling housing demand. The authorities also see the impact of tax benefits for first and second-time home buyers, the reduced tax rate on rental income and the IIP as marginal. They stressed that the planned borrower-based macroprudential measures were carefully calibrated to have minimal market impact upon their introduction. The authorities have agreed that there is room for refinement, in due course, and emphasized that they can easily recalibrate the measures to mitigate financial stability risks emanating from the housing market in a timely and effective manner. The authorities also recognize the growing importance of making housing more affordable for vulnerable households. They emphasized the progressive nature of the new rent subsidy scheme. Projects are underway to increase the stock of social and affordable housing.”
From the IMF’s latest report on Malta:
“Rapidly rising house prices and rents may eventually pose financial stability risks while putting some vulnerable households at risk of poverty. Policies that help mitigate the rapid increase of house prices and make rents more affordable while strengthening households and banks’ balance sheets should be encouraged.
Strong demand for housing has continued to push up property prices. While some signs of overvaluation have started to emerge,
Posted by at 10:52 AM
Labels: Global Housing Watch
On cross-country:
On the US:
On other countries:
On cross-country:
Posted by at 5:00 AM
Labels: Global Housing Watch
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
From a paper by Charles Ka Yui Leung and Joe Cho Yiu Ng:
“This paper aims to achieve two objectives. First, we demonstrate that with respect to business cycle frequency (Burns and Mitchell, 1946), there was a general decrease in the association between macroeconomic variables (MV) and housing market variables (HMV) following the global financial crisis (GFC). However, there are macro-finance variables that exhibited a strong association with the HMV following the GFC. For the medium-term business cycle frequency (Comin and Gertler, 2006), we find that while some correlations exhibit the same change as the business cycle counterparts, others do not. These “new stylized facts” suggest that a reconsideration and refinement of existing “macro-housing” theories would be appropriate. We also provide a review of the recent literature, which may enhance our understanding of the evolving macro-housing-finance linkage.”
From a paper by Charles Ka Yui Leung and Joe Cho Yiu Ng:
“This paper aims to achieve two objectives. First, we demonstrate that with respect to business cycle frequency (Burns and Mitchell, 1946), there was a general decrease in the association between macroeconomic variables (MV) and housing market variables (HMV) following the global financial crisis (GFC). However, there are macro-finance variables that exhibited a strong association with the HMV following the GFC.
Posted by at 10:13 AM
Labels: Global Housing Watch
Subscribe to: Posts