Thursday, 8 August 2013

House Buyers – Is 20% Down Payment Always Better?

by Mike Holman
Money Smarts
www.moneysmartsblog.com


In Canada, if you buy a house and have less than a 20% down payment, you have to pay a CMHC (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation) fee to insure the mortgage.  It should be the goal of all home buyers to have a larger down payment, but it’s not always possible.

One scenario is where someone has enough money to make a 20% down payment and is wondering if they should use all the money for the down payment or put down a smaller down payment and use the extra cash for other things.  Another scenario is where a buyer is close to reaching 20% down payment and only has to borrow a small amount of money to reach 20%.  Should they do it?

I can think of three examples where a person bought a house with a smaller down payment, even though they had enough money or means (via borrowing) to reach the 20% necessary in order to avoid the CMHC fee.  One blogger shall remain nameless, the other person was me (12 years ago) and the third person is a blogger at Moneyville, which is owned by the Toronto Star.  I’m going to use Madhavi (the Moneyville blogger) as my example, only because she is the most recent.

Madhavi and her family owned a condo, which they sold and bought a family house.  They netted $115,000 from the condo sale and bought a house for $560,000.  20% of $560,000 is $112,000, which means she could have put down a 20% down payment and avoided the CMHC fee.

Instead she decided to use roughly half of the money to pay down debts ( a worthy use ) and only put down a 10% down payment.

The problem with only paying a 10% down payment is that you have to pay the CMHC fee.  Does that mean she paid a big fee just to consolidate some unsecured debts?

She mentioned in the article that the CMHC fee was $12,000 including tax.  Had she put down $115,000 down, the CMHC fee would have been zero since mortgages with a 20% down payment or higher do not require insurance.

By using a smaller down payment, Madhavi was able to reduce the interest rate on $59,000 of debt.  If we’re going to analyze the wisdom of paying a $12,000 fee, we have to include the interest cost benefits as well.

The average interest rate of the unsecured debt that was paid down was not mentioned, but she did say that $45,000 of it had interest rates from 6% to 10%.  For argument sake, let’s assume that the average interest rate of all the $59,000 debt she paid off was 4% higher than her mortgage rate.

In other words, she paid $12,000 to decrease the interest rate of $59,000 of debt by 4%.

As to whether this was a good move or not – we have to consider how long she would have taken to pay off the $59,000 of unsecured debt, had she not used part of her down payment money to pay it off.

4% interest on $59,000 for one year is $2,360.   If she doesn’t pay the principal down at all – it will take five years for the interest saved to equal the CMCH fee.  After that, she will have saved money by using a smaller down payment.

If she would have paid down the $59,000 quick enough to keep the total excess interest (4%) cost below $12,000, then she would have been better using 20% down and avoiding the CMHC fee.

Of course, it’s impossible to know what the future holds, but I would suggest that in Madhavi’s case, it’s likely that paying a smaller down payment and paying the CMCH will have a neutral or positive outcome.

The reason I say that is because if you buy a house when you have a lot of unsecured debt (at least $59,000 in Madhavi’s case) and it appears that the house cost itself is a stretch – I don’t think it’s likely that they would be in a position to pay off extra debt very quickly.

Had they put 20% down and saved the CMHC fee, they would have had higher monthly payments, probably would have taken quite a while to pay down the unsecured debt and would have paid more in extra interest than the CMCH fee cost.

What if I don’t have any or much unsecured debt and have to borrow to reach 20%?

Madhavi bought a house with a huge amount of unsecured debt.  I suspect it is more common for people to buy houses who have little or no debt (other than an existing mortgage).  For this scenario, the numbers change quite a bit and it is a lot more likely that if you can borrow enough money at a reasonable rate to make the 20% down payment, you will come out ahead.

What if I have the 20% down payment, no debt, but need some money for other things?

If you have the cash for 20% down payment already and little or no debts – it’s a no brainer.  You must use the cash for the down payment and then just borrow any money you need for closing costs, furniture etc.

Tuesday, 6 August 2013

Rising rates creating increasing dilemma for homeowners


Financial Post


The interest rate dilemma has arrived again for homeowners.

What once was a no-brainer decision, locking in your mortgage rate for five years or even 10 years, now has a question mark attached to it.

Blame the U.S. federal reserve for easing up on its bond buying program. Bond rates have climbed fast and mortgage rates are just following.

Variable rate mortgages, which track prime and are vulnerable to Bank of Canada decisions, are still being offered at about 2.6% for five years. But instead of competing with a 3% fixed rate five-year close mortgage, the competition is a 3.5% product.

It may be just 90 basis points but on a $500,000 mortgage, that’s not small change. Based on a 25-year amortization and $500,000 mortgage, the 2.6% variable would mean monthly payments of $2268.35 and about $60,000 in interest on a five-year term.

The 3.5% product means a monthly payment of $2496.36 and about $81,000 in interest over the term.
Once again it’s the first-time buyer, who is on the edge of being able to crack this market, squeezed out.

“It’s hurting them but also benefiting the rental market,” said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist with CIBC Markets.

Mr. Tal said the surge in the housing market we are seeing happens every time there is a fear of rising rates — consumers try to get into the market before it’s too late.

“I’m hearing a lot about people trying to blend and extend,” said Mr. Tal. Under that scenario, consumers contact their bank before their mortgage is due, hoping to extend their current loan at today’s still historically low rates.

If anything, the gap might widen between rates for short-term and long-term mortgages, after being historically low. “It means sensitivity to interest rates will rise because people will go to what is affordable,” said Mr. Tal.

None of this will likely make Jim Flaherty, the finance minister, happy. His government has gone to great lengths to slow the market and wants people locked into long-term mortgages so they don’t face the shock of suddenly rising rates.
What has gone on is the discounting has shrunk. It’s absolutely sneaky and it’s done on purpose
One of Ottawa’s subtle rules changes was to allow consumers to qualify for a loan based on the rate on their contract as long as they agreed to lock in for five years or longer. If you go with a variable rate, you must qualify for a loan based on the much higher 5.14% posted rate for a five-year fixed closed mortgage.

The Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals found that in 2012, 79% of new mortgages were for a locked-in product, 10% for variable and 11% a combination of the two. Ottawa’s rule changes had an impact on those numbers but so did the deal of a lifetime on a five-year mortgage.

Jim Murphy, chief executive of CAAMP, wonders about what the impact of higher rates will be for new buyers when stacked on top of tougher rules.

His groups pointed out this month that sales for homes under $400,000 in the greater Toronto area were down 18% in May from a year ago. For homes priced above that level, sales were down just 5%.

“All of these changes have impacted the first-time buyer,” said Mr. Murphy. “Now we are seeing rising rates and that will have an impact too.”

Vince Gaetano, a principal at monstermortgage.ca, said the gap has become wide enough to convince him to go variable now.

Strangely enough, banks have not moved quickly to change their 5.14% posted rate — the percentage nobody actually accepts but which everybody qualifies based on.

“What has gone on is the discounting has shrunk. It’s absolutely sneaky and it’s done on purpose because they don’t want to move people away from not qualifying at all,” said Mr. Gaetano.

Another reason the banks don’t want to change the posted rate is it’s used to calculate any penalty on your mortgage. A higher posted rate would shrink your penalty, said Mr. Gaetano.

“It’s a very cleaver way for the banks to keep the handcuffs on people,” he says. “I still see people just break their mortgages outright. Variable is attractive too because of all the games banks play with breaking mortgages and penalties. With a variable mortgage, it’s three-months straight and simple.”

Ottawa’s new rules creating ‘red hot’ market for homes under $999,999


Financial Post


The hottest new Canadian housing-market niche isn’t stacked urban townhouses or suburban condo towers, but homes of any kind priced just shy of $1-million, since federal government rules began favouring homebuyers paying in the six-figure range over bidders that break the million-dollar mark.

The market for homes under $1-million has become “red hot,” agents say, and that’s at least partly because new rules brought in by Ottawa last year make it impossible to get a loan backed by mortgage-default insurance if the property is valued in the seven figures.

The result: Bids for $999,999, or close to it, are increasingly common as even some wealthy would-be homeowners struggle to secure the necessary financing under new government rules.

“It’s created an artificial hot market for homes under $1-million because you just don’t try to go over that amount,” said Vince Gaetano, a principal at mortgage broker, monstermortgage.ca. “Housing sitting just above $1-million is sitting just a little bit longer.”

But fewer buyers in the marketplace for homes at $1-million-plus, means an opportunity for those who can come up with a big enough down payment that they don’t need default insurance to qualify for a mortgage. “There’s a deal to be had,” said Mr. Gaetano. “You see all these homes selling in the $900,000s and [sellers] are sitting there with a home listed for $1,050,000 and wondering what is going on.”

Toronto real estate agent David Batori said he just sold a house for $999,900 after the bidder’s agent said his client just wouldn’t go any higher.

“The agent said ‘we can’t go over a million bucks under the new rules because we have only 5% down,’” said Mr. Batori.

Anyone with less than 20% down and borrowing from a financial institution regulated by the Bank Act must purchase mortgage-default insurance.

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp., the federal Crown corporation that controls about 75% of the mortgage-default insurance market, says those larger home loans still represent a small portion of the market.
It’s created an artificial hot market for homes under $1-million because you just don’t try to go over that amount
At the end of the first quarter of 2013, just 4% of CMHC’s total insurance-in-force portfolio had an outstanding loan amount exceeding $550,000, which was one percentage point less than the same period in 2012.

Still, Mr. Batori said the new rule has become a factor in the Toronto market. “Under $1-million is going crazy. It’s red hot,” he said, noting the house he sold for $999,000 was originally listed for $1,039,000. Meanwhile, he had a similar home listed for $849,000 that attracted nine offers and ended up selling for $951,000.

Doug Porter, chief economist at the Bank of Montreal, said the trend would only have a notable impact in the four priciest markets: Toronto, Vancouver, Victoria and Calgary. Nevertheless, he said this kind of market distortion is to be expected when the government draws an arbitrary line in the sand.

“It doesn’t surprise me at all,” said Mr. Porter. “You’re going to get distortions or breaks in the market when you have set levels.”

He assumes the federal government probably would not be too concerned by the phenomenon, since regulators designed tougher mortgage rules specifically to cool down Canadian housing prices.

“This is probably exactly what policy-makers were hoping to achieve taking some froth out of the market,” said Mr. Porter. “Below that [$1-million level] it might get a bit of a boost, but the flip side is everybody above [experiences a sales hit], so it’s offsetting.”

Ray Harris, president-elect of the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, said the limit on mortgage-default insurance for $1-million homes probably hasn’t had a significant impact on the Vancouver market.

“We do informal polling every month and we see 75% to 80% of buyers do not need CMHC mortgage insurance,” said Mr. Harris. “I think … the rules just told people to stay within their means, anyway.”

While Vancouver’s downtown market attracts a lot of headlines with single-family detached homes selling well over $1-million, Mr. Harris said there is plenty of product available below that threshold. “It’s definitely just a sliver of the market. The majority of people paying $1-million have more than 20% down,” he said.

First-time home buyers undeterred by mortgage rules, rates


Financial Post


About two-thirds of first-time buyers say they’ll purchase a home as planned and are unaffected by new mortgage rules brought in by Ottawa a year ago, says a new survey.

The findings come as the banks continue to increase long-term interest rates in the face of rising bond yields but refuse to bump up the posted rate for a five-year, fixed rate closed mortgage — a key measure in deciding how much a consumer can borrow after the new rules were introduced.

Rates on the five-year mortgage have been rising steadily since the beginning of May in response to bond yields. At one point the Bank of Montreal offered a five-year, fixed rate closed mortgage for as little as 2.99% but that’s now up to 3.59%.

Meanwhile the posted rate has stayed at 5.14% at most banks. That posted rate is used by Ottawa to establish what is called the qualifying rate for consumers who require mortgage default insurance. Consumers not locking in for five years or more face the qualifying rate but since it has hasn’t risen they can borrow as much as ever.

A department of finance spokeswoman noted the five-year is set by the Bank of Canada and is based on the posted rates at Canada’s largest banks.

“The Government continues to monitor the mortgage market and protect taxpayers,” said Stéphanie Rubec manager, media relations, via email. “Prices for financial products, including mortgage interest rates, reflect a financial institution’s business decisions. Due to the fact that taxpayers are the ultimate backstop for government-backed insured mortgages, financial institutions are expected to lend prudently.”

Farhaneh Haque, director of mortgage advice and real estate-secured lending at Toronto-Dominion Bank, said for most consumers it hasn’t had an impact because the majority of mortgages are for longer than five years — meaning consumers can use the lower rate on their contracts to qualify.

“The profile for our customers is the longer term anyway so it hasn’t had a material impact,” said Ms. Haque.

The Bank of Montreal survey, conducted by Pollara, found on the one year anniversary of the latest mortgage rule changes 66% of Canadians buying for the first-time will do so as planned.

Among the other changes was shortening of amortization lengths from 30 years to 25 years. The survey found 14% of Canadians will buy sooner, partially out of fear rules could get even tougher.

Meanwhile there is very little to indicate the posted rate will be rising any time soon, despite the fact government of Canada five-year bond has risen about 65 basis points since May 1.

“You do have to remember when rates where at all-time lows they didn’t lower the qualifying rate either,” said Rob McLister, editor of canadianmortgagetrends.com. “I have never talked to a banker or lender who has openly admitted they are keeping the rates low to qualify more people.”

He says it’s mostly a practical issue for qualification because very few people actually take the posted rate. Mr. McLister said some lenders like to keep it low to appear more competitive.

But there is no question the qualification rate will have to rise if bond yields keep rising. Plus, rising long-term rates might send people back to cheaper variable rate products, creating a more urgent need to tighten loan requirements.

“Once you get a one percentage point gap between short-term and long term, people start looking at variable,” said Mr. McLister.

David Madani, an economist for Capital Economics, agrees it is just a matter of time before the qualifying rate and posted rates start to jump. “There is usually a bit of a lag,” said Mr. Madani.

One bank economist, who asked not to be named, said there is a caution at the banks right now about the bond market. “They want to know that these rates are here to stay,” said the economist.

Home sales recovering but condo prices having trouble keeping pace


Financial Post


Existing home sales appear to be rebounding in Canada’s two most expensive markets with a new trend showing a widening gap between low rise home prices and condominiums in Toronto.

In the Vancouver market, the local real estate board said July sales came in 40.4% ahead of a year ago and were 0.1% above the 10-year average.

“Demand has strengthened in our market in the last few months, which can, in part, be attributed to pent-up demand from the slowdown in sales activity we saw at the end of last year,” said Sandra Wyant, president of the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, in a release.

The overall Toronto market for existing homes continues to show signs of a strong rebound, while the condo sector lags with prices increases just above inflation.

The Toronto Real Estate Board said there were 8,544 sales in July 2013, up 16% from a year earlier and the best July since 2009 and third best on record. The board says new listings are rising, but at a slower rate than sales.

“Despite recent increases in average borrowing costs, home buyers are still finding affordable home ownership options in the greater Toronto area,”said Diane Usher, president of TREB, in a release. “We are a year removed from the onset of stricter mortgage lending guidelines and many households who put their decision to purchase a home on hold have reactivated their search. An increasing number of these households are getting deals done.”
 
Among the key changes — the fourth time Ottawa has tightened mortgage rules — was a lowering of amortization lengths from 30 years to 25 years. A longer length lowers monthly mortgage rates and allows consumers to get a larger loan at the expense of paying more interest.

TREB said the tight market conditions helped push the overall average price in the GTA to $513,246, an 8% increase from a year ago.

“The low-rise market segment continued to be the driver of overall price growth,” said TREB, noting condominium prices are still rising ahead of inflation. The average condo price rose 3.4% from a year ago.

TREB now see prices rising during the rest of 2013 and into 2104.

“Months of inventory for low-rise homes remains near record lows, suggesting that sellers’ market conditions will remain in place in the second half of 2013. An increase in listings in 2014 would lead to more balanced market conditions and a slower pace of price growth next year, albeit still above the rate of inflation,” said Jason Mercer, senior manager of market analysis.

Meanwhile, REBGV says its price index for Greater Vancouver is off 2.3% from a year ago but flat from a month ago.

Over a five-year period single family detached home prices have help up far better than apartment units. The index for single family detached homes is up 11.2% over half a decade while apartments have experienced only a 0.2% gain.

Canadian home prices climb but at slower pace

TARA PERKINS - REAL ESTATE REPORTER
The Globe and Mail
 
Canadian home prices were 1.8 per cent higher in June than a year earlier, the smallest annual gain since November, 2009.

The pace of home price increases has been slowing in the wake of the sharp downturn in home sales that began last summer and has only recently begun abating. But, while home prices aren’t rising by as much as they used to, they are rising more than many economists expected.

Indeed, many economists had been expecting prices to dip into negative territory this year, but now say that is now looking less likely given the latest data.

June’s prices are 1 per cent higher than May’s. While prices usually rise a bit more than that from May to June, the increase topped economists’ expectations at a time when the market is still recuperating from a significant slump.

“It looks like the market is stabilizing and picking up a little bit,” says Royal Bank of Canada economist Robert Hogue, who now expects house prices for all of 2013 to be slightly higher than in 2012, rather than slightly lower. “It’s a fairly sanguine pricing environment at this stage.”

But Mr. Hogue is sticking to his forecast that prices will fall a bit in 2014, when many of the condos that are currently under construction will be completed, putting pressure on prices at a time when interest rates are likely to increase. While Toronto’s condo boom is front and centre, a significant number of condos are also under way in Montreal and Vancouver, Mr. Hogue said.

Cities with stronger-than-average price gains in June included Hamilton (at 7 per cent), Quebec City (5.6 per cent), Calgary (5.5 per cent), Winnipeg (3.9 per cent), Toronto (3.6 per cent), Edmonton (3 per cent), and Halifax (2.3 per cent), according to the Teranet-National Bank Index. Montreal (1.3 per cent), Ottawa-Gatineau (1.1 per cent), Victoria (-4.6 per cent) and Vancouver (-2.8 per cent) dragged down the national average.

National Bank economist Marc Pinsonneault said he too is no longer expecting prices to fall this year.

“The rises in May and June were stronger than I was expecting, even if they’re not exceptional for that time of year,” he said. “We see subdued increases in the next few months.”

In a research report, he did warn however that rising mortgage rates could still put a damper on things. “While home resale activity has strengthened in recent months, this resilience may be put to the test given the rapid increase in mortgage rates in June,” he wrote.

Will there be a housing bubble in Canada? Not likely.

TMG The Mortgage Group
 
 
One day the economy is growing and thriving, the next day, the housing bubble is about to burst and the country is stagnating. This is the fickle nature of the media. Not only was this the news a few years ago, but gloomy economic news is still reported by the media today. It seems that every new research or opinion by a financial pundit gets press time.
 
A closer look at the facts of what's occurring in the economy tells a clear story. Just last week, Statistics Canada reported that the economy grew the fifth month in a row, as gross domestic product (GDP) was 1.6 per cent higher in May than the same month a year ago.
 
 
 
On the job front, Statistics Canada found that in May, the country had its best month for job creation in more than a decade, and remained steady in June.
 
Also last week, the Conference Board of Canada and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business reported a surge in business confidence and that companies were preparing to boost investment and increase hirings.
 
The news is equally as good for the housing sector, one area analysts look at to gauge the health of the economy. Who can forget what happened to the U.S. and global economies when their housing sectors got into trouble. It didn't happen in Canada, which is one reason the country got through the recent global recession in good financial shape.
 
The Canadian Real Estate Association reported that home sales increased in June for the third straight month and prices also rose. This combination is cause for concern among some economists and the reason why there's new talk of a housing bubble. However, a report by TD Economics debunks that idea with some solid observations.
 
 
 
While it's true that household debt is high and is reaching levels seen in the U.S. just prior to that country's crisis, it's the ability to manage that debt that should be the focus. In the U.S. for example, mortgage interest rates started to climb and the delinquency rate started to rise at the same pace that household debt was rising.
 
Here, in Canada, households are less vulnerable for a few reasons. The first is the low interest rate environment, which is helping to keep mortgage costs down. Second, the delinquency rate here, which is the percentage of mortgages in arrears 90 days, is about a third of what was happening in the U.S. just before the fall.
 
Finally, Statistics Canada, in its first quarter of 2013 economic report, found that high household debt and the housing market is starting to balance, which means the new mortgage rules implemented by the federal government and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions has worked. Those changes helped to slow the growth of household debt. The result is that debt growth is at its slowest pace since 2003.
 
It's true that household debt is still high and condo markets in Canada are still uncertain, yet there's no real chance that interest rates will increase suddenly or that there will be a quick uptick in unemployment, which was the condition in the U.S.
 
The new Governor of the Bank of Canada Stephen Poloz said the prime rate will remain where it is at least until the end of 2013 and into mid-2014. This will help keep all household costs down. A confident business sector means more jobs, and could mean pay raises as well, which means households will be able manage their debt.
 
So read the news reports about housing bubbles with some healthy scepticism - Canada and Canadians are in good financial shape for the future.
 
 
About The Mortgage Group Canada Inc.
TMG Canada is an innovative and progressive mortgage brokerage company. With mortgage professionals serving 9 provinces and 3 territories, TMG is national in its reach helping Canadians navigate their unique mortgage options with over 50 lenders. TMG has a network of more than 800 mortgage brokers and agents and has helped more than 200,000 Canadians arrange their mortgages in the past 20 years.

Thursday, 1 August 2013

New ‘rules’ for mortgage investment corporations


Financial Post


Talk about timing.

Three months back, Calgary-based Builder’s Capital Mortgage Corp. filed a prospectus for an initial public offering of subscription receipts: the then non-redeemable investment fund hoped to raise between $10-million and $30-million and use that to invest in a portfolio of construction mortgages. The fund intended to qualify as a mortgage investment corporation under the Tax Act.

One week back, the same issuer, which already was a reporting issuer, filed an amended and restated preliminary prospectus for an initial public offering with the goal being to raise $20-million to $40-million. But three months on, Builder’s Capital has become a corporation even though it still has the same goal of qualifying as a mortgage investment corporation under the tax act.

So why the difference between the two filings – the later runs to 270 pages while the original filing was a more modest 80 pages — over such a short period of time?

Put it down to two proposals. The first would prohibit any investment fund from investing in mortgages other than mortgages that are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by the government of Canada, the government of a province or territory of Canada or by an agency of such governments.

The second proposal came from the Canadian Securities Administrators. In late March, the CSA put the proposals out for comment to be posted back by the end of June. In an April 2013 review of the proposed changes, Blakes said “the proposals seek to impose core operational requirements and investment restrictions upon CEFs [closed-ended funds] that currently only apply to publicly offered mutual funds and exchange traded funds.”

It termed the proposals “a fundamental rethink,” noting that they included investment restrictions, as well as a change whereby “offering expenses incurred in connection with the CEF’s initial public offering may no longer be borne by the fund.”

One other observer noted that under the proposals it was determined that “mortgage investment corporations [MIC] are not investment funds. That’s the crux of this,” he said noting that the changes will affect a slew of issuers.

This observer added that under the March 27 proposals , “the public MICs [which at the time were investment funds] would only be allowed to invest in insured mortgages. They were directed to investment funds but MICs got caught up because they were classified as investment funds. The second change occurred when MICs were deemed to be industrial issuers.”

The result: proposals about limitations on insured mortgages become “moot,” – though existing issuers will have to redefine themselves as a corporation and not as an investment fund.

Indeed, at least one MIC has detailed plans to conform to the new landscape. Timbercreek Mortgage Investment Corp. has called a special meeting of shareholders to transition from the Canadian securities regulatory regime for investment funds to the regulatory regime for non-investment fund reporting issuers.

In a recent release, it indicated the extent of the changes as it moves to a corporate structure, which will be decided by at a Sept. 9 meeting. It will affect reporting (every quarter vs every six months); governance; shareholder rights (to voting shares from non-voting); redemption rights (to none normally except a one-time right if the transition is approved from once a year); and trailer fees (to none from 50 basis points.) But as an example of the blend: investors in Builder’s Capital’s deal are being offered a retraction option once a year at 95% of net asset value.

The Rise of the Young Buyer

By LAUREN SCHUKER BLUM
The Wall Street Journal
 
 
Two years ago, when he was 26, Matt Winter paid a little over $1 million for a four-bedroom, Mediterranean-style house in Culver City, an artsy, formerly industrial section of Los Angeles. This month, the now 28-year-old Mr. Winter, who runs his own interior design firm, paid about $1.7 million for his second home, a three-bedroom, Spanish-revival in Westwood, a neighborhood near UCLA.
 
A new generation is skipping the "starter home" and betting heavily on high-end real estate. Lauren Schuker Blum reports on Lunch Break. Photo: Alexia Fodere for The Wall Street Journal.
 
"I have always felt that having your money in property is the safest and best thing to do if you want to grow your personal wealth," says Mr. Winter, who founded his design company at 23. None of Mr. Winter's assets are in the stock market—he says the market "spooks him" and that he prefers to invest in real estate.

Mr. Winter is part of a growing group of wealthy young buyers who are making inroads in the world of high-end real estate, acquiring properties at prices, and at a pace, that brokers say they have never seen before. Real-estate agents say that young people are buying more expensive homes than previously. They are also more likely to buy several properties, and use one as an investment. Buying real estate has grown more attractive, these young buyers say, compared with the stock market, which appears riskier to a generation that entered the workforce during a market correction.
 
In recent years, low interest rates coupled with lower real-estate prices had also made it easier for people in their 20s and early 30s—whom demographers refer to as "Generation Y" or "millennials"—to buy.

"In the last two months, half the folks I sold homes to were young entrepreneurial types—and they were all buying homes for over a million dollars," says Michael Rankin, a managing partner at TTR Sotheby's International Realty in Washington, D.C. "A few years ago, that kind of buyer was invisible. We had young folks buying starter condos for a few hundred thousand dollars. But this new wave is skipping that step entirely and going right for the high-end home."

In March, Mr. Rankin helped broker a deal for Grant Allen, a 34-year-old who works in venture capital and paid $1.1 million for a 2,400-square-foot three-bedroom row house in D.C.'s Logan Circle neighborhood. His 28-year-old fiancée also owns a condo in the city, but in part because of Mr. Rankin's advice the couple decided to keep it as an investment and now rent it out for $3,250 a month. "The stock market has popped lately, but I view it generally with a lot of skepticism," says Mr. Allen, who adds that he has recently reduced his exposure to public equities to about two-thirds of his assets from three-quarters. "These days, I feel like you need to put your money in something that's more of a sure thing."

While homeownership rates have fallen sharply in the past year among the middle-age, the rate has actually grown among young people aged 25 to 34, according to Census Bureau data. And while the average age of a first-time home buyer has remained relatively constant—at 31—over the past decade, brokers and analysts alike say that the wealthiest 10% of millennials will have a profound effect on the future real-estate market. The spending of this 10% will account for one fifth of all dollars spent on primary-home purchases over the next three years, according to the 2013 Survey of Affluence and Wealth in America, which is conducted annually by American Express Publishing and the Harrison Group, a market research firm.

And according to a new report issued by the National Association of Realtors, millennials now compose the second-largest group of recent home buyers, making up 28% of the pool. ("Generation X," the age group just slightly older, ranks first.)

"My generation—we got burned pretty bad by the stock market, we're tired of paying rent, and we don't see any better place to put our money," explains Oren Alexander, a 26-year-old real-estate broker who caters to many young, wealthy buyers. He had about 25% of his assets in the stock market but liquidated them in 2012 to invest in real estate instead. He is in contract to buy his first apartment for $1.5 million, a 1,000-square-foot two-bedroom on the Bowery in downtown Manhattan.

Some investment professionals caution against the strategy. Andrew O'Daniel, a senior vice president and financial advisor at Morgan Stanley, says home buyers of any age shouldn't look at their primary residence as an investment but rather as a useful necessity, because equities and other assets tend to offer better returns. "If they can make a little money off their home, because of where we are in the real-estate cycle, so be it. That's a nice fringe benefit," he says. "But it shouldn't be the number one objective."
                                     
Another factor in the surge: the tech boom. Brokers say many of the young buyers today have made money during the IPOs of technology companies such as Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, or they have profited by starting their own companies. Ken DeLeon, a broker in the San Francisco Bay area, says that he has seen a large shift in recent years among high-end home buyers, with 70% more people under 35 in the mix today than just two years ago.

Part of that comes as young tech titans, rich in stock, attempt to diversify their portfolios. "We felt that real estate was a much more stable asset class than equities. It also offers tax advantages, which a lot of our friends in tech are looking for these days," says former Facebook executive Rick Armbrust. Now 33, Mr. Armbrust and his wife, Sheila, a litigator, paid $1.2 million for a newly built 2,000-square-foot duplex condominium in Noe Valley about 2½ years ago.

These young techies are often making big real-estate leaps too, jumping from a modest monthly rental to a large home in a single step, rather than purchasing the starter home that was a home-buying hallmark of other generations. "One of my Facebook clients recently moved from an 800-square-foot rental apartment to a 9,000-square-foot home, which they purchased for $7 million," Mr. DeLeon recalls.

Many young buyers are also selecting the most expensive markets in the country, brokers say, skipping modest neighborhoods in favor of the exclusive. Fernanda Vidigal, 33, recently paid $2.2 million for a 2,530-square-foot condominium on Fisher Island, a members-only community in Miami. Ms. Vidigal, who works in finance and lives most of the year in São Paulo plans to spend an additional $1 million to renovate the unit, which has floor-to-ceiling windows that overlook the ocean. "The apartment was cheap for what it is," says Ms. Vidigal. "We got a good value—and moreover, it will be really easy to rent this place once it is renovated."

At the very high end, some of the most headline-grabbing purchases of the past few years have been made by wealthy young buyers.

Last year, a trust acting on behalf of young Russian heiress Ekaterina Rybolovleva paid $88 million for a penthouse on Central Park West—the largest residential transaction on record in Manhattan. Earlier this year, she picked up two Greek islands. The Ecclestone sisters, 20-something daughters of Formula One racing boss Bernie Ecclestone, have spent more than $150 million on properties in London and Beverly Hills over the past few years—and brokers say they may buy more.

This lavish spending at the high end is in part due to a consolidation of wealth among the global elite, says Jeff Hyland, a top luxury broker in Los Angeles whose firm Hilton & Hyland brokered a deal for the Ecclestone family. "There is so much more wealth today among the superrich," says Mr. Hyland. "More than ever these families need a way to safely and quickly distribute money to their children and to different countries. Real estate is a great answer."

Familial assistance, even at more modest levels, has also boosted the purchasing power of younger buyers, brokers say. Parents are helping their children make purchases more often than ever, these people add, in part because keeping their retirement funds in bonds or money-market accounts yields lower returns than in previous decades.

"I've seen more parents buy homes for their children in the last year than in my whole career," says Jade Mills, a luxury broker in Los Angeles. "It was very unusual 10 years ago. In the last year, I've sold six houses to clients whose parents paid for them."

Olivia Waldman, a physician assistant in surgery, approached her parents a few years ago about her desire to buy an apartment in Manhattan. To her surprise, they suggested they contribute to the purchase so they could buy a larger place that might be a better investment. They ended up buying a two-bedroom condo on the Upper East Side for $1.15 million in cash. Ms. Waldman, now 33, didn't contribute to the purchase but pays the monthly maintenance fee. "The apartment is much bigger than I personally would have wanted for myself, but it makes a lot of financial sense because it will resell better than a small studio would," she says.

Many of those parents are baby boomers, who are near retirement age and are also passing along more money to their children than prior generations, according to the study of the wealthiest 10% of Americans conducted by American Express Publishing and the Harrison Group. The study shows that while 24% of millennials have grown up wealthy, only 7% of baby boomers and 9% of Gen X Americans report growing up rich.

"For the first time since the pre-Depression, Gatsby era, we have a generation of kids whose parents made a great deal of money and are giving a great deal of it to their children," says Jim Taylor, vice chairman of the Harrison Group and an author of the study. "Prior to this, very few families had money through inheritance. There is a living wealth transfer currently taking place that this country hasn't seen in decades."

Real-estate developers say they too have noticed the influx of millennials and are now catering to their preferences. These buyers tend to like new construction, with modern touches such as floor-to-ceiling windows, high ceilings and rooms that flow from indoors to outdoors. They also gravitate toward open floor plans that provide large, fluid spaces for entertaining, rather than separate living and dining rooms.

"These days, we absolutely design with a younger buyer in mind," says Lance Tate, a Los Gatos, Calif.-based developer who builds spec homes. "We try to limit walls as much as we can to create an open floor plan and we avoid any ornate nonsense. We try to build modern and we also put solar on a lot of our homes."

Amenities are another draw, and many luxury buildings have had success luring millennials with the promise of pools, gyms, spas, and basketball courts. 515 East 72nd Street, a 41-story building in Manhattan, has all those features and 326 units that range from $725,000 to more than $12 million. In the last six weeks, managing director for Corcoran Sunshine Elaine Diratz, who oversees sales for the building, says she has sold about seven one-bedroom units to young buyers whose parents have assisted them with the purchase; only six one-bedrooms out of the building's 147 one-bedroom units remain.

Kimberly Lucero, who runs sales for the Ritz-Carlton Residences at LA Live in downtown Los Angeles, says she was surprised by the number of young people interested in units at the building. "You think of the Ritz as a more traditional place for the older, affluent crowd." But today almost 15% of the building's residents are millennials, she says. "Our condos have been graduation presents for USC graduates more than once, or gifts to celebrate a kid's first job."

To attract more young people, Ms. Lucero says she and her sales team upgraded the building's amenities in January, renovating the common areas where she noticed young residents like to entertain their friends. Now, in place of several generic lounges, the building features a sports-watching room with multiple televisions, a wine-tasting room, an entertainment library, a travel library and a daily breakfast buffet, served in a special lounge.

Brokers are also marketing to millennials by advertising through new channels. At 250 Bowery in Manhattan, the marketing team turned to social media to promote the building, running renderings of units through filters on Instagram, the photo-sharing site. The 24-unit luxury development sold out within a month when it hit the market late last year.

"The fact that the building was all over Instagram, that definitely made me feel like it was new and chic," says Joseph Hanono, a 29-year-old who runs his own insurance company and is in contract to purchase a 600-square-foot unit in the building for close to $1 million. "I feel like my neighbors there are going to be the kind of people I want to be neighbors with," he adds, "people who make me feel confident that I am building real equity with this apartment, rather than owning some random stock."

David Rosenberg: All’s fine on the Canadian homefront


The Financial Post


It looks like the much-maligned Canadian housing market is way more resilient than those Canada-doomsayers would believe
There’s no sign of a housing collapse in Canada, Gluskin-Sheff’s chief economist says.

David Rosenberg, the latest pundit to weigh in on the hard versus soft landing debate, says Canada’s housing market has almost recouped all the losses brought on by Ottawa tightening the mortgage rules in 2012.

Last year the federal government, concerned about Canadians’ rising debt levels, cut the maximum amortization period for a government-insured mortgage to 25 years from 30 years and capped home equity loans at a maximum of 80% of a property’s value — down from 85%.  Economists at the time expected the tightening to shave 10% to 20% off property prices, and cut into Canada’s GDP.

“It looks like the much-maligned Canadian housing market is way more resilient than those Canada-doomsayers would believe,” Rosenberg wrote in his morning briefing Tuesday.

The economist said existing home sales shot up “an impressive” 6.4% in the second quarter, the strongest performance since the end of 2010.

Existing home sales in June strengthened across the country, including a 6.4% leap in Vancouver, the market hardest hit by the slowdown. Even Toronto, ” a notable under performer,” saw sales climb 1%, he said.

“Bottom line: The Canadian housing market is not collapsing, but rather stabilizing after achieving the government-induced soft landing,” said Rosenberg.