When transfer tax becomes controversial

The legislative process encourages discourse for proposed legislation.  The result is a bill that is passed or defeated.  Regardless, proposed housing market and real estate legislation is not typically exciting; and in fact the minutia of the bill can be downright boring and/or confusing.  However, there are occasions when proposed legislation has the potential to affect home owners and buyers such that it can create a brouhaha.

First, let’s review a few bills passed by the Maryland General Assembly: The first has to do with agency.  Currently, “licensees” are required to provide the Maryland Real Estate Commission’s Understanding Whom Real Estate Agents Represent at the time of first face to face meeting and is a notice to the consumer.  The disclosure explains seller’s agents, agents who represent the buyer, and dual agents.  For many home buyers, the first face to face meeting of an agent is at an open house, and are supposed to be given the disclosure by the agent sitting at the open house regardless if the buyer has an agent or not.  The new law is to simplify the disclosure, eliminating redundant notices and allowing agents at open houses to post who they represent instead of the asking every visitor to sign the disclosure.

Another change is how agents recommend service providers.  The current requirement is for agents to check the licensing status of all recommended service providers, ensuring that the provider is currently licensed in Maryland.  The new law will only require agents to annually check home improvement licenses of recommended contractors.

The General Assembly also passed legislation that will require home sellers throughout the state to disclose deferred water and sewer charges. Additionally, legislation was passed that adds requirements to the state brokerage licensing exemption for attorneys.

Still with me?  Good.  Local residents should be aware of the Montgomery County Council’s attempt to fast track a bill to increase the county’s recordation tax on real estate transactions.  On April 14th, Expedited Bill 15-16, Recordation Tax – Rates – Allocations – Amendments was introduced by Council President Nancy Floreen.  Recordation tax is collected when a home is sold, and when a home owner refinances a mortgage.  If passed, it will become effective July 1st 2016 (which is about 2 months from now!).

The Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors® issued an April 18th press release opposing the bill, stating that it unfairly targets home buyers and home owners by increasing a tax that is already among the highest in the state.

In an April 12th memorandum to Councilmembers (page 7 of pdf) Councilmember Floreen stated: “While nobody likes the idea of increasing taxes of any kind, our needs are great, and this tax is less likely to affect those Montgomery County residents who are struggling most. On the up side, it will generate millions of dollars to support our desperate need for new schools and educational facility improvements. What’s more, a portion of the recordation tax is earmarked for affordable housing.”

Although aspirations for certain projects may be well intentioned, Councilmember Floreen should consider that further burdening home buyers in an already high cost area for real estate could impact homeownership and make “affordable housing” less affordable.  Furthermore, the average Montgomery County home owner refinancing their mortgage may not be struggling, but they are trying to get by the best they can in a high cost of living area.

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2016

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Housing and presidential election

from trulia.com

Another presidential election, and there will most likely be very little discussion and debate about housing policy. During the 2012 presidential election, housing seemed to take a back seat as the real estate market was still emerging from a foreclosure crisis and recession just four years earlier. Fast forward to today and homeownership is hovering near a 30-year low.  Homeownership is out of reach to many due to tightened mortgage qualifying and increasing home prices; while Americans’ incomes are being squeezed by rising rents.

Enter Ron Terwilliger. A successful real estate developer and philanthropist, Terwilliger launched the J. Ronald Terwilliger Foundation for Housing America’s Families in 2014. The organization’s mission is to “…recalibrate federal housing policy to more effectively address our nation’s critical affordable housing challenges and to meet the housing needs of future generations.”

Giving the keynote address at The Affordable Housing Developers Summit in Chicago, Terwilliger described an evolving “silent housing crisis.” He proclaimed that “A legacy of the great recession, the rental affordability crisis is often overlooked by policymakers, ignored by the media, and underestimated, at best, by the general public.” And although affordable housing is a bi-partisan issue, he stated that candidates don’t talk about the issue (housingfinance.com).

New Homes

So it should come as no surprise that the J. Ronald Terwilliger Foundation for Housing America’s Families and the Bipartisan Policy Center hosted a housing summit this past October. Speaking at the summit were a number of presidential candidates, policy makers, current and former Senators, a former HUD Secretary, local officials, and industry leaders and experts. Unfortunately, the presidential candidates that are still in the race, did not participate. The summit was held in New Hampshire, where housing costs for 36% of residents is more than 30% of their gross income; and median rents have increased 50% since 2000 (housingwire.com).

The housing summit seemed to inspire realtor.com chief economist Jonathan Smoke, who shortly afterward penned a statement declaring his candidacy for president as leader of the “Housing Party” (As President, I’ll Make American Housing Great Again—Really; realtor.com; October 21, 2015). Smoke believes that housing should be first on the national agenda stating, “The market won’t solve all of our housing problems on its own. And our government seems incapable of working together to find solutions that can help…” Laying out a detailed platform, Smoke proclaims that a vote for him would “…build our way to a stronger economy and more affordable housing for the middle class—a better America for all of us.” He said that he would work toward getting a home for every family.

But it may be that housing policy is a bit more complicated than just proclaiming “homes for everyone.” In a frank analysis of housing policy, Daniel Hertz laid out what seems to be diametrically opposed positions: policy should keep housing affordable so as not to price people out of the market; and policy should protect house values, because homes are an investment and wealth building vehicle (American Housing Policy’s Two Basic Ideas Pull Cities in Opposite Directions; theatlantic.com; October 14, 2015).

Hertz believes that these seemingly opposite policy positions can be “reconciled” by offering a wide variety of housing types for a broad range of incomes. Additionally, he discussed how local privately developed affordable housing programs (such as Montgomery County’s Workforce Housing and MPDU programs) is one avenue to a comprehensive housing policy.

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2016

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Helping family with homeownership

real estateThe holiday season is about spending time with family and enjoying each other’s company. But as a consequence of the Great Recession, some family members (including adult children) have made “family time” a year round thing by moving in. Whether it’s a child moving back with parents after college, or maybe family who suffered a financial hardship; having accommodating family can be a blessing. However, as the economy slowly improves, the post-recession family nesting trend is changing and many are (re)establishing their own homes.

Some people are taking advantage of an improving housing market to create one of the recent housing trends – purchasing an investment property to “house” family members. Although the benefits of purchasing an investment property and having family live there may not be obvious, some realize that it can be mutually beneficial. Having a trusty and inherently loyal family member live in the rental property can mean a regular rent check, as well as ensure that the home is maintained. As with any investment property – the longer you own it, the greater potential for long term equity.

Some are banking on recent rising home values and taking out a home equity line to purchase investment homes, although some are fortunate to have the assets to pay cash. However, many rely on financing the property, which requires a hefty down payment (typically 20%) as well as an interest rate slightly higher than that of the owner-occupant mortgage you might have on your own home. And although buying an investment property to house family members sounds as if it is a no-brainer to get them out of your own house; due diligence is required to determine if this is advantageous for you, as well as consulting with your tax preparer about tax benefits and/or consequences.

If buying the investment property is not an option, you may be able to help family qualify for a mortgage of their own. Although FHA mortgages are typically common among first time home buyers and/or buyers who need a low down payment loan; FHA has been the go-to program for helping family buy a home –especially when the home buyer falls short of qualifying on their own because of a lack of employment history, assets, and qualifying income. Although Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and VA permits co-borrowers who are not intending to live in the home to co-sign for family; FHA has additional features that may make the loan more attractive. Besides allowing family to gift the borrower’s down payment, FHA may allow alternate credit sources to be substituted when the borrower has insufficient established traditional credit.

Although “co-signing” as a non-occupying co-borrower might help your child or some other family member become a home owner, it should not be taken lightly. You have to consider that even though you do not intend to live in the house or make the mortgage payments, you are signing the mortgage note. Not only could you be held responsible if payments are not made, your credit may even be dinged even if payments are late.

Although there are benefits to having extended family live together, you might be thinking of helping them start their own household. Before making any decisions, do your due diligence. And talk to several lenders, as with any mortgage loan program – underwriting varies from lender to lender and guidelines typically change without notice.

© Dan Krell
Google+

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Homeownership, freedom and independence

While we enjoy the barbecues and fireworks that come along with the Fourth of July Holiday, we might take a moment to think about our freedom and independence. And of course – homeownership is an expression of those liberties which is part of the “American Spirit” that drives us to achieve the American Dream.

The American Dream is not dead, as some will have you believe; the dream of homeownership is like a phoenix that is renewed after the fire, and is resumed by a new generation of home buyers. In his April 2009 Vanity Fair article “Rethinking the American Dream,” David Kamp gave a wide perspective of the American Dream; from its origin to diametrically opposed viewpoints. In his conclusion, Kamp states, “…The American Dream should accommodate the goal of home ownership, but without imposing a lifelong burden of unmeetable debt. Above all, the American Dream should be embraced as the unique sense of possibility that this country gives its citizens—the decent chance, as Moss Hart would say, to scale the walls and achieve what you wish.

As we emerge from the housing and financial crises, many are discussing the benefits of homeownership once again. Even after the Great Recession, many prefer owning a home over renting. Survey after survey indicates that a majority of respondents positively viewed homeownership as a desire or goal (Rohe & Boshamer, Reexamining the Social Benefits of Homeownership after the Housing Crisis, Joint Center for Housing Studies Harvard University, August 2013).

So what is it about homeownership that makes it an aspiration for so many of us? Besides the fact that we all need a place to live; a home is an asset that has relative value to the housing market at any given time. Housing is also still perceived by many as an investment that can appreciate over a period of time. Additionally, those who have a mortgage on their home may be able to take advantage of the mortgage interest tax deduction (check with your tax preparer).

Home owners are more inclined to maintain their homes and neighborhoods, as well as being invested in protecting their home and community; which may account for lower incidences of reported crime. Besides stabilizing communities, many of these benefits may also account for positively affecting home values.

Additionally, there has been a lot said about the social benefits of homeownership. A National Association of Realtors® blog post by Research Economist Selma Hepp, titled Social Benefits of Homeownership and Stable Housing lists many of the documented social benefits. She cites that home owners tend to: be more charitable; participate more in their community (including voting); have an increased connection to their neighborhood and neighbors; have an increased general positive life outlook; express an increased self esteem and higher life satisfaction; and be healthier.

There are many studies that also indicate homeownership benefits children. Hepp includes some of the benefits of children living in owned homes, which include: lower teen pregnancy rate; higher test scores; higher high school graduation rate; decreased delinquencies; and an increased participation in organized activities.

Although June was officially declared “Homeownership Month” in 2002; July is a more appropriate month because of homeownership’s association with freedom, independence, and the American Dream.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2014


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Individual mandates and housing

by Dan Krell © 2012
DanKrell.com

rowhousesThis week, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard arguments for and against issues surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA). The arguments don’t have much of anything to do with providing healthcare, but rather the arguments are about certain elements of PPACA and the Constitution. In fact, Tuesday’s arguments about the individual mandate could be applied to anything – even the housing market.

The individual mandate portion of the PPACA basically requires certain individuals to purchase healthcare insurance or pay a penalty. Individual mandates are not new, and have been enacted in the past. For example, military drafts and income tax have been mandated (the initial enactment of an income tax was found unconstitutional- so the Constitution was amended which resulted in the sixteenth amendment).

I’m not an attorney, and I’m sure that I don’t begin to scratch the surface of the issue; however, the arguments for and against the individual mandate can basically be summed up as follows: Those that oppose the PPACA individual mandate argue that this mandate is different from others such that it regulates commercial inactivity (e.g., levying a fine when a product or service is not purchased); while those in support of the mandate argue it is not a fine for non-participation, but rather a tax.

Regardless, which way you approach the mandate, some contend that a mandate is only one way to have the public engage in commerce. In an editorial that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine, Einer Elhauge, J.D. described the individual mandate as an alternative to providing subsidies (Elhauge, E (2012). The Irrelevance of the Broccoli Argument against the Insurance Mandate. The New England Journal of Medicine 366, e1. published on December 21, 2011). Putting aside Elhauge’s reasoning and opinion of the SCOTUS case; he points out that the Government has many ways to affect industries and commerce. Typically, the Government attempts to persuade us to engage in specific businesses industries by providing incentives and subsidies, such as tax credits to industry participants or purchasers of specific products. However, rather than persuading economic activity, the PPACA individual mandate is historic in that it requires participation and fines those who do not participate.

rowhousesLike other industries, the housing industry is subsidized to encourage participation; home ownership is encouraged through the mortgage interest tax deduction and low interest rate mortgage programs (and for a brief time- first time home buyer tax credits). However, it is not implausible to think that if SCOTUS upholds the individual mandate, Congress could require people to make home a purchase, renovate, or retrofit their homes with green technologies (in an effort to increase economic activity in those industries).

There are some that argue that subsidies are bad enough for the housing market; one argument is that the mortgage interest deduction has artificially elevated home prices. However, some subsidies may only influence the timing of purchases rather than value: recent data suggests that the brief first time home buyer tax credit created short-term spikes of home sales that would have likely occurred over a period of time.

On the face of it, the housing market has little to do with health care. However, this week, housing and other industries may be affected by the SCOTUS decision regarding the healthcare individual mandate. Subsidies verses mandates- it may ultimately be about semantics and interpretation.

More news and articles on “the Blog”
This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. This article was originally published in the Montgomery County Sentinel the week of March 26, 2012. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws. Copyright © 2012 Dan Krell.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector