Short term memory loss?


Posted by: Swindells FP, on April 11, 2013.


The announcement of the “Help to Buy” mortgage guarantee programme has provoked much media comment.

Credible commentary and views we have come across are those such as Martin Wolf’s of the FT (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/481a3f1c-90cd-11e2-a456-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2QuhQjPZi)

“Under the new “Help to Buy” mortgage guarantee programme the government will aim to increase the availability of mortgages. It will provide up to £12bn in guarantees, sufficient to cover £130bn in mortgages. Under the deal, lenders will receive a partial guarantee on mortgages offered to people who buy homes worth up to £600,000 with a deposit of between five and 20 per cent of the property value. The aim of the intervention is to help those people who are now rationed out of the property market by high prices and cautious lenders.

This is good politics and horrendous economics. Since the peak of the boom, UK house prices have fallen by only 16 per cent in real terms, against some 40 per cent in the US. The ratio of median earnings to median house prices has fallen only 7 per cent from its peak. The government is encouraging people to leverage themselves up to the hilt in order to buy what is already likely to be overpriced property and, as a result of this policy, is likely to become still more so. This is irresponsible enough. But worse, the government will probably now find itself permanently using its balance sheet to support risky housing finance, as the US has done. The market cannot sensibly finance such high loan-to-value ratios. But this fundamental lesson from the crisis is now being thrown away.”

And Jonathan Eley of the same publication (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a020739e-9211-11e2-a6f4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2O4qMS1Xn)

“By far my biggest misgiving is over the two schemes that extend state backing to mortgage lending. George Osborne presented this as support for aspiration, helping hard-pressed first-time buyers get on to the housing market.

I can see the appeal, from his point of view. In a country unhealthily obsessed with home ownership, rising house prices create a feel good factor that comes in jolly useful at election time. A combination of state help and dirt-cheap credit makes it fairly certain that, whatever pressure incomes may still be under, house prices will not have fallen appreciably by 2015, when Britain next goes to the polls.

Overvalued homes have other benefits, too. Look at the Office for Budget Responsibility’s predictions for stamp duty revenue; it expects to collect £7.7bn in 2013/14, then £8.4bn, £9.3bn and £10.5bn in 2016/17. Such increases aren’t game changing, but every little helps. The same goes for inheritance tax, the threshold for which is now frozen until 2019. And putting off the day of reckoning in the housing market will help Osborne get shot of those troublesome stakes in Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds. Imagine trying to privatise a high street bank at a time when repossessions are soaring.

Osborne’s boss recently invoked the spirit of Thatcher with his “there is no alternative” speech. He would do better to heed one of her other famous mantras: “you can’t buck the market”. House prices are high because there aren’t enough homes in the places they’re needed. The solution to that is to build more homes – creating gainful employment for many – not fiddle about with the mortgage market using policies soaked in moral hazard.

As the sub-prime experience in the US shows, encouraging people to borrow excessively to buy properties they cannot really afford is rarely a good idea in the long term. What happens if such loans go bad? Who stands where in the pecking order? Do taxpayers get paid back only once banks have got their cut?”

We have tried to find credible arguments to counter the above views but they seem to be rather sparse on the ground unless the commentator has a vested interest in the “Help to Buy” scheme’s success.



|

Enter your email

Get free investment, pensions and wealth management news and advice.

* indicates required

*We will never share your details with any third party.


Categories



Client Stories





Book a consultation


Your Name (required)

Email (required)

Phone Number

Age

Employment Status

Income

What you would like to talk about?

captcha

Enter exactly what you see above






Enter your email to receive free relevant news and updates.

* indicates required

*We will never share your details with any third party.


Latest… View all




Putting the current stock market decline in context


There’s no doubt hyperbolic headlines depicting the recent falls on the world’s financial markets are potentially anxiety-inducing. With the FTSE 100 Index falling to its lowest level since April 2017, the effect of the headlines is to promote a sense of uneasiness; we’re here to remind you that this shouldn’t be the case. Instead of […]

Read more →


Inheritance Tax is an avoidable tax


It is often said that Inheritance Tax is an avoidable tax, but many of us somehow fail to avoid it. Why is this? In our experience, clients’ failure to plan effectively is a result of the following perceived problems: Speed – How often will the thought of having to survive 7 years from the date […]

Read more →


What went wrong with the forecasts?


Reading the tea leaves Investors at year-end are inclined to reflect on the 12 months gone and muse on what the coming year might bring. Aware of this appetite for speculation, themedia tends to feed it with forecasts. These articles can be fun to read, but are even more so a year later. In January […]

Read more →


What should investors make of bitcoin mania?


Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are receiving intense media coverage, prompting many investors to wonder whether these new types of electronic money deserve a place in their portfolios. Cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin emerged only in the past decade. Unlike traditional money, no paper notes or metal coins are involved. No central bank issues the currency, and […]

Read more →