"Housing" - Is It Really Recovering? Details Written by Lance Roberts | Friday, July 26, 2013 Tweet in Share a.cmp_shareicontextlink { text-decoration: none; line-height: 20px;height: 20px; color: #3B5998; font-size: 11px; font-family: arial, sans-serif; padding:2px 4px 2px 20px; border:1px solid #CAD4E7; cursor: pointer; background:url(//static.ak.facebook.com/images/share/facebook_share_icon.gif?6:26981) no-repeat 1px 1px #ECEEF5; -webkit-border-radius: 3px; -moz-border-radius: 3px;} .cmp_shareicontextlink:hover { background:url(//static.ak.facebook.com/images/share/facebook_share_icon.gif?6:26981) no-repeat 1px 1px #ECEEF5 !important; border-color:#9dacce !important; color: #3B5998 !important;} Share There has been much hoped placed on the "housing recovery story" over the last couple of years as it relates to the economy. With each passing month all eyes have been glued to television screens, and headlines, as the latest estimations of housing starts, completions, new and existing home sales, etc. are trumpeted as a sign of a renewed housing cycle. This is no trivial matter as real estate is seen as a bedrock to economic strength as much as it is the sign of achievement of the "American Dream." It is true that in past housing was a large contributor to the strength of economic growth in the U.S. The same was true for automobile manufacturing. The building of homes and cars increased economic output and the multiplier effect through the economy was large. However, due to the shift in the makeup of the U.S. economy, housing is no longer the contributor to the economy it once was. The chart below shows the percentage that housing and automobile manufacturing contributes to U.S. gross domestic product. At less than 3% the impact of increases in residential construction is very small relative to exports, which comprises roughly 40% of corporate profits, and Equipment Software spending which has increased worker productivity and lowered costs. At The Margin The problem with all of the analysis each month on the transactional side of housing is that it only represents what is happening at the "margin." Housing is more than just the relatively few number of individuals, as compared to the total population, that are actively seeking to buy, rent or sell a home each month. In order to really understand what is happening in terms of "housing" we must analyze the "housing market" as a whole rather than what is just happening at the fringes. For this analysis we can use the data published by the U.S. Census Bureau which can be found here . Total Housing Units In an economy that is 70% driven by consumption it is grossly important that the working age population is, well, working. More importantly, as discussed in "Obama's Economic Report Card:" "Full-time, benefit providing, employment is the only type of employment that matters for the average American. Full-time employment allows for an increasing standard of living, household formation, and higher personal savings rates." To present some context for the following analysis we must first have some basis from which to work from. Our baseline for this analysis will be the number of total housing units which, as of Q1-2013, was 133,082,000 units. The chart below shows the historical progression of the seasonally adjusted number of housing units in the United States. As an example, the most recent report of "existing home sales" showed that 5,080,000 homes were sold on an annualized basis in June. Since this is an annualized number we must divide it by 12 months for the estimated seasonally adjusted number of sales in June which was 423,333 homes. This number of home sales represents just 0.3% of the total number of homes available. This is what I mean by "activity at the margin." When put into this frame of reference the "existing home sales" report doesn't seem nearly as exciting. Vacancy Rate Out of the total number of housing units some are vacant for a variety of reasons. They are second homes for some people that are only used occasionally. They are being held off market for one reason or another (foreclosure, short sell, etc.) , or they are for sale or rent. The chart below shows the total number of homes, as a percentage of the total number of housing units which are currently vacant. If a real housing recovery was underway the vacancy rate should be falling sharply rather than rising in the latest quarter and hovering only 0.5% below it's all-time peak levels. Owner Occupied Housing Another sign that a "real" housing recovery was underway would be an increase in actual home ownership. The chart below shows the number of owner occupied houses as a percentage of the total number of housing units available. Despite the Federal Reserve flooding the system with liquidity, suppressing interest rates and the current Administration's efforts to bailout banks and homeowners, owner occupied housing is at it lows. Home Ownership Th e simple reality is that there has really been very little actual recovery in housing, and as shown in the first chart above, which explains its weak contribution to economic growth. The chart of home ownership really shows the lack of recovery the best. At 65% the current level of home ownership is the lowest that it has been since the early 1980's. However, the recent reports of sales, starts, permits, and completions have all certainly improved in recent months. Those transactions must be showing up somewhere, right? REO To Rent While the Federal Reserve and the current Administration have tried a litany of programs to jump start the housing market nothing has worked as well as the "REO to Rent" program. With Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, and the banks loaded with delinquent and vacant properties, the idea was to sell huge blocks of properties to institutional investors to be put out as rentals. This has worked very well. The chart below shows the number of homes that are renter occupied versus the seasonally adjusted home ownership rate. Do you see the potential problem here? Speculators have flooded the market with a majority of the properties being paid for in cash and then turned into rentals. As this activity drives the prices of homes higher, reduces inventory and increases rental rates - it prices out "first time homebuyers" who would become longer term home owners. The problem is that when the herd of speculative buyers turn into mass sellers - there will not be a large enough pool of qualified buyers to absorb the inventory which will lead to a sharp reversion in prices. Maybe this is why the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC, are looking to relax the regulation put in place after the last housing bubble which required banks to have "skin in the game." By removing that restriction banks can now go back to providing mortgages to unqualified buyers, pool them and sell them off to unwitting investors. Haven't we watched this movie before? While the surge in housing activity, which still remains at historically low levels as shown in the chart below, has certainly been welcome it should not be forgotten that it has taken massive bailouts, stimulus and financial supports to induce such relatively small amounts of activity. The mistake, however, as I addressed in "Housing Recovery, What Has Been Forgotten" is that: "There is no argument that housing has improved from the depths of the housing crash in 2010. However, while the housing market remains at very recessionary levels, recent analysis assumes that this has been a natural, and organic, recovery . Nothing could be further from the truth as analysts have somehow forgotten the trillions of dollars, and regulatory support, infused to generate that recovery. I recently penned an article showing the $30 trillion, and counting, that has been thrown at the economy, and financial system, to keep it afloat over the last 4 years. Of that, trillions of dollars have been directly focused at the housing markets including HAMP, HARP, mortgage write downs, delayed foreclosures, government backed settlements of 'fraud-closure' issues, debt forgiveness and direct buying of mortgage bonds by the Fed to drive refinancing and purchase rates lower. Of course, the Fed has also maintained its ZIRP (zero interest rate policy) during this same period with a pledge to keep it there until at least 2015. The point here is that while the housing market has recovered - the media should be asking ' Is that all the recovery there is?' More importantly, why are economists, and analysts, not asking the question of 'What happens to the housing market when the various support programs end?' With 30-year mortgage rates below 4% we should be in the middle of the next housing bubble - not crawling along a bottoming process." The housing recovery is ultimately a story of the "real" unemployment situation which still shows that roughly a quarter of the home buying cohort are unemployed and living at home with their parents. The remaining members of the home buying, household formation, contingent are employed but at lower ends of the pay scale and are choosing to rent due to budgetary considerations. As I stated previously the optimism over the housing recovery has gotten well ahead of the underlying fundamentals. While the belief was that the Government, and Fed's, interventions would ignite the housing market creating an self-perpetuating recovery in the economy - it did not turn out that way. Instead it led to a speculative rush into buying rental properties creating a temporary, and artificial, inventory suppression. The risks to the housing story remains high due to the impact of higher taxes, stagnant wage growth, re-defaults of the 6-million modifications and workouts and a slowdown of speculative investment due to reduced profit margins. While there are many hopes pinned on the housing recovery as a "driver" of economic growth in 2013 and beyond - the data suggests that it might be quite a bit of wishful thinking.
标签: Background经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
