Showing posts with label Global Housing Watch. Show all posts
Monday, June 20, 2022
From the IMF’s latest report on Switzerland:
“Housing matters for economic activity and financial stability in Switzerland. The mortgage market is large relative to the size of the economy and banks are heavily exposed. House prices have significantly outpaced income growth, and this trend has accentuated during the pandemic. The Swiss authorities have taken decisive action to address unsustainable developments, but vulnerabilities have increased. This paper shows that a fuller set of macroprudential tools can be more effective to reduce systemic risk. Adequate calibration and a forward-looking approach are key given lags between policy announcements and policy effects. The paper quantifies a suite of LTV/DSTI caps, amortization requirements, and ‘speed limits’ calibrated at the vintage level to guard against the build-up of vulnerabilities and strengthen resilience.”
From the IMF’s latest report on Switzerland:
“Housing matters for economic activity and financial stability in Switzerland. The mortgage market is large relative to the size of the economy and banks are heavily exposed. House prices have significantly outpaced income growth, and this trend has accentuated during the pandemic. The Swiss authorities have taken decisive action to address unsustainable developments, but vulnerabilities have increased. This paper shows that a fuller set of macroprudential tools can be more effective to reduce systemic risk.
Posted by 9:24 AM
atLabels: Global Housing Watch
Sunday, June 19, 2022
From a new working paper by Arpit Gupta, Vrinda Mittal and Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh:
“We study the impact of remote work on the commercial office sector. We document large shifts in lease revenues, office occupancy, lease renewal rates, lease durations, and market rents as firms shifted to remote work in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. We show that the pandemic has had large effects on both current and expected future cash flows for office buildings. Remote work also changes the risk premium on office real estate. We revalue the stock of New York City commercial office buildings taking into account pandemic-induced cash flow and discount rate effects. We find a 32% decline in office values in 2020 and 28% in the longer-run, the latter representing a $500 billion value destruction. Higher quality office buildings were somewhat buffered against these trends due to a flight to quality, while lower quality office buildings see much more dramatic swings. These valuation changes have repercussions for local public finances and financial sector stability.”
From a new working paper by Arpit Gupta, Vrinda Mittal and Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh:
“We study the impact of remote work on the commercial office sector. We document large shifts in lease revenues, office occupancy, lease renewal rates, lease durations, and market rents as firms shifted to remote work in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. We show that the pandemic has had large effects on both current and expected future cash flows for office buildings.
Posted by 9:29 AM
atLabels: Global Housing Watch
From a new paper by Stephen J. Redding:
“Economic activity is highly unevenly distributed within cities, as reflected in the concentration of economic functions in specific locations, such as finance in the Square Mile in London. The extent to which this concentration reflects natural advantages versus agglomeration forces is central to a range of public policy issues, including the impact of local taxation and transport infrastructure improvements. This paper reviews recent quantitative urban models, which incorporate both differences in natural advantages and agglomeration forces, and can be taken directly to observed data on cities. We show that these models can be used to estimate the strength of agglomeration forces and evaluate the impact of transportation infrastructure improvements on welfare and the spatial distribution of economic activity.”
From a new paper by Stephen J. Redding:
“Economic activity is highly unevenly distributed within cities, as reflected in the concentration of economic functions in specific locations, such as finance in the Square Mile in London. The extent to which this concentration reflects natural advantages versus agglomeration forces is central to a range of public policy issues, including the impact of local taxation and transport infrastructure improvements. This paper reviews recent quantitative urban models,
Posted by 6:52 AM
atLabels: Global Housing Watch
Friday, June 17, 2022
On cross-country:
On the US:
On other countries:
On cross-country:
On the US:
Posted by 5:00 AM
atLabels: Global Housing Watch
Thursday, June 16, 2022
From the IMF’s latest report on Denmark:
“Macrofinancial vulnerabilities remain elevated. Household leverage remains high by international standards and housing prices rose faster than incomes through the pandemic. Furthermore, a sizable share of newly-originated loans were interest-only loans, some with amortizing options that could be exercised by lenders if housing values fall. In addition, homeowners are increasingly taking out variable-rate mortgage loans and repaying fixed-rate loans which naturally increases the interest-rate sensitivity of homeowners. Thus, a domestic or regional house price correction, triggered possibly by a reassessment of fundamentals or a tightening of global financial conditions could reverberate in Denmark, weighing on the real estate market, private consumption, and investment. The impact could be amplified by the high interconnectedness of mortgage credit institutions (MCIs), pension funds, and insurance companies given their dependence on the housing sector. While the net impact is uncertain, high, and persistent inflation could weigh on bank profitability including through lower aggregate demand, or if highly-leveraged households cannot service their debt due to variable-rate mortgages resetting at higher rates.
(…)
They recognize that macrofinancial risks mainly stem from the housing market in combination with high household leverage and an increasing share of risky mortgages.
(…)
Macrofinancial vulnerabilities persist due to high leverage and an increasing share of risky mortgages. Following a prolonged period of low interest rates, high debt, combined with illiquid assets (concentrated in real estate via housing and pension assets), exposes households to price and interest rate shocks that can spill over to aggregate demand. Furthermore, many households have recently opted for interest-only mortgages with options for lenders to request amortization if housing prices fall, which could amplify adverse shocks. Many of these households would face markedly higher debt-servicing costs were they required to amortize their mortgages (DN 2021). A sharp revaluation could harm highly-leveraged households, particularly those who purchased in overvalued urban areas and low-income households. These vulnerabilities are compounded by the large and growing proportion of variable-rate mortgages, which are increasingly used to repay fixed-rate loans, exposing homeowners to higher interest rate risk. Moreover, MCIs and pension and insurance companies are highly interconnected and dependent on the health of the housing sector.
(…)
These developments warrant tightening prudential tools. Macroprudential tools aim to increase macrofinancial resilience and contain excessive risk taking. Staff recommend that new mortgages extended to highly-leveraged households be subject to minimum down-payment requirements or mandatory amortization until a minimum equity share is reached, regardless of maturity and type of interest rate fixation. As valuation-based measures can be less binding when housing prices appreciate rapidly (Chen et. al, 2020), the limits applying to ”highly-leveraged” borrowers should become binding if either DTI or loan-to-value (LTV) limit is breached, instead of the current joint requirement. Based on borrowers’ riskiness, differentiated limits on income-based measures and LTVs for interest-only and floating-rate mortgages should also be considered. In an environment of increasing mortgage rates, the “growth area guidelines” should be extended beyond Copenhagen and Aarhus and debt-service-to-income (DSTI) caps should be considered to protect against liquidity shocks. The proposed risk-based prudential framework should facilitate calibration of these measures, to account for risk differentiation across groups, e.g., first-time home buyers to improve affordability. National legislation should include borrower-based tools (limits on LTVs, DTIs, and DSTIs) in the policy toolkit (FSAP 2020).
To improve affordability, it is important to address features of the tax code and housing supply constraints that create price pressures. Incentives for the adequate supply of housing should be reviewed. Moreover, rent controls in Denmark are pervasive relative to peer countries. Once inflationary pressures abate, these should be relaxed to stimulate the rental market, while protecting the most vulnerable. Mortgage interest deductibility should be reduced as in other advanced economies, as this incentivizes larger housing purchases and higher indebtedness, pushing up prices (Gruber et. al, 2019). Linking property taxes to market valuations should be prioritized.”
From the IMF’s latest report on Denmark:
“Macrofinancial vulnerabilities remain elevated. Household leverage remains high by international standards and housing prices rose faster than incomes through the pandemic. Furthermore, a sizable share of newly-originated loans were interest-only loans, some with amortizing options that could be exercised by lenders if housing values fall. In addition, homeowners are increasingly taking out variable-rate mortgage loans and repaying fixed-rate loans which naturally increases the interest-rate sensitivity of homeowners.
Posted by 12:07 PM
atLabels: Global Housing Watch
Subscribe to: Posts