Real Estate and Housing (Residential)

Latest story

125 Shares28 Views

Fannie and Freddie, the Big Mortgage Backers, Face Climate Risks

by

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac know increasing floods and wildfires are a problem. Dealing with them, however, would require trade-offs.As sea levels rise and natural disasters become more intense, homes in low-lying coastal areas or tinder-dry mountains are starting to lose value.That’s a problem for the finances of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored enterprises that back half of the nation’s outstanding mortgages — and keep the residential real estate market liquid by buying mortgages from banks and repackaging them into securities.In the first year of the Biden administration, financial regulators seemed to recognize the risk, identifying the mortgage market as one of the main channels through which climate change could destabilize the financial system.Since then, reports have been published, comments gathered and summits held. But when it comes to insulating the two enterprises and borrowers from climate-related catastrophe, the Federal Housing Finance Agency — which regulates Fannie and Freddie — has issued only vague guidance.“It came out and I thought, where’s the rest of it?” said Carlos Martín, director of the Remodeling Futures Program at the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies.The issue comes with risk for taxpayers as well, since the federal government took Fannie and Freddie into conservatorship in 2008 after the financial crisis. Fannie and Freddie have reserve capital buffers, but large losses could force the government to intervene.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 150 Shares32 Views

    in Economy

    What Walter Mosley’s Fictional Hero Teaches Us About Race and Real Estate

    by

    About a third of the way through “Farewell, Amethystine,” the latest novel in the author Walter Mosley’s series about a private investigator named Ezekiel (Easy) Rawlins, Easy sets out for a late-night meeting with a gun and a hunch.The book is on a narrative precipice in which our gumshoe has knocked on enough doors and been told enough lies that both he and the reader understand that the simple missing-person case presented in Chapter 2 is about to become violent.But before it goes down, Easy pauses the action to make a weird declaration: He doesn’t need this job. He makes more than enough money renting real estate.Easy is a Black World War II veteran who fled the Jim Crow South for a better life in Los Angeles. In “Devil in a Blue Dress,” the 1990 classic that started both the series and Mosley’s career, Easy takes his first case so he can pay his mortgage and uses a windfall to add a rental property. The ups and downs of real estate continue as a recurring theme and story engine, especially in the early books, where the remedy for some tax lien or underwater mortgage is often to solve whatever mystery is driving the plot.Now, two decades of buying and holding later, Easy is flush. As he explains in “Farewell, Amethystine,” his 12 buildings have a total of 101 rental units that a friend manages for a 0.8 percent fee. Subtract that commission along with mortgage payments and general upkeep, and his take-home is $26,000 a year in 1970 (the year the novel takes place), which, adjusted for inflation, would be about $217,000 today.“I wasn’t rich,” Easy says. “But I sure didn’t need to be going out among the hammerhands and scalawags in the middle of the night.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares158 Views

    in Economy

    Mortgage Rates Fell, Then Rose. What Comes Next?

    by

    Many would-be home buyers are still hoping for mortgage rates to come down as the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates. How much they will fall is unclear.Rafael Corrales, a real estate agent in Miami, recently showed houses to a young couple hoping to move from a rental into a home. They had been lured to the market after hearing that mortgage rates had come down.But when the couple went to get approved for a home loan, they found that the borrowing costs had ticked up once again.“They were very confused,” said Mr. Corrales, 49, an agent for Redfin. It pushed them back onto the sidelines of the housing market, and they’re now staying put in the hope that rates will fall again.Mortgage rates fell steadily from this spring through September, as economic data slowed and as investors began to expect a steady string of interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve. But the rate on a 30-year mortgage has reversed course and climbed sharply over the past month to 6.79 percent nationally, from about 6.1 percent at the start of October.The move has come as a shock to some home buyers, who had waited many months for Fed officials to begin lowering borrowing costs, hoping that they would bring relief to the mortgage market.The logic was fairly simple. When the Fed lowers its benchmark interest rates, the downward shifts tend to trickle through financial markets to lower other interest rates. While the biggest impact is on short-term rates, the effect can extend to 10-year Treasury notes, which mortgages closely track. And the Fed is, in fact, adjusting policy. Officials cut interest rates for the first time in four years in September, and they followed with a quarter-point rate cut on Thursday.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    U.S. average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage
    Source: Freddie MacBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Blames Immigrant Surge for Housing Crisis. Most Economists Disagree.

    by

    The former president often implies that deportations will bring down housing costs. Reality is more complicated.Former President Donald J. Trump and his running mate, Senator JD Vance, regularly blame America’s housing affordability crisis on a recent surge in immigration. They point to their plans for mass deportations of undocumented workers as part of the solution.But most economists do not believe that immigrants have been a major driver of the recent run-up in housing prices. Rents and home costs started to surge in 2020 and 2021, before the flow of newcomers began to pick up in 2022 and 2023.And while immigrants could have kept housing demand elevated in some markets, past studies suggest that they are a small part of the overall story. Even the economist whose paper Mr. Vance had cited as evidence said in an interview that she thought that immigration’s recent impact on housing costs had been minuscule.In fact, a number of economists and housing industry experts said that one of the solutions Mr. Trump was proposing — large-scale deportations — could actually backfire and make the housing crisis worse.That’s because immigrants do not simply add to the demand for housing: They are an important part of the work force that supplies it. Foreign-born workers make up a quarter of the construction labor force, and they are especially concentrated in trades like plastering, hanging drywall and roofing.Across many booming housing markets, particularly in the South, the recent flow of migrants has helped residential builders meet demand for both skilled trades and relatively unskilled laborers, industry groups say and job market data suggest.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    How Inflation and High Interest Rates Have Changed the Economy

    by

    As inflation cools and the Federal Reserve cuts rates, an era of economic upheaval is coming to a close, but not without lingering marks.People with jobs have started showing up at homeless shelters in Atlanta. Families who can’t cover their grocery bills are pushing up demand at a Boston food bank. A dearth of available houses is plaguing Sacramento. Yet reports of recent raises abound, and a partly retired homeowner near Pittsburgh is happy about his savings.America’s bout of painfully high inflation — and the period of high interest rates meant to cure it — is finally drawing toward a close. Price increases are nearly back to a normal pace, so much so that the Federal Reserve voted on Wednesday to lower borrowing costs for the first time in more than four years.But even as the nation’s tumultuous pandemic economic era begins to approach its end, the period is destined to leave lingering marks.There are many things to celebrate about the current moment. Inflation has so far cooled without a major economic pullback, a development few economists thought possible. Consumers are still spending at a solid clip. Years of strong job growth and solid wage gains have lifted up many workers, and a run-up in stock prices is padding retirement accounts.The Greater Boston Food Bank has delivered more than 100 million pounds of food every year since 2020, up from less than 70 million in 2019.Sophie Park for The New York TimesYet the past several years have also brought serious and lasting challenges. Prices remain sharply elevated compared with their prepandemic levels, and many families are still struggling to adjust. Some have seen their wages fall behind costs. For others, pay gains have kept pace with inflation, but the memory of cheaper egg and rent prices endures, leaving an ongoing sense of sticker shock. And across the country, housing affordability has tanked, a trend that could take time and even policy changes to reverse.Grocery Inflation Jumped, Then CooledGrocery inflation was even more rapid than overall price increases in 2022, though it has recently calmed notably.

    Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price IndexBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Harris Economic Plan Focuses on Prices, a Key Vulnerability

    by

    Vice President Kamala Harris has been balancing the challenges of defending “Bidenomics” and charting her own course on the economy.As Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled her economic plans in recent weeks, former President Donald J. Trump has accused her of being a Marxist, a communist and a socialist.When they meet on Tuesday night for their only scheduled presidential debate, Ms. Harris will have the opportunity to rebut those claims and confront Mr. Trump about his record of managing the U.S. economy.She will also lay out her vision, which has been challenging as she tries to defend “Bidenomics” and demonstrate that she has a plan to chart a new course amid widespread economic discontent among many Americans who are struggling with high prices and other affordability issues.In a compressed presidential campaign, Ms. Harris indicated that she would continue many of President Biden’s policies, which aim to raise taxes on companies and punish them for price gouging, while also trying to strike a more business-friendly tone. In some cases, such as her embrace of ending taxation of tips, the vice president has even shown a willingness to adopt the policies put forward by Mr. Trump.How Ms. Harris would ultimately govern if elected will depend largely on the makeup of Congress, but her initial suite of proposals — from taxes to trade to child care — suggests that she would take the economy in a vastly different direction than her Republican opponent.Cost of LivingPerhaps Ms. Harris’s biggest political vulnerability is the run-up in prices that occurred during the Biden administration. Mr. Trump has repeatedly blamed the vice president for causing inflation to surge after the coronavirus pandemic, a phenomenon that stemmed from a mix of factors such as supply chain issues, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and repeated bursts of fiscal stimulus to keep families and businesses afloat. The higher cost of goods initially hurt Mr. Biden when he was running against Mr. Trump, and Ms. Harris is now facing many of the same concerns from Americans who are feeling negative about a relatively strong economy.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Harris and Trump Have Differing Plans to Solve Housing Crisis

    by

    The two presidential nominees are talking about their approaches for solving America’s affordability crisis. But would their plans work?America’s gaping shortage of affordable housing has rocketed to the top of voter worry lists and to the forefront of campaign promises, as both the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris, and the Republican candidate, Donald J. Trump, promise to fix the problem if they are elected.Their two visions of how to solve America’s affordable housing shortage have little in common, and Ms. Harris’s plan is far more detailed. But they do share one quality: Both have drawn skepticism from outside economists.Ms. Harris is promising a cocktail of tax cuts meant to spur home construction — which several economists said could help create supply. But she is also floating a $25,000 benefit to help first-time buyers break into the market, which many economists worry could boost demand too much, pushing home prices even higher. And both sets of policies would need to pass in Congress, which would influence their design and feasibility.Mr. Trump’s plan is garnering even more doubt. He pledges to deport undocumented immigrants, which could cut back temporarily on housing demand but would also most likely cut into the construction work force and eventually limit new housing supply. His other ideas include lowering interest rates, something that he has no direct control over and that is poised to happen anyway.Economist misgivings about the housing market policy plans underline a somber reality. Few quick fixes are available for an affordable housing shortfall that has been more than 15 years in the making, one that is being worsened by demographic and societal trends. While ambitious promises may sound good in debates and television ads, actual policy attempts to fix the national housing shortfall are likely to prove messy and slow — even if they are sorely needed.Here’s what the candidates are proposing, and what experts say about those plans.Harris: Expand Supply Using Tax Credits.Ms. Harris is promising to increase housing supply by expanding the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, providing incentives for state and local investment in housing and creating a $40 billion tax credit to make affordable projects economically feasible for builders.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Why Interest Rate Cuts Won’t Fix a Global Housing Affordability Crisis

    by

    Central bankers are lowering borrowing costs, but that won’t be a cure-all for a widespread lack of affordable housing.To Moira Gallagher, 38, buying a house in Anchorage would be a step toward financial stability for her growing family. But even with a six-figure household income and stable jobs, she and her husband have struggled to make a purchase.High mortgage rates, limited housing supply and historically poor affordability have kept buying a home stubbornly out of reach for Ms. Gallagher, an economic researcher who is expecting her third child. Three- or four-bedroom homes in good school districts are both hard to come by and prohibitively expensive.“It makes it hard to feel secure,” she said. “It affects everything.”From Anchorage to Amsterdam, many developed and even emerging economies are confronting a similar problem: Housing supply is failing to meet demand, helping to push home prices to levels that are out of reach even for middle-income families.Affordability problems have been exacerbated by high central bank interest rates, which officials across the globe have been using to tackle rapid inflation. Those policy rates trickle through financial markets to elevate mortgage rates — making it even more expensive for borrowers to buy a home and for builders to finance construction for new houses and apartments.The second part of that equation is now poised to change. Central banks in many economies are lowering interest rates or preparing to do so imminently. The European Central Bank and Bank of England are already cutting borrowing costs, and the chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve signaled last week that it would start reductions in September.But those rate cuts are unlikely to be a panacea for housing affordability.While the shift in central bank stance is already translating into somewhat lower mortgage rates in many countries, borrowing costs are not expected to fall back to the levels that prevailed during the 2010s. Several economists said 30-year mortgage rates in the United States, for instance, could end up in the 5.5 to 6 percent range, down from their 7.5 percent peak last year but still up notably from the 4 percent that was normal before the pandemic.Home Prices Jump in Developed WorldHow inflation-adjusted home prices are shaping up across advanced economies.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    O.E.C.D. house price indexes, 2015=100
    Data reflects first quarter of each year.Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentBy The New York TimesWhat Share of Income Does a Typical Home Cost? Across metro areas in the United States, the cost of owning a typical home has been rising as a share of the local median income.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Share of income that would go to owning standard home
    Source: The Atlanta Fed’s Home Ownership Affordability MonitorBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Plans to Accuse RealPage of Enabling Collusion on Rents

    by

    The Justice Department is set to file an antitrust suit against the real estate company RealPage alleging illegal price-fixing facilitated by algorithms.The Justice Department plans to file an antitrust lawsuit as soon as Friday against the real estate software company RealPage, claiming its software enabled landlords to collude to raise rents, two people with knowledge of the lawsuit said.The suit, which will be joined by California, Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina, Washington and other states, was expected to accuse RealPage of facilitating a price-fixing conspiracy that boosted rents beyond market forces, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.The suit would escalate the government’s efforts to regulate what it sees as misuse of technology. Officials have sued Google, Amazon, Meta and Apple over what they said were monopolistic behaviors that harm consumers.RealPage’s YieldStar product, which gathers confidential real estate information, has been at the heart of the government’s concerns. Landlords, who pay for the software, share information about rents and occupancy rates that is otherwise confidential. Based on that data, an algorithm generates suggestions for what landlords should charge renters, and those figures are often higher than they would be in a competitive market, according to allegations in prior lawsuits against RealPage by state attorneys general.A spokeswoman for the Justice Department declined to comment.Owned by the private equity firm Thoma Bravo, RealPage has advertised its software to landlords as a tool that can help them outperform the market by 3 percent to 7 percent. It says its software is used in metro areas around the country.RealPage did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Thoma Bravo did not immediately respond to a request for comment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More