News   May 03, 2024
 155     0 
News   May 03, 2024
 502     0 
News   May 02, 2024
 1.1K     1 

The Housing Market needs to crash.

On this visit, I'm noticing stuff that I didn't on three previous trips. One is that I've seen more brick residences here than any place since I was in St Louis back in 1970. The second thing I'm noticing is that houses are REALLY PACKED TOGETHER. Looks like maybe a metre or so between many houses. Another interesting feature. Gaps between some homes just big enough to drive a car through with a garabe behind. And then MANY houses have a parking platform in place of a lawn in front of the house. Not seen that anywhere before. So some of these homes have capacity to park two or more cars, if one is in front and one or more in back. I guess there's more chance of owning a car in town than I had thought previously. But I still say TTC provides better noncar service than any other city I've visited. With Portland Oregon being second.
 

So some of the key points:

Ottawa tightening mortgage rules; no more 30-year amortizations

The federal government is moving again to tighten the rules on mortgage lending in Canada amid growing concerns that the housing market is overheated and household debt levels are climbing to perilous levels.

The country’s biggest banks were caught off guard on Wednesday night as the Department of Finance prepared to clamp down on mortgages by reducing the maximum amortization for a government-insured mortgage to 25 years from 30.

Ottawa will also limit the amount of equity that can be borrowed against a home to 80 per cent of the property’s value, down from 85 per cent.

The moves are designed to cool the housing market and limit the record levels of personal debt Canadians have amassed in recent years. Figures from Statistics Canada show the average ratio of debt-to-disposable income climbed to 152 per cent, up from 150.6 per cent at the end of 2011. A rise in interest rates or further job losses could put some households at financial risk, endangering any economic recovery.

The Bank of Canada is expected to keep interest rates low for some time because the economy shows little sign of a strong recovery, so tightening mortgage rules is one way to ensure Canadians don’t get in over their heads during a prolonged period of ultra-low interest rates.

Reducing the maximum amortization on government-backed mortgages will eliminate the 30-year mortgage for most borrowers in Canada. The changes, which are expected to be unveiled at a news conference in Ottawa on Thursday morning, will translate into higher monthly payments, but result in the loan being paid off sooner.

Ottawa will announce two other changes, according to a source. It will no longer allow high-ratio mortgages over $1-million, and it will cap the gross debt service (which looks at a consumer’s total debt payments as a percentage of their income) at 39 per cent. While many banks tend not to allow mortgages over 40 per cent, there had been no official rule in place.

It is the fourth time in four years that Ottawa has moved to cool the housing market by tightening mortgage rules. In early 2011, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty reduced maximum insured amortizations to 30 years, and limited borrowing to 85 per cent of the property value.

CIBC economist Benjamin Tal described the changes as a “gentle push,†since the government didn’t make alterations to the minimum downpayment required on mortgages, which stands at 5 per cent.

“The fact that they didn’t change downpayments is a realization that doing so would probably be too severe given that the market is slowing down,†he said.

However, there remain concerns the changes could cause too abrupt a shift in the market. “All of these things might precipitate the housing market downturn that the government wants to avoid,†Jim Murphy, CEO of the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals, said in an interview.
 
Because its way too late and will have little impact.

For those who are moving up from an existing property, I agree, it has little impact. Reducing the amount of equity one can borrow against their home will not be significant. Similarly, instilling that CMHC will not insure mortgages on properties over $1M will have very little impact as well, as the majority of people buying the $1M and $2M homes will have at least 20% down payments. As a matter of fact, in the ultra-high-end market, most purchasers don't even require a mortgage.

Capping the gross debt service will have a small impact on buyers who may not have all their finances in a row. The biggest change will be for buyers hoping to reduce their monthly payments on a 30-year amortization period whose qualifications will now be based on a 25 year amortization period. Neither of these changes are a bad thing. If anything, it should've been done a long time ago.
 
For those who are moving up from an existing property, I agree, it has little impact. Reducing the amount of equity one can borrow against their home will not be significant. Similarly, instilling that CMHC will not insure mortgages on properties over $1M will have very little impact as well, as the majority of people buying the $1M and $2M homes will have at least 20% down payments. As a matter of fact, in the ultra-high-end market, most purchasers don't even require a mortgage.

Capping the gross debt service will have a small impact on buyers who may not have all their finances in a row. The biggest change will be for buyers hoping to reduce their monthly payments on a 30-year amortization period whose qualifications will now be based on a 25 year amortization period. Neither of these changes are a bad thing. If anything, it should've been done a long time ago.
Exactly. This is not even political, its like they are trying to avoid the inevitable, when the damage has been done.
 
Exactly. This is not even political, its like they are trying to avoid the inevitable, when the damage has been done.


they're trying to undo the damage they started.
people have short or limited memories.
sadly, some have forgotten Flaherty et al were the ones who loosened the CMHC requirements / standards in the first place:

* March 2006 – AIG enters the Canadian mortgage insurance market
* March 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 30 yr amortizations (Genworth anounces 35 yr amortizations)
* June 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 35 yr amortizations, interest only payments allowed for 10 years
* November 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 40 yr amortizations, interest only payments allowed for 10 years
* April 2007 - CMHC insurance given to borrowers with less 20% down (changed from 25 %)
* October 2007 - lowered the down-payment threshold for an investment property from 15% down to 0%
* October 2008 – CMHC: 5% down, 35 yr amortizations, investors need 5% down.
 
^ That's precisely it. Most people think this is a regression whereas, in fact, it is more of a correction. CMHC mortgage insurance should be abolished altogether. As I've expressed in other threads on this forum, I am a supporter of increasing minimum down payments into the 20%-25% range. Those who can will plan, budget and save the required down payment. Those who can't simply won't buy a house. Simple as that.
 
they're trying to undo the damage they started.
people have short or limited memories.
sadly, some have forgotten Flaherty et al were the ones who loosened the CMHC requirements / standards in the first place:

* March 2006 – AIG enters the Canadian mortgage insurance market
* March 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 30 yr amortizations (Genworth anounces 35 yr amortizations)
* June 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 35 yr amortizations, interest only payments allowed for 10 years
* November 2006 – CMHC: 0% down, 40 yr amortizations, interest only payments allowed for 10 years
* April 2007 - CMHC insurance given to borrowers with less 20% down (changed from 25 %)
* October 2007 - lowered the down-payment threshold for an investment property from 15% down to 0%
* October 2008 – CMHC: 5% down, 35 yr amortizations, investors need 5% down.

^ That's precisely it. Most people think this is a regression whereas, in fact, it is more of a correction. CMHC mortgage insurance should be abolished altogether. As I've expressed in other threads on this forum, I am a supporter of increasing minimum down payments into the 20%-25% range. Those who can will plan, budget and save the required down payment. Those who can't simply won't buy a house. Simple as that.
'

Fair enough guys, but will this prevent a severe correction? I don't think so.
 
We are doomed

We have been played by the very people we elect to be our leaders. Mortgages should never have gone to a 40 year amortization in the first place. That's almost half your life time in this world and most if not all of our "working years". The people who need a 40 year amortization are exactly the same people who SHOULD NOT be using it. People have a false sense of "Affordability" nowadays.

Save for retirement NOW! In 2020, the world will be done talking about the Euro Crisis and will be talking about the Canadian Crisis.
 
We have been played by the very people we elect to be our leaders. Mortgages should never have gone to a 40 year amortization in the first place. That's almost half your life time in this world and most if not all of our "working years". The people who need a 40 year amortization are exactly the same people who SHOULD NOT be using it. People have a false sense of "Affordability" nowadays.

Save for retirement NOW! In 2020, the world will be done talking about the Euro Crisis and will be talking about the Canadian Crisis.

I see you're a 'glass half-empty' type. Either that or you've been hanging around Garth Turners website a bit too much.

Seriously though, if the Canadian housing market crashes it's likely going to take our entire economy with it, just like it did with the US and most of the rest of the world. That means saying good-bye to your retirement savings as well.
 

Back
Top