NO Condo Bubble in Calgary nor Toronto!
These comments below are in addition to the report last week that said that because Toronto has:
-
lots of in-migration,
-
New to Canada migration and
-
no other kinds of homes being built in the inner city
they do need all of these new condos and it is not a bubble. Interesting.
Economists to condo investors: Smile!
Written by Vernon Clement Jones
Condo investors in Toronto have every reason to be keep smiling, with two separate bank reports suggesting their assets are almost certain to retain their value at the same time their cash flow gets buoyed by rental demand.
“As CMHC… mentioned, capital return for investors who bought new condominiums and decided to rent them once the construction was complete, could earn superior returns than on other investment products,” reads Laurentian Banks’ July economic outlook. “Furthermore, condominiums rents are generally 40% more expensive than apartments of same dimensions in the Toronto CMA, the most important spread in the whole country.”
Smiling yet?
There’s more.
RBC is also weighing in on the future of Canada’s most controversial housing market, suggesting there’s no indication condos, despite what most see as a glut of inventory, are in a bubble.
Far from it.
“Based on market activity to date,” say economists for the heftiest of Canada’s big banks, “the total number of new housing units (condos) completed by builders has not exceeded the GTA’s demographic requirements and is unlikely to do so by any significant magnitude in the next few years.”
Phew!
That dual analysis effectively counters concerns that T.O.’s high-rise properties are primed to fall in value as renters find themselves spoiled for choice and investors are forced to slash prices. The naysayers are also worried that even new construction will be subjected to a major price correction and in the short-term, a phenomenon directly tied to mortgage rule changes making it harder to win financing.
That could, in fact, still happen, although not likely on the scale many analysts had predicted earlier this year, says Laurentian in its analysis.
Calgary housing market poised to show strong price growth
More good news on the market outlook.
November 6, 2011. 8:33 pm
Pay attention. Something’s happening here,” says Don Campbell, president of the Real Estate Investment Network in Canada.
Campbell is paying attention to the all the reports coming out these days showing some positive economic news for Alberta and Calgary. Good economic growth. In-migration levels rising. And employment growth leading the way in Canada.
The real estate market lags the economy by about 18 months, he says.And the economy is in recovery. We’ve now seen the job growth and the population growth starting to affect the rental vacancy rates which have gone down, resulting in rents rising.
Campbell says that by the spring of 2013, and perhaps by the fall of 2012, there will be a real strong upward pressure on demand for resale homes in Calgary and surrounding areas.
He predicts there will also be a jump in listings at that time which will keep a little bit of a cap on the price increases. So will continued world economic turmoil.
But even with that Calgary should expect strong price growth in the value of resale properties.
“I think you’re going to see a nice steady eight to 10 per cent increase in 2013 in average sale price for Calgary (year-over-year),” says Campbell, one of the authors of the book Secrets of the Canadian Real Estate Cycle.
Real estate: A ‘secret’ tax shelter
By Jason Heath
TFSAs have been a welcome addition to the tax shelter landscape in Canada, but they leave something to be desired for those with substantial assets and maxed out RRSP and TFSA room.
Film limited partnerships have disappeared, charitable donation tax shelters were flawed from the start and the investment tax credit for flow-through shares may or may not be extended in the next budget.
Real estate is often overlooked in the quest for tax reduction and deferral, let alone income generation and inflation protection. If real estate is all of these things, why doesn’t everyone own a rental property? The answer is simple – money.
It’s not that investors don’t have the money to get into the rental property market, because this can be easily accomplished with leverage and minimal monthly carrying costs. The problem is there is simply no money to be made by financial professionals when it comes to rental real estate. The result is that rental real estate is a secret tax shelter that few people ever consider.
Investment advisors sell stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Insurance agents sell insurance policies. Accountants sell tax preparation services. Real estate agents sell real estate, but they tend to sell real estate from a vendor to a purchaser to be used solely as a principle residence.
So rental real estate ends up being a golden goose, elusive, yet attractive.
According to Harvard professor Niall Ferguson in The Ascent of Money, “The original property game we know today as Monopoly was actually invented back in 1903 to expose the unfairness of a social system where a small minority of landlords [took advantage of] the majority of tenants.
“What the game of Monopoly tells us, contrary to its inventor’s intentions, is that it’s smart to own property.”
First, a lesson in rental real estate taxation. Rental income is taxable and rental expenses, including mortgage or line of credit interest, are tax-deductible. In many cases, if a property is financed, it will run at a loss for tax purposes creating a tax deduction against all other sources of income and therefore, a tax refund. In the meantime, real estate values grow tax-deferred until an eventual sale. Even if a property runs at positive cash flow for tax purposes, depreciation can be claimed to wipe out some or all of the taxable income inclusion.
Rental real estate has been described by some as the equivalent of a super-charged RRSP. What is a traditional RRSP? It’s a tax-deferred savings vehicle; contributions are tax-deductible; it provides a future income stream; and it’s an investment asset. Rental real estate incorporates all of these features, plus there’s no pre-determined maximum tax deduction limit like with RRSPs; withdrawals aren’t forced at age 71 like with RRIFs; contributions can be financed and the interest can be deducted, unlike RRSP loans; and the taxes paid on selling a rental property are at the 50% capital gains tax rate, unlike RRSP withdrawals which are fully taxable.
The Harvard and Yale endowment funds have more than 50% of their assets invested in non-traditional asset classes, like real estate. The Ontario Teacher’s Pension Plan, the largest single-profession pension plan in Canada, has 18% of their pension assets invested in real estate. Maybe Harvard, Yale and the OTTP know something the mainstream investment community doesn’t know.
Jason Heath is a fee-only Certified Financial Planner (CFP) for E.E.S. Financial Services Ltd. in Markham, Ontario.
Calgary ranks third on global prosperity score card
Calgary ranks third on global prosperity score card: Toronto Board of Trade
BY KIM GUTTORMSON, CALGARY HERALD
Calgary is back near the top of a score card that ranks prosperity in a number of cities around the world, besting all other Canadian metros on the list.
Strong population growth, a young workforce, disposable income, affordable housing and clean air helped boost the city to the number three spot on the list behind Paris and San Francisco.
That’s up from last year’s fifth place ranking, but below its first place finish in 2009, the first time the Toronto Board of Trade compiled results, using information from the Conference Board of Canada — including commute time, income equality, gross domestic product and productivity — to compare 24 major cities.
However, Calgary did score low in some key areas, including transportation.
“I think it speaks to Calgary’s more dynamic economy, more dynamic than we had in the ‘80s when it took us years to crawl out of the recession,” Todd Hirsch, senior economist at ATB Financial, said of the city’s post-recession recovery. “What you’d really hate is to be extremely high in some (indicators) and at the bottom on others.
“You’d rather be really good on a number of indicators and get an overall ranking quite high, like Calgary got.”
The Toronto board of Trade said “Calgary’s success comes from a combination of solid fundamentals in both (economy and labour attractiveness), not just from a robust economy. With the fastest population growth of all metros, Calgary proved that it was an attractive place for people seeking work.
“Calgary’s housing affordability and clean air provide further evidence of its livability.”
Elsbeth Mehrer, director of research, workforce and strategy for Calgary Economic Development, says the city’s ranking shows it should be a choice destination for both companies and people.
“To be able to put the city in the context of major global cities like Paris and San Francisco, that’s an important frame around our positioning,” she said. “I think that helps to elevate the conversation to a different level.
“If you’re comparing yourselves with communities of this stature, now it’s a very different conversation in terms of the types of target companies you’re trying to attract, the types of investment.”
On the score card Calgary ranked third overall, and third for being attractive to workers (behind Paris and London).
The ability to attract labour is important, said Chamber of Commerce chief economist Ben Brunnen, because “the labour shortage, labour retention issue is starting to emerge again. Positioning Calgary as a destination for young talent is a fundamental first step for long-term prosperity.”
Calgary placed sixth if only the economy was looked at (behind San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Dallas and New York).
The Toronto Board of Trade wrote that Calgary overcame “near-bottom rankings on venture capital investment, market size, and IPOs, with first or second-place results on income growth, unemployment rate, residential building permit growth and GDP growth” to get to that sixth spot.
Calgary’s average office rents also put them in the top half of the rankings, in that they’re cheaper than more than 50 per cent of the list.
In the first three months of 2011, according to CB Richard Ellis, Calgary’s office vacancy fell to 12 per cent from 15 per cent compared to the same period a year before. Regional managing director for Alberta Greg Kwong said in a release that given the amount of office space coming onto the Calgary market, the drop is “amazing. This is a testament to how resilient Calgary’s office market has become.”
However, for all the good news, the city rated an overall 13th place in the transportation category.
That factored in an average commute time of 67 minutes, longer than Los Angeles, Chicago and Berlin, but better than Toronto’s 80 minutes, and a score in the bottom half when public transit ridership was evaluated.
“It points out some of the warts, too,” Hirsch said of the score card. “It’s good to be made aware of this is where we rank in global cities when it comes to commute times. A 60-minute commute time is not normal, this not just being part of a big city.
“This is a problem. Who knows where we would be if we could solve some of those transportation problems.”
Calgary also ranked lower in areas that included productivity and venture capital, which Mehrer said are on-going issues the city’s business community knows need work.
“It reaffirms what we know needs to be a focus,” she said.
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
CANADIAN HOMEOWNERSHIP COSTS EASE FOR SECOND CONSECUTIVE QUARTER: RBC ECONOMICS
This is great news.
TORONTO, Feb. 24 /CNW/ – Canada’s housing affordability continued to improve in the fourth quarter of 2010, thanks in part to slight decreases in five-year fixed mortgage rates and minimal home price appreciation across the country, according to the latest Housing Trends and Affordability report released today by RBC Economics Research.
“Some of the stress that had been building in the housing market between 2009 and the first half of 2010 has been relieved, but tensions persist overall and the recent improvement in affordability is likely to be short-lived,” said Robert Hogue, senior economist, RBC. “We expect that the Bank of Canada will resume its rate hike campaign this spring and with borrowing costs set to climb further in the next two years, housing affordability will erode across the country. That said, we don’t expect this to derail the housing market because of rising household income and job creation from the sustained economic recovery.”
The RBC Housing Affordability Measure captures the proportion of pre-tax household income needed to service the costs of owning a specified category of home. During the fourth quarter of 2010, measures at the national level fell between 0.4 and 0.8 percentage points across the housing types tracked by RBC (a decrease represents an improvement in affordability).
The detached bungalow benchmark measure eased by 0.8 of a percentage point to 39.9 per cent, the standard condominium measure declined by 0.4 of a percentage point to 27.6 per cent and the standard two-storey home decreased 0.4 percentage points to 46.0 per cent.
“We expect affordability measures will rise gradually in the next three years or so while monetary policy is readjusted, but will land softly thereafter once interest rates stabilize at higher levels,” added Hogue. “This pattern would be consistent with moderate yet sustained stress on Canada’s housing market. Overall, the era of rapid home price appreciation of the past 10 years has likely run its course and we believe that Canada has entered a period of very modest increases.”
A majority of provinces saw improvements in affordability in the fourth quarter, most notably in Alberta where falling home prices once again contributed to lower the bar for affording a home. Only the standard two-storey benchmark became less affordable in Ontario and Quebec, as did the standard condominium apartment in Quebec and the Atlantic region.
RBC’s Housing Affordability Measure for a detached bungalow in Canada’s largest cities is as follows: Vancouver 68.7 per cent (down 0.4 percentage points from the last quarter), Toronto 46.8 per cent (down 0.5 percentage points), Montreal 41.3 per cent (down 0.4 percentage points), Ottawa 38.7 per cent (up 0.5 percentage points), Calgary 34.9 per cent (down 3.1 percentage points) and Edmonton 31.0 per cent (down 2.4 percentage points).
The RBC Housing Affordability Measure, which has been compiled since 1985, is based on the costs of owning a detached bungalow, a reasonable property benchmark for the housing market in Canada. Alternative housing types are also presented including a standard two-storey home and a standard condominium. The higher the reading, the more costly it is to afford a home. For example, an affordability reading of 50 per cent means that homeownership costs, including mortgage payments, utilities and property taxes, take up 50 per cent of a typical household’s monthly pre-tax income.
Highlights from across Canada:
- British Columbia: Buying a home in B.C. became slightly more affordable in the fourth quarter of 2010, due primarily to a small drop in mortgage rates. After experiencing some declines in the previous quarter, home prices rose modestly for most housing categories; condominium apartments bucked the trend, however, and depreciated slightly. Prices were supported by a tightening in market conditions with home resales picking up smartly following substantial cooling in the spring and summer that saw sellers lose their edge in setting property values. Demand and supply in the province are judged to be quite balanced at this point. RBC’s Affordability Measures fell between 0.8 and 1.0 percentage points in the fourth quarter which came on the heels of much more substantial drops (1.7 to 4.8 percentage points) in the third quarter. Notwithstanding these declines, affordability remains poor and will weigh on housing demand going forward.
- Alberta: Alberta officially became the most affordable provincial market in the country in the fourth quarter, according to the RBC Measures which fell once again by 1.0 to 2.4 percentage points, extending their declines since late-2007. In addition to the lower mortgage rates, the further depreciation of home prices contributed to lowering homeownership costs. Property values were negatively affected by a substantial downswing in demand in the spring and early summer, which put buyers in the drivers’ seat. The significant improvement in affordability is near the end of its line, however, as demand has shown more vigour in recent months – alongside a provincial economy that is gaining more traction – and the market has become better balanced. RBC expects that this will stem price declines this year, thereby removing a potential offset to the negative effect of projected rise in interest rates on affordability.
ORES Real Estate Index For January 2011
COMMENT: This is a very cool index I found that compares most investments to real estate. It is interesting right now as gold is at an all time high, oil is back up and Canadian real estate has held most of its value and is coming back.
- Wednesday, 16 February 2011 10:09
- Brian Madigan LL.B.
Here is the “ORES REAL ESTATE INDEX” which tracks the average resale prices of single family homes and condominiums in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). It also tracks certain benchmark comparisons such as the price of oil and gold, as well as the Consumer Price Index.
In addition, the stock market indices for Toronto, and the three largest US markets are also compared.
For ease of comparison, everything we look at is worth 100 points on the Index as of 1 January 2005. That time period compares favourably with the five year average used as a standard benchmark comparison in the mutual fund industry.
As of 31 January 2011, here is the Index representing average prices:
Real Estate
132.15…..GTA single family homes
130.87…..All condos in GTA
139.34…..Downtown Central Condos
122.53…..East condos
131.35…..West condos
124.97…..North condos
Other market comparisons
310.23…..gold (price per ounce)
206.98…..oil (price per barrel)
147.24…..TSX index
132.15…..ORES Index single family homes
111.59 …..CPI index
130.92…..NASDAQ index
113.37……Dow Jones index
108.88……S&P Index
Using the Index
Just a quick note on reading the information. Have a look at the ORES Index for Real Estate (single family homes). As of the end of January, the index stood at 132.15. That’s a 32.15% increase in 73 months. That means the increase is 0.404% monthly, or it could also be expressed as 5.28% annually. The performance here is shown without annual compounding for the sake of simplicity.
The other statistics are reported in a similar fashion for the ease of comparison.
Observations (on the Index)
As we use index, there are several notable comments:
• Commodity prices are just commodity prices
• There is no other “extra return” for commodities
• The same is true for the CPI
• The CPI is a benchmark to see whether you are keeping pace with inflation, that number is 111.59 (It has been modest and appears under control)
• For a realistic performance goal, you should aim for CPI plus 3.5% annually
• Stocks provide dividends in cash or extra stock. This return is additional to that shown in the stock market indices
• The stock market Indexes only measure the survivors. So, in 2009, both GM and Chrysler would have been dropped due to the bankruptcies
• If you held GM and Chrysler, you lost everything, but two new companies moved in to replace them in the Indexes
• Real estate offers a return in terms of occupancy. You can rent out the property and receive income, or occupy the property and enjoy it yourself
• Actually, I should have mentioned that if you held gold bullion, you could sit in a room, count it, and enjoy that experience too. I’m not quite sure how to measure that. You’ll have to ask King Midas or Goldfinger!
Comparative Observations Using the New Index
• Gold was the best performer, but reached its peak of 324.61 earlier In January
• Oil was the most volatile, (yes it dropped in half over our measurement period)
• Real estate was the most stable, with solid predictable returns at about 5.28% annually
• single family homes continue to show a better overall return than condos
• Our own stock market posted reasonable gains, and is now ahead of single family homes over the measurement period, however, don’t forget that the TSX is still well off its highs
• All three US stock market indicators now show positive numbers.
Conclusion
For steady, predictable, measured gains pick real estate. It’s a solid performer with lower risk (less volatility) and generally moving in a positive direction.
And remember, when it comes to real estate, it’s never “wiped out” completely, like GM or Chrysler stock. So, unless you’re sitting on the edge of a tsunami, you’ll still own something when the storm is over.
For a benchmark of success, there’s 1,000 years of history to point to a rate of return in real estate being about the equivalent of 5% per annum, simple interest (non-compounded). That means that real estate doubles in value every 20 years. There are a lot of companies (now bankrupt, including CanWest Global, and many US Banks) that would have been happy with that return.
Intra-provincial migration at 20-year high
Comment: This is exactly what started the boom in Calgary in 2006 when 25,000 people moved into town from all over Canada. This should drive the rental market vacancy rate down and increase rental prices. Then it will be more affordable to buy and the slack in the market will slowly get taken up; supporting home prices.
Good news for everyone in the housing industry and for home owners.
—- Nicolas Van Praet, Financial Post · Thursday, Jan. 27, 2011
MONTREAL — The number of Canadians moving to another province has punched to a high not seen in 20 years as people pack up in search of better jobs and salaries elsewhere.
Roughly 337,000 Canadians were on the move in 2010, says a report on interprovincial migration published Thursday by TD Economics. That’s 45,000 more than the year before and the most since the late 1980s. It also represents the largest share of the overall population since 1998.
“It’s a good sign in the sense that whenever you see that kind of movement, it’s an expression of a labour market that’s healing after a pretty severe recession,” said TD senior economist Pascal Gauthier, who wrote the study. “People are either returning home or moving to areas that didn’t have employment before. For those that are already employed, they’re finding potentially better prospects.”
Interprovincial migration matters because when there is a net movement of people to higher-employment and higher-productivity areas, that generates net economic output gains on a national basis. It’s also crucial for businesses because people often make big-ticket purchases when they move, which can have a significant impact on local housing and retail markets.
Canada’s situation lies in stark contrast with the United States, where census data show long-distance moves across states fell last year to the lowest level since the government began tracking them in 1948. Americans used to be a nation of big movers, with as many as one in five relocating for work every year in the 1950s. Now, experts are debating why they’ve become a nation of “hunkered-down homebodies,” as the New York Times put it.
Richard Florida, director of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the University of Toronto, says the United States is experiencing a new kind of class divide now between “mobile” people who have the resources and flexibility to pursue economic opportunity, and “stuck” citizens who are tied to places with weaker economies.
He argues the U.S. housing crisis is a big factor slowing mobility down. When the housing bubble popped, it left millions of Americans unable to sell their homes. “It’s bitterly ironic that housing, for so many Americans, has gone from being a cornerstone of their American dream to being a burden,” he wrote in a recent opinion piece.
Mr. Gauthier agrees that the housing crash is partly to blame for keeping Americans put. “There’s such a glut of supply that it’s just difficult to sell your house. In Canada, that’s not been an issue.”
In Canada, the biggest impediment to the free flow of labour between provinces and territories remains regulation as occupational requirements fall under provincial jurisdiction.
Workers in regulated professions and skilled trades, such as teachers and engineers, still face major barriers trying to work in provinces other than their own. Solving that problem will be key ahead of the looming labour force crunch, Mr. Gauthier argues.
Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan have seen the strongest net inflow of people of all provinces for the past three years and that will not change in the short term, the TD report forecasts. The three jurisdictions are working to implement a newly signed trade and labour mobility agreement between them that could eventually see seamless movement of workers between their borders.
TD says Ontario and Quebec will continue to lose residents to other provinces on a net basis, but the bleeding will be at a slower pace than in previous years. It says Manitoba and Prince Edward Island will be the only provinces still shedding a significant share of residents through the end of 2012.
In Manitoba’s case, it’s not that there aren’t any jobs. The province’s unemployment rate has been consistently lower than that of the rest of Canada since the 1990s. It’s that people are being lured by the prospect of higher-paying jobs in neighbouring provinces.
Landlords Dodge New CMHC Rule
Landlords Dodge New CMHC Rule
The recent changes to CMHC rules on qualifying for investment mortgage are having an effect that is causing havoc on an investor’s debt-service ratio, making it difficult for investors to qualify without a more-than stable personal income.
The following article discusses how recent investors are experiencing difficulty when qualifying for mortgages, and explores the best ways to avoid CMHC, highlighting that investors should deal with banks that “go outside of CMHC”.
We DO have lenders that still do the offset under certain circumstances. Call to find out how and when.
— Mark Herman
Article Source (Calgary, Alberta – Financial Post) – These are particularly confusing times to be a real estate investor due, for the most part, to a policy change made by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (CMHC) in April.
The major issue concerns mortgages on CMHC-insured properties with four complete units or less, which went from being calculated using an 80% offset model to a 50% add-back one. As reported in this paper, the offset model meant that up to 80% of the expected rental income is used to offset the cost of the mortgage. With the add-back model, half of the expected gross rental income will be added to an investor’s income, but the entire mortgage is added to expenses.
In other words, it wreaks havoc on an investor’s debt-service ratio, as was the case with full-time Toronto investor and consultant Cindy Wennerstrom, who is currently shopping for her eighth property but is “stuck, mortgage-wise,” she says.
“When banks take off 50% of the rent and apply that to your expenses, there is usually a deficit. That is subtracted from your actual income,” she says.
And with Ms. Wennerstrom’s other properties each producing a cash flow of $800 to $1,100 per month, there still isn’t enough to bring her to the desired debt-service ratio of 40%.
“That means 40% of your gross monthly income has to service your monthly debts,” says Barrie, Ont., broker Adam Bazuk. “That makes it very difficult to qualify investors unless they also have an enormous personal income.”
If that wasn’t difficult enough, the 50% add-back policy is not rubber-stamped across all lending institutions, with some allowing investors to use more than 50%, and others maintaining different versions of the offset program.
“It’s gone from a nice simple A or B plan, to an A, B and C plan, with all different ways to get there,” says Dustan Woodhouse, a B.C. mortgage broker with Invis.
Confusing, perhaps. But is it a bad thing?
Consider the 80% offset, for instance. “Everybody thought rental offset was gone,” says Mr. Woodhouse. “All they could see was that, based on a $1,000 monthly rental income, an 80% offset would qualify you for a $190,000 mortgage, while a 50% add-back would qualify you for $45,000, so it’s messed up the market from that perspective.”
But he says that for “organized property investors,” who have been reporting rental income on their T1 forms for the past two years, there are still good, if not better, options out there.
“Under the old rules, I would only be allowed to subtract 80%,” Mr. Woodhouse says.
While not a true 100% offset, it is the easiest way to explain the program, says Chris Hoeppner, a regional vice-president at Street Capital.
“If a client can provide the statement of real estate rentals from the T1 General, we just go with the net gain or net loss that property produces. As long as a person claims enough rental income to cover all the expenses, it basically becomes a wash, taking that property out of the debt servicing.”
But for those not so organized, who have not been reporting rental income on their T1 forms, there are still options.
As well, private mortgage insurers Genworth allows for rental offset.
Mr. Bazuk suggests avoiding CMHC by having a 20% or more down payment, and dealing with banks that “go outside of CMHC.” He also says Scotiabank, National Bank, Royal Bank of Canada and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce still offer a 70% offset arrangement, or are rental-property friendly.
Ms. Wennerstrom, despite being without a mortgage at the moment, is still confident.
“The option is still there, but you just have to buy the right properties,” she says, which means ones with “exceptionally positive cash flow.” To her, that’s more than $700 a month after expenses, plus a 10% reserve for maintenance and a 5.4% vacancy slush fund.
“After that, it’s just what sort of hoops to jump through to get the mortgage,” she says. “They will continue to change the rules and we will continue to find ways around them.”