13/5/2014: Q1 2014 Mortgages Approvals Data: There Is a Rise, But...

Undoubtedly, you heard much about the latest IBF data on mortgages approvals showing huge increases in lending in March 2014 compared to March 2013. But are these increases as dramatic as the IBF claims?

Well, let's take a look at the data:

• In Q1 2014, total number of mortgages approved for house purchase as opposed to remortgaging was 4,357 which represents a large increase of 55% y/y. Remortgages approved rose to 334, up 18% y/y. And total number of mortgages approved is up 51% to 4,691. Sounds impressive, until your remember that November 2012-April 2013 was the period of huge volatility due to changes in tax breaks on house purchases. But more on this point below.
• By value, total mortgages approved in Q1 2014 rose to EUR782 million, or 56% up on Q1 2013. House purchases mortgages value was at EUR750 million, up 58% y/y and remortgaging was up at EUR32 million or +19% y/y.
• Average mortgage issued for house purchase purpose stood at EUR172,027 which is up 3% y/y, average re-mortgaging loan was EUR93,954 or down 1% y/y. So average mortgage issued for both purposes was EUR136,854 which is up 3% y/y.

Two charts to illustrate above numbers:

Note two things from above chart:

1. With such a large jump in March, number of mortgages approved is still barely above the trend line. Which might be a sign of solid technical support for further upside.
2. Average mortgage value, having risen slightly above the trend line is still consistent with downward pressure on mortgages issued. Things are still solidly trending downside here.

Note to the above chart: we are bang-on the trend line in March, so nothing surprising in the rise - it is in line with longer term trend. The series continue to show support to the upside, which is a good news.

But here is the kicker. Coming back to that problem period of November 2012 - April 2013, we have a pesky little problem: how do we compensate for the one-off change in mortgages issuance that took place due to changes in taxation. One way (pretty much the only way) is to compute trend and use it to replace the actual outruns in these 'troublesome' months. I've done this before, so you will be familiar with the chart below:

Here's the thing: in IBF data we have a 53% rise in house purchase mortgages approved in March 2014 y/y. Adjusting for the one-off tax changes yields a much shallower rise - of 8.2%. Ditto for value data: IBF data shows 50.3% rise, but adjusting for volatility induced by tax changes, we have a 5.4% rise.

Still, nice bit - there is a rise...

28/3/2014: 'Recovery' in Mortgages Lending... Back to 1995...

In previous post I have shown that IBF mortgages approvals data is primarily driven by the excessive volatility recorded at the end of 2012 - beginning of 2013, thus skewing the entire result for February 2014. The details here: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2014/03/2832014-irish-mortgages-approvals.html

However, we can also look at quarterly data and extend the series to cover periods before IBF data became available. Based on CSO's heavily lagging (the latest we have is Q3 2013) series for House Loans Approved and Paid and extending it with IBF data for Q4 2013, we have data on the issue of number of loans approved and their value from Q1 1975 through Q4 2013. We can also use January-February 2014 data from IBF to estimate Q1 2014 with relative accuracy.

Here are the results:

The argument is that January-February data and indeed data for the later part of 2013 shows improvement in the markets, and even recovery in the markets.

In the last 2 quarters, based on IBF data, there were around 4,510-4,530 house loans approved. This represents 8th lowest quarterly result for the entire history. This also represents lower levels of lending than in Q2 and Q3 2013. Prior to the onset of the crisis, there is not a single quarter on record when there were fewer new loans issued by numbers.

In terms of volumes of lending, without adjusting for inflation, things are only marginally better. Volume of lending over Q4 2013-Q1 2014 averaged at EUR809 million per quarter. This is comparable (but slightly lower) than levels of lending attained in Q4 1995-Q1 1996.

As you can see from the chart, you need to have pretty vivid imagination to spot any recovery in the above series.

28/3/2014: Irish Mortgages Approvals: February 2014

There were some boisterous reports in the media today about the latest IBF data on mortgages approvals in Ireland, covering February 2014.

Here are the facts, some of uncomfortable nature for the 'property markets are back' crowd.

1. Year on year, mortgages approved for house purchases rose 49.5% which, on the surface, is a massive nearly 50% jump, suggesting huge improvement in the markets (see below on this).
2. However, 3mo average approvals through February 2014 are down 16.2% on 3mo average approvals through November 2013. Which suggests that things are still running slower in recent months than they did before.
3. Top-up mortgages approvals have declined: down 6.6% y/y and down 27.3% on 3mo average basis compared to previous 3mo period.
4. Average value of mortgage approved for house purchase is up 6.5% y/y, but it is down 5.4% for 3mo average through February, compared to 3mo average through November 2013. So mortgages being approved do not support price increases in recent months. Or put differently, mortgages being approved afford lesser LTVs on homes.

Chart to illustrate:

Key takeaways from the chart above:

• Number of new mortgages approved is running well below the trend, so improvement in February is driven by something other than market growth. Instead, it is driven (as argued below) by extraordinary volatility in approvals around the end of 2012 - beginning of 2013, which was down to expiration of tax breaks at the end of 2012. 
• Average mortgage approved is on-trend and the trend is down not up. So things are getting worse, not better.

Next, volume of lending:

1. Total volume of loans issued for house purchase went up 59.1% y/y in February 2014, but
2. 3mo average through February 2014 was down 20.9% on 3mo average through November 2013. In fact, February 2014 lending was the second lowest level over 10 months, with the worst recorded in January 2014. The start of this year is worse than any 2 months period since January-February 2013, which were distorted by end of tax break in 2012 and stripping these out, this years first two months are the worst since May 2012.

Key takeaways from the chart above:

• February 'improvement' puts us below trend and within the general trend direction, so the reading is weak, but consistent with upward trend.

Now on to the main bit: What happened to drive February figures so dramatically up in y/y terms? The next chart explains in full (click on the chart to enlarge):

Key takeaways from the chart above:

• Statistically-speaking, all of the massive increase y/y in lending for house purchases in Ireland recorded this February is down to huge distortion generated in the data by the end of tax breaks in December 2012. There is no other story to tell.

2/2/2012: Sunday Times 29/01/2012 - irish property bust

This is an edited version of my Sunday Times article from January 29, 2012.

In a recent Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey of 325 major metropolitan areas in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, United Kingdom and the United States, Dublin was ranked 10th in the world in terms of house prices affordability. The core conjecture put forward in the survey is that Dublin market is characterized by the ratio of the median house price divided by gross [before tax] annual median household income of around 3.4, a ratio consistent in international methodology with moderately unaffordable housing environments.

Keep in mind, the above multiple, assuming the median household income reflects current unemployment rates and labour force changes, puts median price of a house in Dublin today at around €175,000 – quite a bit off the €195,000 average price implied by the latest CSO statistics. But never mind the numbers, there are even bigger problems with the survey conclusions.

While international rankings do serve some purpose, on the ground they mean absolutely nothing, contributing only a momentary feel-good sensation for the embattled real estate agents. In the real world, the very concept of ‘affordability’ in the Irish property market is an irrelevant archaism of the era passed when flipping ever more expensive real estate was called wealth creation.

What matters today and in years ahead are the household expectations about the future disposable after-tax incomes in terms of the security and actual levels of earnings, stability of policies relating to household taxation, plus the demographic dynamics. None of these offer much hope for the medium-term (3-5 years) future when it comes to property prices.

Household earnings are continuing to decline in real terms (adjusting for inflation) in line with the economy. The CSO-reported average weekly earnings fell 1.2% year on year in Q3 2011 once consumer inflation is take out. But the average earnings changes conceal two other trends in the workforce that have material impact on the demand for property.

Firstly, reported earnings are artificially inflated because the workforce on average is becoming older. Here’s how this works. Younger workers and employees with shorter job tenure also tend to be lower-paid, and are cheaper to lay off. Thus, the rise in unemployment, alongside with the declines in overall workforce participation, act to increase average earnings reported. This explains why, for example, average weekly earnings in construction sector rose 2.5% in Q3 2011 year on year, while employment in the same sector fell 4.1% over the same period. This means that fewer potential first-time buyers of property are having jobs, and at the same time as the existent workers are not enjoying real increases in earnings that would allow them to trade up in the property markets.

Secondly, the real world, rising costs across the consumer expenditure basket, further reducing purchasing power of households, is compounded by the composition of these costs. One of the largest categories in household consumption basket for those in the market to purchase a home is mortgage interest. This cost is divorced, in the case of Ireland, from the demand and supply forces in the property markets and is influenced instead by the credit market conditions. In other words, the 14.1% increase in mortgage interest costs in the 12 months through December 2011, once weighted by the relative importance of this line of expenditure in total consumption is likely to translate into a 2-3% deterioration in the total after-tax disposable income of the average household that represents potential purchaser of residential property.

And then there are effects of tax policies on disposable income. One simple fact illustrates the change in households’ ability to finance purchases of property in recent years: between 2007 and 2011 the overall burden of state taxation has shifted dramatically onto the shoulders of ordinary households. In 2007, approximately 46% of total tax collected in the state came directly out of the household incomes and expenditures. In 2011 the same number was 58%.

The above factors reference the current levels of income, cost of living and tax changes and have a direct impact on demand for property in terms of real affordability. In addition, however, the uncertain nature of future economic and fiscal environments in Ireland represents additional set of forces that keep the property market on the downward trajectory. For example, in Q3 2011 there were a total of 116,900 fewer people in employment in Ireland compared to Q3 2009. However, of these, 113,700 came from under 34 years of age cohort. Unemployment rate for this category of workers, comprising majority of would-be house buyers, is now 20.4% and still rising, not falling. Given the long-term nature of much of our current unemployment, no one in the country expects employment and income growth to bring these workers back into the property markets for at least 3 years or longer. Without them coming back, only those who are trading down into the later age of retirement are currently selling, plus those who find themselves in a financial distress.

Tax uncertainty further compounds the problem of risks relating to unemployment and future expected incomes. Government projections that in 2013-2015 fiscal adjustments will involve raising taxes by €3.1 billion against achieving current spending savings of €4.9 billion are rightly seen as largely incredulous, given the poor record in cutting current spending to-date. Thus, in addition to already draconian pre-announced tax hikes, Irish households rationally expect at least a significant share of so-called current expenditure ‘cuts’ to be passed onto households via indirect taxation and cost of living increases.

In short, there is absolutely no catalysts in the foreseeable future for property markets reversing their precipitous trajectory. No matter what ‘affordability’ ranking Irish property markets achieve, the demand for property is not going to grow.

This, of course, brings us to the projections for the near-term future. The latest CSO data for the Residential Property Price Index released this week shows that nationwide, property prices were down 16.7% in December 2011 compared against December 2010. Linked to the peak prices as recorded by the now defunct PTSB-ESRI Index, the latest CSO figures imply that nationally, residential property prices have fallen from the peak of €313,998 in February 2007 to ca €166,000 today (down 47% on peak). In Dublin, peak-level average prices of €431,016 – recorded back in April 2007 – are now down to close to €195,000 (almost 55% off peak).

Using monthly trends for the last 4 years, and adjusting for quarterly changes in average earnings and unemployment, we can expect the residential property price index to fall 11-12% across all properties in 2012. Houses nationwide are forecast to fall in price some 12-14% - broadly in line with last year’s declines, while apartments are expected to fall 11-12% year on year in 2012, slightly moderating the 16.4% annual fall in 2011.

More crucially, even once the bottom is reached, which, assuming no further material deterioration in the economy, can happen in H2 2012 to H1 2013, the recovery will be L-shaped with at least 2-3 years of property prices bouncing along the flat trendline at the bottom of the price correction. After that, return toward longer-term equilibrium will require another 1-2 years. Assuming no new recessions or crises between now and then, by 2015-2016 we will be back at the levels of prices recorded in 2010-2011. Between now and then, there will be plenty more reports about improving affordability of housing in Ireland and articles about the proverbial foreign investors kicking tyres around South Dublin realtors’ offices.

Chart: Residential Property Price Index, end of December figures, January 2005=100

Source: CSO and author own forecast

Box-out:

Ireland’s latest shenanigans in the theatre of absurd is the fabled ‘return to the bond markets’ with this week’s swap of the 2 year 4.0% coupon Government bond for a 4.5% coupon 3-year bond. The NTMA move means we will be paying more for the privilege to somewhat reduce the overall massive debt pile maturing in 2014, just when the current Troika ‘bailout’ runs out. So in effect, this week’s swap is a de fact admission by the state that Ireland has a snowball’s chance in hell raising the funding required to roll over even existent debt in 2014 through the markets. Which, of course, is an improvement on the constant droning from our political leaders about Ireland ‘not needing a second bailout’. Of course, as far as our ‘return to the markets’ goes – no new debt has been issued, no new cost of financing the state deficits has been established in this swap. The whole event is a bit of a clock made out of jelly – little on substance, massive on PR, and laughable from the functionality perspective.

8/1/2012: Irish property prices - History, Equilibrium & Directions to Nowhere Fast

A quick footnote to Brian Lucey's post on house prices:

I often hear people referring to 'historical averages' as price equilibrium indicators. Hmmm... historical and histrionic - here's a snapshot from The Economist data plot:

That pretty much does the trick for anyone still saying we have crossed some sort of the long term equilibrium level... 

03/07/2011: Household Credit: latest data

Some more analysis of new lending - based on CBofI data through April 2011.

Household loans and consumer loans are covered in this post. So house purchase loans first:

• Rates for the loans for House Purchases floating and up to 1 year fixation have risen from 3.09% to 3.20% in April 2011, relative to March. Historical average rate is 3.743% and the average rate since the beginning of the crisis (January 2008) is 3.574%. Current rates are above their 12mo MA of 2.959%. It is interesting to note that this data clearly shows that there is no statistically significant easing of rates during the crisis as crisis period average rates are not statistically significantly different from those for the entire history of the data series. Another interesting point is that when house purchasers are concerned, volatility of retail rates has risen during the crisis: the historical standard deviation of the series is 0.827 while post-January 2008 standard deviation is 1.072.
• Volumes of loans in the above category has declined from €1.190 billion issued in March 2011 to €1.092 billion in April 2011. Again, current rates of issuance are signaling continued credit tightening: historical monthly average issuance stands at €2.577 billion, while issuance since January 2008 averages €2.0 billion.
  
• Rates for the loans for House Purchases, over 1 year fixation have also increased mom in April from 4.23% to 4.29%. The rates are now above their historical average of 4.213% but below their crisis period average of 4.34%. April rate is above 12mo MA of 4.115%. As in the case of floating rate loans, fixed rate loans rates also risen in volatility during the crisis with overall historical standard deviation for the rates at 0.641 and January 2008-present standard deviation of 0.723.
• However, good luck to anyone trying to get these loans. Fixed rate loans for House Purchases issuance fell from €568 million in March to €331 million in April. New issuance of these loans is now well below historical average monthly volumes of €705 million and below crisis-period average of €521 million. Although 12mo MA is above the crisis average at €526 million.

A chart:
But what about consumer loans not designated for house purchases?

• Cost of consumer credit for floating loans and loans up to 1 year fixation fell from 6.02% in March 2011 to 5.23% in April. Thus, April rates were below their historical monthly average of 5.584%, their crisis period average of 5.565% and their 12mo MA of 5.640%. Note that crisis period was associated with higher volatility of rates in this category as well, with standard deviation rising from historical 0.836 to crisis-period 1.099.
• In terms of volumes of loans issued in the above category, the volume increased from €134 million to €156 million between March 2011 and April. However, volume of new loans issuance remains well below its historical average of €393 million, crisis-period average of €378 million and 12mo MA of €193 million.
• Cost of consumer credit for fixed loans (over 1 year) has fallen from 10.09% in March to 9.90% in April 2011, with current rate still above historical average of 8.589% and crisis period average of 9.494%, but is now below 12mo MA of 10.217%. Interestingly, volatility of rates charged on these types of loans has fallen from historical standard deviation of 0.962 to crisis-period standard deviation of 0.695.
• Again, good luck securing such loans, though, as volumes issued declined from €60 million in March 2011 to €51 million in April. Historical average issuance stands at €169.5 million, while crisis period average is €96 million. Current issuance however remains above 12mo MA of €48.8 million.

A chart to illustrate:

Economics 29/7/10: PTSB house prices

PTSB/ESRI house price index is in for Q2 2010. The core result: house prices were down, again, by 1.7% qoq in Q2 2010 - a lower rate of change on Q1 2010 contraction of 4.8% qoq. Thus, prices are now off-peak by 35% to an average of €201,364.

Dublin prices are down 3.5% qoq in Q2 2010 and are off 44% relative to peak. This gap between nation average and Dublin, assuming (as seems to be reasonable) that capital prices appreciation prior to the current crisis were significantly affected by underlying demand, should be erased over the next 12 months plus. Which means we can expect at some point that Dublin will lead the recovery across the country, while other regions continue to contract toward the 45-50% nationwide average off-peak pricing.

NCB stockbrokers gave a good comparison to fundamentals-determined prices. Per their analysis,

• Rental yield model implies house prices equilibrium at between €118,000 and €157,000, or a mid-range house price of €137,500;
• Earnings multiples model implies €170,000;
• Present value model (although not detailed as to the assumptions built in) implies the range of €158,000 to €236,000 for an mid-range of €197,000

You can see where these valuations are heading, don't you? Take a full range of estimates mid-range point of €177,000 - that would be a decline of 43% off the peak prices. Take the simple average price of all mid-range points to get 46% decline.

Now, recall - these are equilibrium prices. In normal price adjustments, there is a relatively pronounced undershooting in prices - in other words, we can expect prices to fall below equilibrium levels before reverting toward longer term values over time.

The depth of this undershooting and its duration depend on some external factors, such as the ease of getting mortgages approvals, mortgage conditions etc - none of which are currently helping the housing markets. So there is a very strong possibility for prices to hit the floor at around -55-60% off the peak.

Lastly, there is a question to be asked as to the validity of PTSB's data - the country largest mortgages holder might no longer be the country largest mortgages issuer. And the sample size globally has shrunk substantially. In other words, if a desperate homeowner in the distant province sells a house for, say, €120,000 while a dozen of his neighbors are not braving the market, does this really tell us anything about the market clearing price? Not really. Imagine what the said homeowner would have got for his dwelling if 12 more identical dwellings in the neighborhood had a 'For Sale' sign.

So a grain of salt is due - the size of an orange...

Economics 6/7/10: Mortgage Arrears Group Report: soapy and wooly

Mortgage Arrears and Personal Debt Expert Group, Interim Report was published today. Its stated objective is to provide recommendations, "focused on actions/solutions that effectively address immediate priorities and are capable of implementation in a relatively short time frame” to deal with defaulting mortgages and rising arrears.

Apart from the report being about 18 months too late, I missed any actual solutions or actions that would help addressing these priorities. Instead, the report contains 44 pages of rather general, if lofty, talk about the need to do things, discuss things and agree to things. A handful of meaningful recommendations it contains actually set out nothing more than the best practices that all lenders should pursue regardless of the Working Group effort.

In the end, the entire report is roughly 90% rehashment of arrangements that already exist in the industry, with a call to standardize these, plus 10% relating to stronger Social Welfare protection measures. If you are a private homeowner in trouble (negative equity, fallen income, including due to higher taxes, or loss of one income without crossing means tested barrier) you are not covered by the Report.

Let's take a look at those recommendations that do contain at least some substantive proposals.

37. The Financial Regulator should amend its quarterly public report on mortgage arrears to record, amongst other things, the number of mortgages that have been rescheduled. (Page 11)

[It is mind boggling to think that there is a need for a Working Group to get to this done. One would assume that the FR could have established such a reporting system on their own.]

38. The Department of Social Protection should introduce an alternative and more equitable approach to achieving the MIS [Mortgage Interest Supplement] objectives and maintaining its sustainability in light of changes in the economic climate and the mortgage market.
This should cover issues such as:

• No legal action should be taken by the lender while MIS is being paid and the borrower is cooperating with the lender. [logical]
• The ban on paying MIS to a couple where one person is in full-time employment should be removed and a revised means test developed. [logical]
• The current rule which excludes the payment of MIS when a house is for sale should be suspended. [Logical, but there should be a strict limit for such payments – say average duration of sale, plus 3 months – to discourage ‘perpetual’ listings and unrealistic pricing. None are set.]
• The State should not provide MIS where the lender is charging interest above the market rate. [This might be logical, but presents a problem for subprime borrowers who are more likely to be in distress.]
• MIS should only be payable where no capital is being repaid.
• MIS should be paid directly into the mortgage account of the borrower.
• Lenders should agree forbearance options with borrowers for a period of six months and ensure the SFS is completed before the State shares the responsibility by providing MIS support to the borrower. [logical, but potentially too restrictive]
• An overall time limit for MIS should be considered to ensure that the scheme does not act as a disincentive to seeking or retaining work. [What limit? How is it to be determined?]
• The scheme should remain as a short term income support. [How short? Especially, how short relative to expected length of unemployment spells?]
• Where a borrower’s situation is or becomes unsustainable, they should be facilitated, if necessary, in applying for social housing appropriate to their needs. [Errr, sure… why is this even being established here?]

In three words - largely useless fluff.

40. Urgent consideration should be given to the effective implementation, in the shortest possible timeframe, of measures for the comprehensive reform of both judicial bankruptcy proceedings and the establishment of a non-judicial debt settlement process.

[You can get this advice without paying for a working group. Just listen to any radio programme about mortgages arrears or read newspapers and you’ll hear or read someone speaking about the need for such a reform, with actually more details supplied than in the current report].


There is a really bizarre, if not outright offensive, claim in the report (chapter 3 - which incidentally provides volumes of rehashed unoriginal information on housing market bust) relating to the negative equity mortgage holders:

“Recent ESRI research estimates the number of mortgage borrowers in negative equity. House price declines to date, coupled with the anticipated price decline in 2010 would take the number of borrowers up to 250,0009. Although this represents a large number of households in absolute terms it is a small proportion of the stock of households in Ireland.”

Now, there are 791,000 mortgages in Ireland according to the same report (page 17). Which means that negative equity is expected to impact roughly 1/3 of all mortgage holders in the nation. How this can constitute a ‘small proportion’ of households, beats me.


“Lenders must not require the borrower to give up their low cost tracker or other existing product if to do so would put the borrower at a financial disadvantage.This must be publicly communicated by all lenders.” (page 19)

This introduces a bit of dilemma for the banks – if the banks are to continue subsidise tracker mortgages, especially non-performing ones, who will cover the banks’ losses? Of course, variable rate mortgage holders, who are, predominantly, at a higher risk of default, and at a higher risk of negative equity. So is this idea of preserving tracker mortgages a cure that can make the disease only stronger?

Needless to say, the working group should have done some work and estimated what would be the impact of continued tracker mortgages losses on costs of mortgages to variable rate holders. And then stress-tested the actual loans against this. But, alas, this was not performed. So hold on to your seats, folks, the working group solutions might give a rough ride in the near future, as banks hike up their mortgage rates to compensate for the working group’s well-meaning, but un-researched recommendations.


Crucially, there is nothing in the Group recommendations preventing lenders from arbitrarily forcing higher and higher repayments on people who might be currently compliant with their mortgage repayments, but are in either severe negative equity or otherwise in breach of loans covenants. In other words, being pro-active – the advice given by the Group to mortgage holders – is not something the Group itself is following.


“All lenders should publish the types of forbearance that are available under their MARP and the guidelines they are employing for decision making on which approach is appropriate for typical sets of financial circumstances. These could include one or more of the following alternative repayment measures [notice – this is really crucial – ‘one or more’, which means that none, collectively, of the below actions are required, page 27]:

An arrangement on arrears could be entered into whereby the amount of monthly repayment may be changed, as appropriate, to help address the arrears situation [Presumably this should not alter conditions to the detriment of the borrower, yet that is not explicitly specified in the statement].

Deferring payment of all or part of the instalment [sic] repayment for a period might be appropriate where, for example, there is a temporary shortfall of income [How this is to be determined remains unknown – if unemployment is deemed ‘temporary shortfall’ then ‘temporary’ might mean 12 months or 36 months].

Extending the term of the mortgage could be considered in the case of a repayment loan - although this may not make a significant difference to the monthly repayments.

Changing the type of the mortgage (e.g. to interest only) might be appropriate if this could give rise to a reduction in the level of monthly mortgage outgoings.

Capitalising the arrears and interest could arise where there is insufficient capacity over the short term to clear the arrears but where repayment capacity exists to repay the capitalised balance over the remaining term of the mortgage. This measure may be considered where a pattern of repayment has been established and where sufficient equity exists. [Does this mean equity sharing with the lender? If so, on what terms? How these terms should be set? Simply to say ‘capitalising can be allowed’ is not good enough for a Working Group report]”

So in brief, this report is hardly worth 47 pages expended on it. It is not even worth the first few pages that serve as a summary. And it certainly not something you'd expect from a really concerned Working Group labouring over it for 5 long months since February 2010.

Economics 06/04/2010: Return of the markets

Another 'Must Read' from WSJ - Gary Becker on Obamanomics, health care reform and why Americans will opt once again for Smaller Government with more checks and balances on the power of bureaucracy. Read it here.

Perhaps the most insightful - from our point of view here in Ireland - is Becker's arguments about interest groups-driven poor legislation that ossifies into innovation-choking regulatory diktat absent proper competition between interest groups acting as a (limited) check on the corrupting power of tax-and-spend politics.

having just returned from the Western sea board, I can testify to that corrupting power. Take a small town, popular with summer vacationers, I visited. Bungalows piled mile-high - crowding each other and older homes. Local county councilors own, per local paper expose, many of these, with some holding mortgages on 7-9 of such vacation properties, with section 30 tax breaks attached to make the deal sweeter. Scores of developments (not one-offs) were built in violation of planning permissions granted. And scores of planning permissions were granted in violation of the standard building codes.

As a friend of mine has described the countryside: 'You have D4 folks with homes, back then, worth some €4-5 million rushing to buy public-housing-styled vacation homes for a €1 million-plus with an illusion that these were to be their country retreats. And the Government was dishing out tax breaks...'

We clearly have no competing interest groups - just a Social partnership feeding party.

Economics 13/10/2009: Nama politicised

Update: a must-read today is Morgan Kelly's article in the Irish Times (here). As I have shown in my Business & Finance column well ahead of Morgan, buying equity in the banks to repair their balancesheets makes financial and ethical and economic sense.


So the Greens are now going on a methodical politicising of Nama. This was predictable, but it is nonetheless ironic, for it is normally the domain of FF to turn every economic policy into a political / interest-groups circus.

As a part of their Programme for Government, the Greens have promised 'protection' of defaulting homeowners. Instead of calling for a reform of our archaic bunkruptcy laws the GP is now considering several possible options for doing so.

1. Force the banks to purchase homes from defaulting homeowners, writing down existent mortgage. Assuming 5% default by homeowners (conservative number in my view) on roughly €82bn worth of principal residence-tied mortgages will yield a direct hit on the banks balancesheets of €4.1bn in 2010. Given the lags, one can expect this to be followed by a roughly 3-3.5% default rate in 2011, inducing another hit of €2.9bn, for a grand total of €7bn in 2 years. But this is not all - buying these mortgages out will imply the banks will take on assets that are worth significantly less than the outlays implied. For example, assuming 75% LTV ratio and 50% decline is peak-to-trough valuations (note: the first to default mortgages are more likely tied to lower quality properties, so 50% assumption is a reasonable one, if the average peak-to-trough fall was to be around 35%) the banks will be taking on an asset value loss of 0.5/0.75=33% of the mortgages assumed, or an additional €2.31bn. So capital base impact of this scheme will be around: 10% of RWA of 7bn-2.3bn = 470mln + 10%*(1+expected default rate+expected devaluation rate) of 7bn liability or ca 840mln. New demand on capital for banks will be in the region of €1.3bn immediately. Two questions to our GP friends: (1) Where will this capital come from? and (2) Where will the funding for acquisitions come from? If Nama is to be expected to generate commercial lending, what funding is available for buying out mortgage holders?
   
2. The Greens are also considering US-styled scheme where lenders are subsidized to reduce payments by those in default. This would be a temporary (presumably) bridge. The problem here is that if you subsidise my neighbour, I will face a choice: (a) continue paying my mortgage at increased rates (someone will have to provide the 'subsidy') or (b) default and get subsidised too. Any guesses as to what a rational agent will do? Once again, who will pay for this scheme and how can it be made compatible with Nama objective of relaunching commercial lending. How will the banks exit this scheme in the long run?
   
3. Measures to reduce the interest on mortgages: now this is ironic, given that this coalition has already swallowed IL&P increase in mortgages charges with Brian Lenihan saying that the banks are private enterprises and must be allowed to increase their profit margins.
   
4. Banks taking equity in home loans - equity in what? In a negative equity asset?
   
5. Mortgage terms extended. Given that we have been saying that 30-year mortgages at 100% LTV were reckless lending, making the same mortgages (now at 140% LTV) a 40-year contract will certainly be a prudent idea.
   

In the end, Green Party's denial of reality is evident throughout these proposals. The Exchequer is broke and Nama now means that we have no longer any capacity to aid the economy - we have spent the entire family silver on rescuing a handful of banks shareholders and builders. Instead of correcting the Exchequer deficit, the Greens are now full set to expand it to plaster over their disastrous agreement to back Nama. All of the above proposals will contribute to the future deficits and to the ongoing squeze of consumers, mortgage holders and taxpayers.

Months ago, myself and Brian Lucey have told this Government (including our direct briefing of the Green Party leaders) that Nama will trigger a wave of households defaults and that this will induce a new run on banks capital. We were called scaremongers.

The IMF seconded our views. The Fund opinion was ignored.

Now the Greens are running for cover on this issue, having pushed through Nama in the first place. This ethically disastrous stance of the GP leadership is a glaring example of how not to do policy.

Economics 03/10/2009: IMF GFSR: partII

To continue with IMF’s World Outlook (from the earlier post here for GFSR and here for WO Part I):

Remember we left WO Part I on that table estimating expected future contraction in house prices. The table is:
Some interesting estimates of the ‘left to contract’ distance in house prices by countries and by measures of long-term equilibrium pricing, as of Q1 2009, taking into account the contractions achieved to date. As with the analysis of the last table, based on the historical averages Ireland has some room left for downgrades. Loads of room.

As we all know, Ireland is experiencing a perfect storm – a confluence of several simultaneous crises: housing bust, general property bust, general economic recession with global demand contractions, an unprecedented fiscal crisis and a financial sector meltdown. Clearly, these factors warrant much deeper contractions on the long-term adjustment path than what simple averages suggest.
The second chart above shows that indeed, this might be the case – Ireland is distinguished as the country with the greatest remaining room for further downward adjustments in house prices than any other country in the sample. This reflects Ireland’s economic, assets markets and property markets fundamentals comparative to other countries in the sample. So 15% to go still? And that is assuming only property crash has happened…

Chart below actually confirms the above, once we realize that the income measure used by IMF is our GDP. Of course, we are familiar with the following tow facts:

1. GDP in Ireland is currently 18.5% above GNP, and
2. GNP is a closer measure of our income in the country.
   

Thus, adjusting the above figure for GDP/GNP gap implies that instead of roughly 0.2 forward expected adjustment expressed in GDP terms as the income base, we are facing a 0.24 level of adjustment. Furthermore, given that Ireland is currently experiencing deeper income collapse than any of the charted peers, plus, given substantial declines in after-tax income following Budgets 2009 and 2009.II, the real extent of the remaining room to compression for Price-to-Income ratios comparisons is of the magnitude closer to 0.3 – in line with all of our peers. 24-30% still to move down for Irish house prices then?
Lastly, the chart above once again reinforces the conclusions reached by IMF in the second chart above and by my own recalibration of the IMF’s duration-to-amplitude model in the table above. Price to rent ratio still has a room for some contraction of the magnitude of ca 40%. This, of course will be reached through further declines in prices relative to rents and this process is currently being delayed by rents falling off at a faster rate than asking prices in recent months. In rental yield terms, some 40% left to cover for Irish prices. Hmmm… me recalls some stockbrokers recently were saying yields are at 6-8% already and the crisis is nearly over…

Is that really a case? Not per IMF:
So IMF is saying that Irish commercial rents have much further to fall – 30 plus percent more! Say yields also compress – if not by more than that, but at least that much. Ronan Lyons estimated recently that commercial yields in Ireland are around 3% pa. Bringing these to historical average will require prices falling dramatically more from current levels – as chart above implies.

Good prospects for Nama, then, which is overpaying for underlying real assets at today’s prices, let alone at where IMF would expect the prices to be in equilibrium… Will it be -40% from current levels or -30%, or -20% - no one can know for sure. But then again, Nama is a bet on prices actually rising from current levels, not falling.