|
Vanessa Seidler's Blog
August 3rd, 2010
WSJ WEEKEND INVESTOR | JULY 24, 2010
Doubling Down on Housing
Record-Low Interest Rates and a Scary Stock Market Are Prompting Investors To Sink Even More Money Into Their Homes
By M.P. MCQUEEN
The housing crash has left at least 11 million people in the unenviable position of owing more on their homes than they are worth—and many more millions with properties worth far less than they paid for them. But some might not be as trapped as they think. Record-low mortgage rates and a new slump in home prices are presenting unusual opportunities in the housing market these days—even for so-called underwater borrowers.
David Walter Banks for The Wall Street Journal
Larry and Mary Schuck paid about $29,000 to refinance into a 15-year mortgage at a rate of just 4.5%. That’s like an investment return of about 10% a year over five years. They also reduced their total interest payment by more than $95,000.
Some intrepid homeowners are intentionally taking a loss on their current house—and writing a big check to retire their old mortgage—in order to buy twice the home for not much more money. Others, eschewing conventional personal-finance advice, are even opting for “cash-in” refinancings, paying thousands of dollars out of pocket to settle old loans—and then taking out new mortgages with lower payments, shorter durations or both.
Katie Everett, a real-estate broker in Denver, says none of her clients kicked in cash when selling their homes last year. This year, “about half are willing to bring money to closing, anywhere from $5,000 to $45,000,” she says.
Are these people crazy to be tying up even more of their cash in their homes, in effect doubling down on what has been a losing bet thus far? After all, any number of variables, from the employment picture to the credit markets, could weigh on housing for years to come.
Yet economists say trading up to new homes or refinancing existing ones can be smart—even if it means plunking down more cash to get out of old mortgages. People living in less-desirable neighborhoods might be able to find better homes in tonier ones that offer better appreciation potential. And with mortgage rates so low, such buyers can keep their monthly payments manageable, even though the new homes are more expensive.
“If you are trading up, what better time than when interest rates are at record lows and the cost of the trade-up is much less than it used to be?” says Christopher J. Mayer, a Columbia Business School economist.The refinancing equation is changing, too. Thanks to rock-bottom interest rates and liberal lending terms for Federal Housing Administration loans, a person who plunks down cash to retire a higher-rate mortgage might be able to reduce his monthly payments, even as he shortens his loan term to 20, 15 or 10 years.
In the past, financial planners typically recommended that homeowners devote as little cash to real estate as possible, and to invest it in the financial markets instead. But with stocks essentially where they were 11 years ago and market volatility seemingly on the rise, people are rethinking that wisdom. Devoting extra cash to repay a mortgage early is among the safest ways to produce an investment return.
“At this point,” says Jay Brinkmann, chief economist of the Mortgage Bankers Association in Washington, “if they don’t have anything else that is bringing a tremendous return, then they are buying themselves an annuity by paying their house off sooner than they needed to.”
During the fourth quarter of 2009, 33% of refinancings were of the cash-in variety, the highest percentage since Freddie Mac began tracking the characteristics of refinance transactions in 1985. Figures for the second quarter are due next week.
“Historically high percentages of borrowers are paying down their principal when they refinance their mortgages,” says Brad German, a Freddie Mac spokesman.
It helps that interest rates are lower than they have been in decades. The average rate on a 30-year fixed-rate loan was about 4.74% on July 21, according to Bankrate.com. That is down from 5.26% in January. Rates on 15-year loans averaged about 4.18%.
The Mortgage Bankers Association said Wednesday that low interest rates sent the volume of mortgage applications 7.6% higher during the week ended July 16. Purchase applications increased for just the second time since the expiration of a temporary federal tax break in May. Refinance applications grew 8.6%, to the highest level since May 2009.
The attractive terms are spurring people like Scott Ayler, 35 years old, into action. He and his wife, Jaclyn, 33, recently decided to trade up to a larger home in their native Denver, despite taking a loss on their current house. In 2004, they paid $234,000 for a three-bedroom, 2½-bath house builtthat same year in Green Valley Ranch, a subdivision that has among the highest foreclosure rates in the city and lacks upscale amenities. They are in contract to sell the home for about $204,000.
Their new home, built this year, cost about $323,000, comes with four bedrooms and three baths, and sits on a corner lot overlooking a reservoir. The house, which was initially listed at $379,000, is in Denver’s desirable Cherry Creek area, known for excellent schools, plentiful amenities and few foreclosures.
With $195,000 remaining on their original 6.625%, 30-year fixed-rate loan, the Aylers estimate their total paper loss will be around $45,000. They are putting down only $11,500 on the new house. But because the new FHA loan carries a 4.5% rate, their monthly payment will rise by only $290 a month.
They say they expect better price appreciation in their new home. And with a young daughter and plans for another child, they need more space anyway.”We don’t want to wait for the market to come back,” says Mr. Ayler, general counsel for an energy company. “We wanted a better quality of life now.”
Of course, many homeowners in states like Arizona, Florida and Michigan are seriously underwater, having overpaid for houses now worth as little as half their value at the market’s peak. Making up that yawning gap and scraping up additional cash for a new down payment is beyond their means.
Some of those people are going to extremes by engaging in “strategic defaults,” a highly controversial strategy in which they stop paying their mortgages and go into foreclosure to get out of their obligations. But while cutting losses on a bad housing investment might seem liberating, it can stain a person’s credit report for years.
The vast majority of homeowners remain reluctant to sell their primary residence at a loss, perhaps irrationally so. In a study of seller behavior in condominium transactions in downtown Boston from 1990 to 1997, economists David Genesove of Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Prof. Mayer of Columbia showed that sellers were so “averse to nominal losses” that it affected their behavior. Those who were selling their homes in down markets and faced the possibility of nominal losses kept their homes on the market for much longer than other sellers, in some cases to their detriment.
“Loss aversion is a very, very strong force,” Prof. Mayer says. “People don’t like to sell their homes for less than they paid for it.”
But, he adds: “Why should it matter? If you sell a home for less than you pay for it, you would buy for less, too.”
Others are coming around to that view. In Minneapolis, real-estate agent Jason Walgrave says he recently helped a couple buy a 2,800 square-foot home in nearby Plymouth, Minn., an affluent suburb, for $325,000. To get there, they sold for $175,000 a 1,500 square-foot house for which they had paid $190,000 in 2005. Their existing home is financed with a 7.5% mortgage; they will get 4.5% on the new one.
The couple is bringing $25,000 to the closing table to pay off the old loan and closing costs. “They want to take advantage of the bigger house at a lower price and the lower interest rate,” Mr. Walgrave says. Now, for an extra $390 a month, they are getting almost twice as much house.
![[WKmortgage]](http://sg.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-BE773_WKmort_NS_20100723214104.gif)
Just as old beliefs about selling houses are being upended, the conventional wisdom surrounding refinancing is changing, too. Time was when the only question about a refinance deal was how much money the homeowner could take out of the house. From the 1980s through the mid-2000s, the so-called cash-out refi became an easy way for homeowners to spend beyond their means.Now, some homeowners are doing the opposite: writing big checks to pay off their old mortgages and taking out new ones with far lower interest rates, shorter repayment terms or both.
David Walter Banks for The Wall Street Journal
The Schucks, of Winston, Ga., recently refinanced to save money. .
Should You Invest Your Cash in a Refinance
Until recently, few homeowners were “underwater” on their mortgage, meaning they owe more on it than their house it is worth. Now millions of people are in that situation. But that doesn’t mean they can’t refinance—it simply means they must pay down the principal of their loan with cash.Because that concept is relatively new, few online calculators help people run the numbers for themselves.
Here, Jack Guttentag, professor emeritus of finance at the Wharton School and self-styled “Mortgage Professor,” calculates the potential return on a hypothetical deal. He considers only the cash used to retire the mortgage; closing costs would affect results as well. And he assumes a five-year period because that’s a typical length of time people hold a mortgage. (The returns are similar over 15 years, he says.)In general, the rate of the return is larger when there is less cash required, or when there is a greater difference between the old and new mortgage rates.
- Current loan balance: $809,000
(on a 30-year fixed mortgage at 6%)
- Current monthly payment: $6,398
- Cash paid at closing to retire current loan: $80,000
- New loan terms: $729,000, 15-year fixed mortgage at 4.375%
- New monthly payment: $5,530
- Monthly payment savings: $868 per month
- Return on the $80,000 investment: 10.4% annually for five years.*
*Includes both the principal paid down on the new, shorter-term loan and the monthly savings in loan payments.Source: Jack Guttentag, www.mtgprofessor.com
Anthony Hsieh, chief executive officer and founder of loan broker LoanDepot.com, says that because home values have fallen so much, many people have to bring cash to qualify for refinancing these days. “Surprisingly to us, they are willing to do it,” he says.
Skeptics question why people would throw more cash at a depreciated asset. But according to Prof. Mayer, the Columbia economist, the decision centers on whether the homeowner thinks he or she can find better ways to invest the cash being sunk into housing. During most of the 1980s and 1990s, the answer was unquestionably yes. The stock market was rising, and investing in housing seemed comparatively dull. During those years, personal-finance experts even argued against paying “points” on a mortgage to reduce the interest rate. With banks lending at 7% to 8% throughout much of the period and the stock market returning more, it was foolish to devote more cash to housing than was necessary.
But since 2000, stocks have essentially gone nowhere. Meanwhile, the recent recession gave new currency to the idea of living as close to debt-free as possible, a process economists call deleveraging. “Today, people are a lot more conservative,” Mr. Hsieh says. Larry Schuck, 60, a semiretired security consultant, is among them. Mr. Schuck is opting to pay money out of his own pocket to refinance into a shorter-term mortgage. The goal: to reduce his total interest payments over the life of the loan.He and his wife, Mary, 56, like their Winston, Ga., community and plan to stay there.
They bought their home in December 2008 for $246,000, and it appraised recently at $228,000.Mr. Schuck this month paid $29,000 in principal and closing costs to refinance his 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, which carried a 5.87% interest rate, into a 20-year loan at 4.5%. The deal will save him more than $95,000 in interest charges over the life of the loan, he estimates, while lowering his monthly payment by $147.
In investment terms, the deal produces a return of about 10% a year for five years, which about as long as most people keep a mortgage, according to Paul Habibi, professor of real estate at the UCLA Anderson School of Business.”You are lucky if you get 1% interest in your savings account,” he says. The average savings account pays interest of 0.21%, says Greg McBride of Bankrate.com. Economist Laurence Kotlikoff, a professor at Boston University and president of Economic Security Planning, a financial-planning software company, calculates that by refinancing the mortgage to a lower rate and a shorter term, Mr. Schuck and his wife were able to increase the amount of money they can spend during retirement by about 3% each year. The short-term cost: a four-year period of belt-tightening resulting from their forgoing the ability to spend the $29,000 they paid for the new loan. “Even though things will be a little bit tight for the next four years, on balance it was a good move,” Prof. Kotlikoff says.
For scores of other homeowners, summoning the courage to take a loss now could lead to gains later on.”People who have suffered losses and would like to refinance hesitate to do so because they have to acknowledge this loss and come up with money to get a decent rate,” Prof. Kotlikoff says. “But it might still be in their interest to do it.”

Posted in Home Buying, In the News, Mortgage, Refinance | No Comments »
July 28th, 2010
Lately I’ve come across buyers who are debating between purchasing a condominium in a luxury full service building or foregoing some of the service and amenities for lower HOA dues. Prior to the economic downturn, homebuyers had a high level of confidence that their income levels would be sustained, and home prices (hence their values) would continue to rise. Fast forward nearly five years later where incomes have been slashed and net worth has free-fallen to a lifetime low. Today, expenditures fall under greater scrutiny. Home buyers want to make a prudent choice while making the least amount of personal concessions. The decrease in home values have opened up the market, affording buyers the option of luxury full service buildings which they may have been priced out of in the past. The maintenance costs are higher in these types of buildings, so buyers come to me torn between the ideal of having every service imaginable at their fingertips, or being okay without some of the service and amenities to spare the carrying cost of luxury condo ownership.
When deciding what is best for you, you should assess how you value and allocate your time. Lifestyle is a big question. How the home will be used is most important; is it a primary residence, or a second home? The needs for a full time resident versus a pied-a-terre buyer can be very different. One woman told me she and her husband lead hectic lives; they divide their time between Southern California and San Francisco; both are self-employed and they have two small children. With time being so scarce, they spend the money for convenience. When they travel, it is first class all the way. Another client is a professional lady who is single, also very busy with her career and leads a busy social life. When she travels, she spends the money on what she sees are “musts”: luxury accommodations (5-star hotel), and dining out at fine restaurants. However, at home she will use public transportation, walk to her neighborhood drycleaners and hires housecleaning only for when she has guests coming over or for the regular (but occasional) “deep cleaning”; otherwise she does her own house cleaning. Assuming they have the income to match, the couple would probably not regret choosing the full service luxury building. When they come into town, they won’t want to worry about lifting a finger and taking care of the mundane details like housekeeping and grocery shopping. They will be able to justify the cost for the lifestyle they are used to maintaining and it will free their time to focus on their businesses and quality time with their children.
The woman who likes the best of both worlds; being pampered in some ways while taking care of things herself might be best served in a building with some level of service and amenity, but she probably would not maximize the benefit of a full-service luxury building. The difference in monthly HOA dues can be up to 300%, so it is an important consideration.
Posted in Home Buying | No Comments »
June 9th, 2010
The Wall Street Journal
May 28, 2010
Luxury Sales Bounce Back
Bidding wars for a $2 million house? In some markets, sales of high-end homes return to levels not seen since the boom
For years, Jennifer Metz and her husband John yearned for a bigger home in San Francisco. Three months ago, the couple started looking, figuring that in this shaky economy, their $3 million budget should provide them a pick of attractive homes and accommodating sellers.
Kimberly Hallen/Boston Virtual Imaging
A Cambridge, Massachusetts home
They were wrong. Hours after seeing a 5,000-square-foot fixer-upper in Presidio Heights with an asking price around $2.7 million, the Metzes put in a bid—and lost. Soon after, they made another offer on a four-bedroom in Russian Hill. Their bid was rejected.
Last week, the Metzes rushed over to a large, dilapidated home in Pacific Heights that needed a lot of work but was asking the (relatively) low price of $2.25 million. The Metzes put in their over-ask bid the next day, but lost that one too: There were nine offers; the winning bid was $2.56 million.
”It’s frustrating,” says Ms. Metz, a 44-year-old stay-at-home mom whose husband works in finance. “You think you put in a good offer but, no.”
After a near-disastrous 2009, the luxury market appears to be making a comeback, driven by growing buyer confidence, improved financing conditions and more-realistic seller pricing. Despite the housing downturn, attractively priced homes in some of the nation’s most coveted neighborhoods are selling, sometimes fast and sometimes with multiple offers. Nationwide, sales of homes selling for $2 million to $5 million in the first quarter totaled 2,461, up 32% from a year before, says CoreLogic.
Sotheby’s
$2,146-per-square-foot is what a buyer paid for this elaborately redone San Francisco home that has a vanishing wall.

That sales are up from last year shouldn’t come as a big surprise. The shock of the financial panic in the fall of 2008 left many potential buyers too nervous to bid, and those who were willing to wade in found it hard to get financing. But a study for The Wall Street Journal by MDA DataQuick, a real-estate data provider, found that in some areas of the country, sales of homes over $2 million in the first quarter were actually on par with the levels of 2005, the peak year for existing-home sales volume nationwide.
In San Francisco, 49 homes sold for $2 million or more in this year’s first quarter, according to the study, compared to 47 in 2005. In Manhattan, there were 402 sales of $2 million or more in the latest quarter, compared with 311 in the first quarter of 2005, according to the appraisal firm Miller Samuel Inc. Other areas with strong rebounds included New York’s Hamptons, Menlo Park, Calif., and Beverly Hills.
Even a couple of troubled housing markets experienced a strong uptick. In Las Vegas, there were 21 such sales in the first quarter, up from 15 in the first quarter of 2005, according to DataQuick. In Miami, 21 such sales of $2 million or more were recorded in the first quarter, up from 15 last year and close to the 23 that sold in that time five years earlier.
Of course, many markets including Greenwich, Conn. and parts of New Jersey are still ailing. Brokers say pricey homes in outlying suburbs are more likely to sit than sell. Miami-Dade County still has enough homes priced at $2 million or more to last 41 months at the current sales pace, though down from 116 months a year earlier, says Ron Shuffield, president of EWM Realtors, a large local brokerage.
Sothebys
The rear of the San Francisco home.
The recent stock market tumble could unravel the turnaround. Unlike the rest of the housing market, which is driven largely by employment trends, housing analysts say high-end buyers are much more sensitive to changes in the stock market, which for the first quarter was helping them feel even wealthier. “If the markets don’t recover soon, it will scare people” and hurt demand for high-end homes, says Kenneth Rosen, chairman of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at the University of California, Berkeley.
In the meantime, some high-end renovators are making quick sales. Koby Kempel bought a colonial in Brookline, a posh suburb of Boston, last year for $1.45 million. He raised the ceilings, rebuilt the interior, expanded the home by about 50% and added a heated garage. The six-bedroom home was listed by Mona Wiener of Hammond Residential on a Friday in early May and was under contract the next day for the asking price of nearly $3.5 million.
Back in San Francisco’s Pacific Heights neighborhood, a four-bedroom home on Broadway, with a spa and views of the Golden Gate Bridge, was renovated by Gregory Malin. It went on the market in late January and sold two weeks later for $13.5 million, compared with the $14 million asking price. The listing agent, Val Steele of Sotheby’s International Realty, says the sale, at $2,146 per square foot, marked the first time a home in San Francisco topped $2,000 a square foot since early September 2008.

Tags: luxury real estate market, San Francisco luxury real estate, San Francisco real estate Posted in Home Buying, Home Selling, In the News | No Comments »
June 5th, 2010
This Sunday celebrates the opening of the new Fort Mason Farmers’ Market. Now Cow Hollow and Marina residents have their own neighborhood farmers’ market to shop for locally grown produce and freshly prepared gastronomic delights.
When: Every Sunday from 9:30 to 1:30 during the months of June through October
Where: Inside the entrance of Fort Mason Center at Marina Blvd. @ Buchanan Street
Tags: Fort Mason Farmers Market, san francisco farmers market Posted in Activities and Events, In the News | No Comments »
March 29th, 2010
If you are considering buying a home, townhouse or condominium, picking up the pace can result in some nice savings. The federal government’s significant tax credits for 2010 are set to expire April 30, 2010.
First-time Home Buyer Tax Credit
If this is your first home purchase, the IRS will credit you $8,000, or 10% of the sales price, whichever is less. You must have a binding contract on April 30, 2010, and close escrow by July 1, 2010. The credit applies to homes costing $800,000 or less, and the credit does not have to be repaid if you live in the home for at least three years. Eligibility also requires that you or your spouse has not owned a home in the last three years. The full $8,000 credit is available to married couples filing a joint return whose modified adjusted gross income is $225,000 or less and for single filers with a modified adjusted gross income of $150,000 or less.
Existing Homeowner Tax Credit
Perhaps you are already a homeowner? The federal government has a credit for you also. If you want to move up, Congress granted existing homeowners a tax credit of $6,500, or 10% of the purchase price of a home, whichever is less. You must have lived in your current home for five consecutive years of the last eight. Again, you must have a binding contract on April 30, 2010, and close escrow by July 1, 2010. The credit does not require you to sell your current home to qualify. The same income requirements as the First-time home buyer provision applies, and you must remain in the home for at least three years to avoid having to repay the credit.
Additional Home Buyer Tax Benefit for California Residents
A state home buyer tax credit was just signed into law, which affords California residents a state tax credit for a home purchase. Home purchases for eligible buyers closing escrow on or after May 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010 will receive $10,000, or 5% of the purchase price, whichever is less, in the form of a tax offset over three years. There is no income limitation or first-time homebuyer requirement, but you need to live in the home for at least two years. As it did last year, it is expected this benefit will run out before the state’s year-end deadline.
Your tax advisor will guide you through your financial situation, so I recommend you consult with him or her. Obviously, if you utilize one or both of the tax credit offers, take advantage of the (still) low interest rates and lower home prices, you may have a once-in-a-lifetime value opportunity for home ownership. Contact me to help you find the right home most efficiently in order to meet these critical deadlines.
Tags: existing homeowner tax credit, first time home buyer, home buyer tax credit Posted in Home Buying | No Comments »
January 19th, 2010
Here are snapshots of price reductions within the last 10 days on homes located in two prominent areas of San Francisco: Russian Hill (where I live), and SOMA. The data includes condominiums and single family homes. There are only three price reductions in Russian Hill, indicative of the smaller amount of inventory and a high-demand area where prices have held up over other neighborhoods. SOMA has a large amount of inventory, which translates to some good values at the newer condo developments and among the resale market.
If there is another area of San Francisco you would like to see specific data on, please contact me: vanessa@finelivingsf.com.
Russian Hill Price Reductions: http://bit.ly/7nqrgR
SOMA Price Reductions: http://bit.ly/5bBhv9
Tags: real estate price reductions, San Francisco real estate, San Francisco real estate market Posted in Home Buying, Home Selling, In the News | No Comments »
January 14th, 2010
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) - Despite a national housing market that is still trying to right itself, San Francisco boasts one of the country’s real estate success stories. Read more and watch the video report: http://bit.ly/4qB0×2

Tags: Infinity San Francisco, luxury condos, San Francisco real estate, Vanessa Mills, Vanessa Seidler Posted in In the News | No Comments »
January 11th, 2010
The Pied-a-Terre is taking us back to our roots
My real estate business is largely attributed to finding second (third or fourth) homes in the city of San Francisco for clients who live full time elsewhere in the country and abroad. So it is interesting to notice a trend lately among city residents with regard to pied-a-terre ownership: more and more clients of mine who live in the city full time are seeking second homes – but not in resort areas or big cities. They have forged a wonderful life in the city with every intention of maintaining it, but now want to add to their real estate portfolio a “home away from home” in locations similar to or where they grew up, where the pace was a little slower and one is surrounded by the comfort of familiarity.
With current lifestyle trends shifting toward nesting, eating locally grown and produced food, shopping the local mom and pop businesses and having stronger ties to community, the choice in vacation home is increasingly becoming one that is reminiscent of where we grew up.
Whether part time or full time, living in San Francisco will never go out of style; there will always be an appetite for fine arts, dining, world-class shopping and the buzz that comes with city living. Lately it has become more about shrinking our social radius a bit, taking us to places that make us feel comfortable and sheltered (in a good way); locations where cozying up at home instead of bustling about is a welcome retreat.
Pied-a-terre ownership of homes conducive to nesting isn’t limited to houses in rural isolation! Nor does it have to be beach homes in resort areas we’ve come to know. Homeowners still want outlets to quality shopping and dining, but on a smaller scale with emphasis on the locally grown, locally produced and locally made. I have a client looking for a home on a large lot in the Alexander Valley where some hobby vines can be grown and the local market (notice the omission of “super” in “market”) carries produce from neighboring farms, and area restaurants prepare fresh meals sourcing local meat, dairy and produce, some even from the restaurant’s own garden. Or my city dwelling client who misses his hometown roots and is now seeking a “vacation home” in a mature suburb of Sacramento with a backyard primed for summer barbecues and pool parties, and where his children can experience 4th of July block parties as he did as a child. One client wants a condominium in Scottsdale, Arizona, as his wife grew up there and the warm weather provides resort like living when it is winter in most other parts of the country.
The homes are located conveniently enough for frequent access, making them great weekend and holiday homes, unlike the typical vacation home that requires planning and stays of longer duration. They are usually located in area with lower cost of living, resulting in lower maintenance costs.
A challenging economy has shifted our focus on the comforts of home and more simplicity. This economy has also presented fantastic buys for those seeking a second home outside of the city. If you would like assistance with your search, whether in San Francisco or beyond, I am happy to help. I have access to a network of top real estate agents experienced in locations throughout the country.
Vanessa Seidler is a Real Estate Agent with Pacific Union International | Christie’s Great Estates in San Francisco. Her website is www.FineLivingSF.com.
Tags: home buying, pied-a-terre, real estate, realtor, San Francisco real estate, second home, Vacation Homes, Vanessa Mills, Vanessa Seidler Posted in Home Buying, In the News, Vacation Homes, pied-a-terre | No Comments »
January 2nd, 2010
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
December 21st, 2009
Last week the Federal Reserve announced it the target for federal funds rate will remain in the 0 percent to 0.25 percent range, and expects economic conditions to justify low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period of time. “Information suggests that economic activity has continued to pick up and that the deterioration in the labor market is abating,” the Fed said in a prepared statement.
“Financial market conditions have become more supportive of economic growth, although economic activity is likely to remain weak for a time. The Committee anticipates that policy actions to stabilize financial markets and institutions, fiscal and monetary stimulus, and market forces will contribute to a strengthening of economic growth and a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability,” the Fed said.
The Federal Reserve also said it will purchase a total of $1.25 trillion of agency mortgage-backed securities and nearly $175 billion of agency debt to buoy mortgage lending and housing markets, in addition to improving overall conditions in private credit markets.
Could the country’s debt status contribute to a rise in interest rates? Mortgage rates rose a bit again last week, its second consecutive weekly gain. According to Freddie Mac economist Frank Nothaft, two out of three home loans made during the first two weeks of December were refinancings. The LA Times published an interesting article a few days ago on the creeping interest rates which may be a sign that the sub-5% interest rate may be going away: http://bit.ly/4VaMD5
I tell home buyers who have been sitting on the fence that although the home prices have come down to unveil good buying opportunities, the historically low interest rates should be the primary focus on deciding whether to buy over price. I haven’t seen a 30-year fixed mortgage at 5% in my lifetime! If you are in the market for purchasing a home and would like me to help you meet your home and financing needs, please do not hesitate to call or email me.
Tags: fed rate, home buying, mortgage rates Posted in Home Buying, In the News | No Comments »
|