Housing affordability - Extract from my book Myth Busting Economics

Mon, 15 Jun 2015  |  

There is a lot of emotive codswallop being written and spoken about housing affordability and house prices at the moment, so I have included a brief extract from one of the chapters in my book, Myth Busting Economics.

Have a read and think about the current house price dynamics.

Oh, and if you want a copy of my book, click and pay here.

https://www.booktopia.com.au/myth-busting-economics-stephen-koukoulas/prod9780730321958.html 

Cheers, The Kouk

============================================
Extract from Myth Busting Economics

Think of housing affordability in this way.

In the mid to late 1980s, a house cost, say, $75 000 and required a mortgage of $60 000 — that is, a loan-to-valuation ratio of 80 per cent. Household incomes at this time were around $25000 per annum and interest rates were around 13.5 per cent. In these circumstances, it took around 20 to 25 per cent of a household’s after-tax income to make the monthly mortgage repayment. The other 75 per cent of disposable income could be spent as the householder wanted.

Fast forward to now. A house is around $625 000 and, based on a loan-to-valuation ratio of 80 per cent, the mortgage would be around $500000. Household disposable income is around $125000 per annum and the interest rate is 5.25 per cent (although the increased competition now compared with the 1980s means that not many people pay this advertised rate). In these circumstances, it takes around 20 to 25 per cent of a household’s after-tax income to make the monthly repayments.

While house prices are up, so too are household incomes and, critically, interest rates are structurally down.

This shows, quite starkly, that it is no tougher financially for a first- home buyer today to service an average mortgage on an average house than it was 20 or 30 years ago. It is just that in the so-called good old days, the average home buyer’s mortgage pain came through interest rates and not the house price. Now, the pain comes through the house price and not interest rates and, I suspect, expectations being skewed to buying above-average houses.

Looking at it another way, monthly repayments are much the same on a $400 000 mortgage with an interest rate at 5.25 per cent as they are on a $300 000 mortgage with an interest rate of 8 per cent.

As a homeowner with a mortgage, what would you prefer? The joy of buying a house at a low price, with a relatively low mortgage, but having to pay a high interest rate, or taking out a large mortgage on an expensive house but having a low interest rate to service that loan?

Any prospective home buyer should be largely indifferent to these dynamics. Those wanting lower house prices, beware! It might come at the cost of higher interest rates, which would do little or nothing to help affordability.

Think of it this way. House prices could undoubtedly fall to make them more affordable, and a return to 8 per cent interest rates would no doubt help achieve that. Imagine paying a 13.5 per cent mortgage interest rate (as paid in the 1980s) right now. Obviously, if that were ever to occur again, a first-home buyer’s delight in getting a cheaper house and therefore borrowing less would, by definition, be neutralised by the pain of higher interest rates.

For those bemoaning high house prices now by stressing the lack of affordability, go to one of those very good mortgage calculators that are so common on the internet. Plug 10 per cent, 13.5 per cent or even the 1990s peak of 17 per cent into the ‘interest rate’ box and see how much you could afford to borrow today. The exercise should change those perceptions of poor housing affordability in recent years.

I am not sorry for going on about this — it is a vital point to make. It is a roundabout way of saying that it has never been easy to get into the housing market for the first time or to upgrade to a nicer house, but it is no harder now than it was in the past. It is just that the dynamics and the mix are different.

What has not changed is that sacrifices need to be made to get your foot in the door of the property market.

comments powered by Disqus

THE LATEST FROM THE KOUK

Why Australians have lost $300 Billion this year

Mon, 22 Oct 2018

This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/3665708-004156966.html 

--------------------------------------- 

Why Australians have lost $300 Billion this year

The total wealth of Australians has dropped by close to $300 billion since the start of 2018.

How much of that is yours?

The fall in house prices and now the slump in the stock market is undermining the wealth of Australian householders.

This is an important trend given the solid link between the change in wealth and household spending. Numerous studies show that when wealth increases, growth in household spending is faster than it would otherwise be. It appears that householders view their extra wealth in a manner that sees them lower their other savings or use that wealth as collateral for additional borrowing fund extra consumption. They may even ‘cash in’ their extra wealth and use those gains to fund additional spending.

When they observe falling wealth, experience weak wages growth and realise their savings rates are perilously low, they will adjust their spending – down.

Labor almost home, not quite hosed

Mon, 22 Oct 2018

The extraordinary vote in the Wentworth by election, with the 18 or 19 per cent swing against the Liberal Party, presents further evidence that the Morrison government is set to lose the next general election.

There is nothing particularly new in this with the major nation-wide polls showing the Liberal Party a hefty 6 to 10 points behind Labor.

The election is unlikely to be held before May 2019, which is a long 7 months away. A lot can happen in that time but for the Liberal Party to get competitive, but for this to happen there needs to be a run of extraordinary developments.

In the aftermath of the Wentworth by election, the betting markets saw Labor’s odds shorten.

While the odds vary from betting agency to betting agency, the best available odds at the time of writing was $1.25 for Labor and $4.00 for the Coalition.

If, as most now seem to suggest, Labor is ‘across the line’, $1.25 is a great 25 per cent, tax free return for 7 months ‘investment’. Yet, punters are not quite so sure and seem to be holding off the big bets just in case something out of the ordinary happens.

While some segments of the economy look quite good, at least on face value – note the unemployment rate and GDP – others that probably matter more to voters – husong, share prices, wages and other high-frewquency cost of living issues are all looking rather parlous. And none of these are likely to change soon.

There is an old saying for punters – odds on, look on. But $1.25 for Labor seem great value.