Property Market – nowhere to call home

House prices are distorted by demand from investors and governments are making the situation worse

Houses have become so much more than homes and many of us are missing out as a result.  More than just a place to live, houses have become the investment option of choice during turbulent times.  The popularity of investment properties means that buyers looking for a home are being crowded out of the market.  Rather than correcting this distortion, government policies typically make things worse and leave the dream of their own home beyond the hopes of many.

No home sweet home

The property market is never far from any topic of conversation.  Since everybody needs a place to live, it affects us all.  The substantial price tag that comes with buying a house would be enough to weigh on anyone’s mind.  But property purchases take on even greater significance as real estate also counts as a form of saving for the future.  The money tied up in property is the biggest investment that many of us make.  This means that the ups and downs of the housing market shape the financial well-being of many families. 

The predominance of property investment is further accentuated as buy-to-lets become increasingly popular as a means of putting ones wealth to work.  The abstract nature of shares and bonds along with the shenanigans in the financial markets makes property seem like the safe-as-houses option.  Yet this extra source of demand for real estate inflates house prices beyond their value as a mere place to live.  Investment in real estate brings benefits, such as providing rental accommodation and improvements to neglected properties, but the costs also mount as investment in property increases.

With a relatively fixed amount of housing in large cities, one person’s buy-to-let gets in the way of a house becoming a permanent home.  Along with the benefits to home owners, neighbourhoods also have a greater sense of community with stable residents.  The higher house prices due to property investment results in home ownership being coupled with a larger amount of mortgage debt.  This makes the property ladder more tenuous for debt-laden buyers who could easily be caught out by any economic hardship.

Need to make room for more

Governments, which could work to limit these negative consequences, tend to only exacerbate the problem.  Policies targeting the real estate market differ across countries – tax breaks for mortgage debt, low levels of capital gains tax, easier access to loans.  But the common thread is that it is all too tempting for governments to please better off voters by bolstering the property market.  The predominance of monetary policy as the main tool for managing the economy makes this even worse by stoking up borrowing (and the property market) when the economy is weak. 

While pushing up demand, governments do too little to boost supply.  It is more housing that is often cited by politicians as the solution to buoyant property prices but government regulations and zoning rules are not reflective of the growing need for new houses.  Houses take too long to build while elections are never far off even though more building would make for good economic policy at a time when the economy is still suffering from a shortfall in demand.

Financial markets are awash with other places to invest.  Our animal spirits should be limited to parts of the economy where the ups and downs can be absorbed without wider consequences for the rest of us.  Housing is too important to get caught up in such investment games.

Inflation – More friend than foe

Inflation plays the role of the bad guy in economic theory but this may change now that we are faced with a greater threat to the economy

Inflation has been cast as a villain by economists but it could be a source of salvation.  Rising prices are often seen as one of the main evils in an economy – they push up the cost of living and eat into savings.  This may be the case in a normal economy but may not hold true considering that things are far from normal.  Instead, it might be that the high levels of debt weighing down the economy prove to be a greater menace.  In an ironic twist of fate, it is inflation that may prove to be our best weapon in our fight against high levels of debt.

I’ll be back (as the good guy)

Villains can turn into heroes with a twist in the storyline.  Just think of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character in the second Terminator movie.  The havoc wrought by inflation in the past is almost on the same scale of a cyborg from the future but it has left economists with an innate fear of its return.  Inflation has been tamed and no longer poses the same danger to the economy having been the focus of monetary policy for decades.

It was the global financial crisis that led to a new peril.  Interest rates that were kept too low along with creativity in the banking sector set the scene for a surge in the amount of loans.  The problem of excessive debt was made worse by policies designed to bring the economy back to life.  Monetary policy has left interest rates at record lows while also resulting in a flood of liquidity in the financial markets through quantitative easing.  This combined with government policy to revive the housing market has seen a dramatic rise in the volume of mortgages.

As we have seen with government spending, a large burden of debt can result in cutbacks which damage an economy.  If consumers are also saddled with debt, the resulting limits on consumer spending have serious implications for economic growth.  Debt is not only bad for borrowers but the resulting sluggish economy dims the prospects for everyone else as well.

More inflation now to save the future

While not a new technology sent from the future, something as simple as inflation could be one way of alleviating the burden of debt on both consumers and the government.  Inflation helps by increasing the size of the economy relative to any debts.  If wages increased along with inflation, households would also have more money for repayments of their loans and the greater tax revenue will be a boost for the government. 

There are a range of measures (including one preferred by Your Neighbourhood Economist) which could be used to nudge inflation upwards in a controlled manner while also adding momentum to the economic recovery.  Many economists would recoil from the idea of higher inflation almost as fast as they would run from a cyborg.  But this has more to do with economists being stuck in the past than the destructive powers of inflation.

There are some negatives to factor in but the overall effect of increased inflation would be positive.  Inflation will eat into our spending power through higher prices for many of the things that we buy.  However, spending on everyday items takes up a smaller portion of the earnings of borrowers compared to paying off debt.  Even though a policy of allowing more inflation would be biased towards those with debt, everyone would benefit from a more vibrant economy.  As the Terminator movies have taught us, our current actions shape our future and a little more inflation would be a small price to pay to bid hasta la vista to our burden of debts.

Drowning in Debt – Need Help

We are being pushed into borrowing our way back to economic growth but staying afloat also involves selling off our future

The last thing a drowning man needs is more water but this is how policy makers have chosen to react to the global financial crisis.  The global financial crisis came about due to consumers being allowed to take on too much debt in the past.  Yet, the policy response has been to push for greater borrowing by lowering interest rates and feeding money into the banking system.  Higher debt now can only mean greater repayments in the future.  This would be acceptable if a swift return to economic growth was on the way but this seems too optimistic.  Instead, while the economy is getting a temporary boost now, growing levels of debt are being forecast to depress the economy for years to come.

Cheap loans anyone?

The debt and water analogy works on many levels.  In the same way that water is essential for life to flourish, debt is needed for an economy to grow.  Yet, like water, too much debt can be as bad as not enough.  The appropriate level of debt depends on the pace of economic expansion.  Rapid economic growth will create greater demand for loans as business opportunities arise and asset prices rise.  Like a garden requires watering when the weather is hot, a booming economy can absorb more debt as the money generated through the loans makes it easier to fund debt repayments. 

The opposite is also true.  It is desirable to have fewer loans as an economy cools since paying off debt is tougher.  It seems a strange time to convince people to rack up more debt but that is what central banks are pushing for.  This is because the tools of monetary policy work by reducing the cost of money (through lower interest rates or printing more cash) when the economy is floundering.  Such policies make sense when assuming a rapid recovery in economic growth but even economists are pessimistic about the prospects for the global economy.

The other bail out option is for the government to ramp up spending through increased borrowing.  This is the typical response to dampened economic growth but concerns about high levels of government debt have limited the capacity for such a fiscal stimulus.  This has resulted in monetary policy having to take on the bulk of the heavy lifting in getting the economy moving again.  Businesses have typically not made use of the cheap credit on offer through the low interest rates (except to buy back their own shares).  It is the increased debt taken on by households that has been the main driver of economic recovery but this is neither balanced nor sustainable. 

Debt – paying the price

It is the role of policy makers to create an environment for encouraging economic growth.  Tough choices are necessary when few options are available but relying on households to pile up more debt seems irresponsible and short-sighted.  The ratio of earnings to house prices is on the rise at a time when wages are standing still.  This means that consumers will be saddled with debt repayments for longer (especially if house prices stagnate as is probable) and this will depress consumer spending in the future.  It seems a poor trade-off even at a time when the economy is underwater. 

This policy seems even dafter when considering that consumer debt is mostly unproductive.  Buying a house off someone else does not add anything to the economy (while spending on renovations does help a bit).  On the other hand, if the government were to borrow and spend more on education or infrastructure, this would increase the output capacity of the economy.  Yet, this sensible alternative is being dismissed even though investors are no longer shunning any government with excessive debt and interest rates on government debt are near record lows for many countries. 

It will ultimately be people like you and me who pay the price.  Our spending power is being put at risk at a time when the government’s own finances are drained and businesses are not putting their balance sheets in jeopardy.  It is likely to remain tough for many people to keep their heads above water and an economy saturated with debt may not provide much help.

UK economy is growing but not yet in recovery

Some good news at last for the UK economy but don’t expect the tough times to be over

The outlook for the UK economy is finally beginning to brighten following a harsh recession and weak recovery.  The Office for Budget Responsibility raised its forecasts for the UK economy with growth of 1.4% expected in 2013 up from a previous estimate of 0.6% in March while 2014 is expected to see growth of 2.4% instead of a prior March forecast of 1.8%.  While the government was keen to publicise this as good news, much of the improvement is due to factors that are likely to be temporary.  Government measures along with monetary policy are behind the perkier economy but the effects will not last and a proper recovery may still be some time away.

The unexpected boost to the economy has come through higher spending by households.  Many UK consumers are feeling better off with UK shares near record highs and the UK property market going through a period of resurgence.  Stock markets in many developed countries have been providing stellar returns as extra cash being printed by central banks flows into shares.  House prices have benefited through a range of government schemes aimed at increasing the availability of mortgages.  This has translated into more consumer spending through a mechanism known as the wealth effect which is the notion that people will spend more if the financial assets which they own are worth more.  The UK government has tried to tap into this effect on spending using schemes such as Help to Buy to lift house prices as a means to boost the economy due to few other options (such as higher government spending) being available. 

The wealth effect relies on growing levels of financial wealth which can be lifted by different measures but which ultimately rely on the health of the economy.  As such, temporary boosts are possible but asset prices (and wealth) can only be pushed up so far and may involve potential negative effects for the economy.  Higher prices for financial assets now come at the cost of price gains in the future  (such as a weaker property market in the future) with a reduced wealth effect.  This may be a necessary price to pay with few other avenues for generating growth but the tactic of pushing up property prices has also been used by the UK government to provide cover for its program of austerity measures. 

With public debt reaching around 75% of GDP in 2012, the government has given priority to cutting back its spending but this is controversial coming at a time when the overall economy is weak.  The government claims that the cuts are necessary as investors would not buy UK government bonds (resulting in the government having to pay higher interest rates) were government debt to get even more out of hand.  Concerns about debt levels have eased considerably since reaching near frantic proportions during the Eurozone crisis, but the government remains unrepentantly committed to slashing spending levels.  Cuts to government spending are going to continue for years to come with the stated goal of reaching a budget surplus by 2018 despite calls for a change in policy.

Other areas of the UK economy also have little to offer in terms of growth.  Exports from the UK have failed to pick up despite a weaker pound and the value of the currency has begun to rise again which does not bode well for UK exporters.  Investment is also weak with lending to businesses in decline.  It is proving tough to come up with an engine to drive growth in the UK – a recovery is long overdue but we may still have to wait.

British banks gone AWOL

The banking sector is in dereliction of its traditional duties in the economy and quick fixes will not be enough to make amends

After nearly collapsing and bringing the economy down with them, UK banks are further adding to their bad name by holding back the economic recovery.  Banks are either too weak or too caught up in making easy money to fulfil their traditional role in the economy.  The situation is made worse because monetary policy works through the financial sector and banks are crucial links through which money is fed into the actual economy.  Instead, bank lending to UK businesses has been falling, thereby dampening the impact of lower interest rates and pushing the Bank of England to pump more and more money into the economy (which is not healthy).  Why have banks seemingly abandoned their posts?

Banks have traditionally acted as intermediaries between those with money to spare and those in need of financing.  There is a surplus of funds at the moment due to quantitative easing by the central banks which is aimed at getting more households and companies to borrow.  But this money is not getting to businesses - partly because the weak economy has hit demand for loans but also because of the reluctance of banks to lend.  A large amount of debt, which could go bad due to the weak economy, is making banks cautious while new banking regulations are restricting banks’ capacity to take on fresh loans.  Small businesses have been hit hardest as there are few other options for getting cash.  As a result, there has been a large knock-on effect on the economy as small businesses are a significant source of jobs and innovation.

Other parts of the finance sector have failed to pick up the slack.  Investment banks (which are different to retail banks who carry out the functions above) have long had only weak links with the actual economy and continue to generate profits through their ability to make money from money while also attracting some of the best and brightest who could offer more in other sectors (see previous blog).  Firms such as Wonga, which offer lending services now shunned by retail banks, are being hounded for their trouble.  The only bright spot has been mortgage lending but that has been targeted by government initiatives along with monetary policy to the extent that the Bank of England has had to apply the brakes due to concerns about a housing bubble.

The failure of banking to facilitate the circulation of funds around the economy has resulted in surplus cash flowing into financial assets such as property or the stock market rather than being put to productive use in the actual economy.  The Bank of England has tried a scheme of providing banks with funds for lending but more needs to be done to clean up banks and change their behaviour.  One of the reasons why Japan took so long to recover from a financial crisis more than two decades ago was that it allowed problems in its banking sector to stagnate.  Let’s hope that it doesn’t take that long to learn the same lesson.

UK Property Market – Prudence over Politics

Why we should be happy that the Bank of England is putting the brakes on the government’s efforts to boost the property market.

It is the job of politicians to get elected, but it does not follow that governments always do what is in the best interest of voters.  This might be the best explanation behind the actions of the current UK government with regard to the housing market – angling for voters (and an economic recovery) by pumping up property prices with little concern about the long term health of the economy (for more on this, see rebound in UK house prices is not all good news).  Many expressed a sigh of relief when the Bank of England stepped in to put the brakes on a booming real estate market by taking away incentives promoting mortgage lending among banks.  It is something new to see a central bank taking a stance which puts them at odds with the government but it provides a good case for arguing for greater oversight of government policy.

The current understanding of the role of a central bank is as an independent body which watches over the economy with powers to intervene if there is too much or not enough growth.  Central banks are kept separate from politics where policies are aimed at winning over voters within a time frame of a few years.  Some aspects of government where a longer time frame is required such as monetary policy could be influenced in a negative way by political calculations and it is thought that central banks are better positioned to administer monetary policy in order to achieve goals such as warding off inflation.

The global financial crisis highlighted that low inflation in itself is not sufficient for financial stability with aggressive lending by banks combined with excessive gains in asset prices also shown as big threats.  Central banks have been given greater scope to oversee the overall health of the financial sector and this is behind the latest policy actions by the Bank of England.  The UK government was hoping that a buoyant property market would increase spending and create a feel-good factor propelling it back into power in elections scheduled for 2015.  Yet any gains in real estate prices without higher wages would be unsustainable and put home ownership beyond the reach of many, ultimately requiring weaker prices in the future to bring house prices back in line with the economy. 

Governments and central banks had previously been operating in their own separate spheres of influence but the extended remit of central banks may bring them into conflict.  This has the potential to work in a positive way to provide greater oversight for government policies shown to be at fault in the past (for example, high government borrowing in the UK in the run up to the global financial crisis).  Another example of how the European Central Bank did the most to save the euro while the various governments in Europe squabbled.  It is not hard to argue for giving more power to economists (see previous blog) when politicians provide so many reasons for doing so.  

A rebound in UK house prices is not all good news

The government in Britain has done its damnedest to revive the property market but this does not bode well for the future

Buying a house is typically the largest and most important purchase any of us will make.  It is a pity then that the property market is subject to the whims of policy while also being caught up in a craze in Britain for investing in real estate.  These forces have collimated to fuel a resurgent property market with new schemes from the government in Britain along with pledges for low interest rates while investment in property is growing again due to a dearth of other options.  But, rather than being celebrated, it should be seen as a distortion coming at the same time as the economy is in its worst slump for decades.  How did this strange turn of events come to be and why should we worry about it?

The property market, like any other market, should be controlled by the forces of demand and supply.  People need houses to live in, somewhere close to where they work, which is the source of demand for real estate in any specific location.  The supply  is the current amount of buildings already standing as well as any new houses that have just been put up.  The number of jobs, and attractiveness of the location, will dictate the strength of demand which is why house prices in London are higher than elsewhere. 

Property prices will also affect demand – higher prices will put people off moving to popular places while cheap housing will lure people to previously shunned areas.  Supply too is influenced by price with more houses likely to be built in locations where prices are high because more people want to live there.  The effects of both adding more buildings and of people moving away to find cheaper housing work in a way to temper the rising cost of property in desirable places.

However, houses are not the same as other commodities that we buy and sell. There are numerous forces at work which push property prices up higher than would normally be the case; residential property is  a source of investment for many people who buy-to-rent and this adds to the demand for property in prized locations,  the government in the UK likes to promote home ownership due to the belief that it gives people a greater stake in their community, and monetary policy  targets the housing market with low interest rates used to spur on purchases of real estate as this is deemed to be good for the economy. 

The boom and bust that came with the global financial crisis provides a great case in point.  Interest rates were relatively low in the early 2000s with the base rate set by the central bank reaching a low of 3.50% in 2003 and only edging up to 5.75% by 2007.  Cheaper mortgages fuelled a surge in prices and this was exacerbated by the media playing up the money to be made through investing in property.  The Bank of England was not concerned about this rampant rise as theory had taught economists to focus on inflation (for more, see Time to rethink Inflation).  And the government was also spurring on the economy with its own borrowing and spending binge. 

This all ended in spectacular fashion with a massive slump in property prices as lending dried up with the onset of the global financial crisis.  The government has since stepped in to try and prop up the housing market with its Help to Buy scheme which offers up financing support for home buyers to make up for limited lending options.  The government’s efforts to bolster the property market have instead triggered concerns about the perkiness of the real estate market at a time when the economy is not doing so well. 

Data released in the middle of August shows that property prices in the UK are rising as fast as during the boom in 2007 (but prices have yet to reach the same peaks as in 2007) with lending to first-time buyers also reaching a six-year high.  Yet, although the government has succeeded in reflating the property market, its aim of promoting home ownership is in tatters as this has dropped to 65.3% of households – which is the lowest level in 25 years.

Low interest rates add extra impetus to the recovery in the real estate market through two routes – making mortgages cheaper, but also making property a more attractive investment compared to leaving money in the bank.  As such, lending to landlords has also surged of late and reached the highest levels since late 2008.  This all suggests that the pickup in prices does not reflect an increase in genuine demand for houses but interest in property has been artificially generated as a part of government and central bank policy. 

This premature rebound in house prices is a boon for some but puts many others at a severe disadvantage.  While house owners will be sighing in relief, any prospective buyers will have to pay prices for property which have been inflated by the government.  In essence, the government is supporting the haves while penalising the have-nots with the goal of trying to shore up the economy.  Many of the have-nots are young people who are also struggling to find work amid the worst job market for decades. 

So along with lower pay, there will be a generation shackled with higher debt (if they are one of the lucky few who are able to grab onto the lower rungs of the property ladder) which does not bode well for consumer spending in coming years.  A buoyant property market now also means a slow rate of rises in house prices in the future – higher prices for property rely on increases in wages which were sluggish even before the global financial crisis.  So the government is cashing in on higher house prices now at the cost of a weaker property market in the future.  It seems like the government is going to a lot of trouble for something that is more likely to cause problems somewhere down the line.  Isn’t that how we got stuck in this slump in the first place?