THE HOUSING RECOVERY FRAUD EXPLAINED

3 comments

Posted on 23rd January 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

,

Lance Roberts explains how the MSM bullshit about the blossoming housing recovery has painted a false picture. There is no recovery and 2013 will reveal it to be a Big Lie.

The Media Is Misreporting The Housing Turnaround Story

Imagine that your financial advisor called you up one day and said:

“Great news…your investment portfolio gained 1%  in January which is an annualized return of 12%.  However, we have to  subtract .05% from that return because historically January’s return has only  been 0.95% since 1950.  This brings our seasonally adjusted return to  11.4%.”

Of course, after the SEC  pays a visit to the advisor to correct his performance reporting measures, the  simple reality is that “what you see is what you get.” 

While this example may seem a little farfetched – this is exactly what  happens with a variety of economic reports that are released by various  government agencies and member organization/lobby groups.  The reasoning  for such data manipulations is not a nefarious scheme; but rather an attempt to  smooth what is normally very volatile data.  This is particularly the case  with housing related data.   As an example the chart below shows the data  released by the Census Bureau for housing starts on both a non-seasonally and  seasonally adjusted basis.

 

As you can see there is an extreme amount of volatility in the  non-seasonally adjusted data.  The Census Bureau takes the reported monthly  housing starts data and annualizes it.  Therefore, if 10,000 homes were  started in January it is reported as 120,000 on an annualized basis.  Then  a seasonal adjustment factor is added to account for seasonal weather  and demand patterns.   For example let’s take a look at the housing start  data that was just released for December of 2012.

The headlines read that “Housing starts surged by 12.1% in  December proving that the housing recovery is back.”  In reality  the numbers were as follows:

  • December starts:  61,500 (down 2.8% from  November)
  • Annualized December starts:  738,000
  • Reported seasonally adjusted December starts:  954,000  (Up  12.1% from November)
  • Seasonal adjustment to December starts:  +216,000

Historically, the data smoothing methodology was “close  enough”  and the variations were, more or less, worked out over  time.  However, in the current economic environment, the seasonal  adjustment process may be overstating that actual activity that is occurring  within the underlying economy.  With housing currently making a very small  contribution to overall economic activity, just slightly more than 2.5% as shown  in the chart below, the difference between  the “real” economic impact of 61,500 homes being started  nationwide versus 954,000, of which 216,000 were a mathematical seasonal  adjustment, can be quite dramatic.

 

However, as in our financial advisor analogy, when it comes to the impact  of the “housing recovery” on the economy “what we  see is what we get” and nothing else.  Therefore, in the quest to  determine what the actual contribution to the overall economy that housing will  provide, we need to look at the full process of housing on an actual  basis.

The Housing Process Activity Index (HAPI)

The housing process begins with the permit to build a home which leads to the  start of the construction process, the completion and the sell to an end buyer.    The reason for looking at all four components is that many permits that  are filed do not result in a start, many starts do not lead to completions and  there are many completions that remain unsold for quite some time.

The Housing Process Activity Index (HAPI) takes into account all four  variables.  However, instead of utilizing seasonal adjustment factors and  annualizing the monthly activity, as with the Census Bureau, I use a 12-month  average of the actual monthly activity to smooth the data.   The chart below shows the HAPI as compared to its individual HAPI  subcomponents.

 

This tells us quite a different story than what the media is currently  reporting.   On average over the last twelve months there were:

  • 67,000 permits for new privately owned housing
  • 65,000 housing starts each month
  • 54,300 completions
  • 30,900 sales

What this tells is that out of the 67,000 permits, on average, that were  pulled each month to build a home only 30,900 actually wound up being completed  and sold.  This is a very different picture than the recent months  seasonally adjusted data that showed:

  • 903,000 permits
  • 954,000 starts
  • 686,000 completions
  • 377,000 sales (as of November)

It is important to note that I am NOT contesting the manner in  which the Census Bureau reports its housing data.  I am,  however, suggesting that the method used in the current economic environment may  be overstating the actual activity that is occurring.  By smoothing the  non-seasonally adjusted data using a monthly average we see a very different  perspective to the data.  The HAPI begins to potentially answer the  questions of why housing remains a low economic contributor and why construction  employment is still mired at very low levels.

 

While housing has improved somewhat from the post-crisis lows it is  far weaker than the majority of headlines actually suggest.  Housing  inventory has declined sharply from its peaks that have primarily been driven by  speculative all-cash investors turning lower priced homes, and buying homes in  bulk from banks, to be turned into rentals.

 

Furthermore, a large portion of the “housing  start” story has been in the multi-family apartment space.   As shown in the chart below the percentage of apartment starts, 5-units or  more, is currently at some of the highest levels on record and has surpassed the  peak seen in the last recession.

 

Currently, there are still more than 25% of homeowners underwater which  limits their ability to move, refinance or sell their homes.  However, as  prices rise, there are two issues that begin to attack the housing story:   1) As prices reach levels where underwater homeowners can sell they will  likely do so out of a psychology need to escape the “trap,” which will bring a  large supply of homes back onto the market, and; 2) rising prices will  eventually erode the profitability of buying homes for rentals which will bring  the speculative frenzy that has been the driver of the recent recovery to a  halt.

The housing recovery is ultimately a story of the “real” unemployment  situation which still shows that roughly a quarter of the home buying  cohort are unemployed and living at home with their parents.  The remaining  members of the home buying, household formation, contingent are employed but at  lower ends of the pay scale and are choosing to rent due to budgetary  considerations.  Also, we should not discount the psychology of home  ownership has dramatically changed since the crash as many of  the “millennials” saw the financial damage their parents  suffered and are opting out of taking such a perceived risk.

As I  stated recently the optimism over the housing recovery has gotten well  ahead of the underlying fundamentals.  The overarching problem is that the  housing market that is almost exclusively dependent on the continued push to  artificially suppress interest rates combined with massive amounts of direct  stimulus, and incentives, to bailout current homeowners and banks.  This  intervention is causing an artificial supply suppression which is likely to  create a backlash in the future as the current supply/demand conditions are  unsustainable.

While the belief was that the Government, and Fed’s, interventions would  ignite the housing market creating an self-perpetuating recovery in the economy  – it did not turn out that way.  Today, these repeated intrusions are  having a diminished rate of return and the risk now is that interest rates rise  shutting potential homebuyers out of the market.  It is likely that in 2013  housing will begin to stabilize at historically low levels and the economic  contribution will remain fairly weak.  The downside risk to that view is  the impact of higher taxes, stagnant wage growth, re-defaults of the 6-million  modifications and workouts, elevated defaults of underwater homeowners and a  slowdown of speculative investment due to reduced profit margins.  While  many hopes have been pinned on the 2012 stimulus fueled, China investing, and  supply deprived housing recovery as “the” driver of  economic growth in 2013 – the data suggest that may be quite a bit of wishful  thinking.

Read more:  http://www.streettalklive.com/daily-x-change/1468-the-real-housing-recovery-story.html#ixzz2IqTJD78P

3 Comments
  1. marissa says:

    My husband’s company is headhunting for a tech with very specific skills and experience. Anybody with the desired qualities who lives in the area has already got a job–a very good job. So locally nobody is going to give up their already good job to jump to another company and start over.

    So now they’re looking to recruit for this position country wide. The company has had a few nibbles. But most of the interested candidates are in another state stuck in a house they can’t sell. So they can’t move. The job remains unfilled because qualified people who’d love to have it can’t get out from under their overpriced unsellable homes.

    Tragic state of affairs. The job pays $30 an hour plus top of the line benefits.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    23rd January 2013 at 7:25 pm

  2. Makati1 says:

    And the beat goes on. ALL housing is still way over-priced. Many sold now will be back on the market in a few years, or repoed again. The economy is contracting. THAT is the new norm. Adjust. There is no ‘growth’ in the future.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    23rd January 2013 at 9:35 pm

  3. Bostonbob says:

    How can housing be overpriced? My brother bought his first house in 1992 in Somerville MA for $120,000 from my uncle who paid $5,000 in 1962. He recieved an unsolicited offer 2 years age for $675,000. Needless to say he took the money as he is presently living in North Carolina. The gentleman who purchased the home converted it back to a one family from the two family that is was and updated it. It resold for about $1.15 million. How this is possible I am not sure, but these are the facts as I know them. This will end because it cannot continue, that is just the way it is.
    Thank you,
    Bob.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    23rd January 2013 at 9:03 am

Leave a comment

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.