03-07-2019, 11:21 AM
|
#2
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
I feel like it just isn't a good idea to purchase the most expensive house you can afford as it doesn't leave a lot of room in your budget for other things and puts you in peril if interest rates increase and squeeze you out so in that sense, the stress test is a good thing.
As a home owner, I'm not a fan of the fact that my house has dropped a fair bit in value since I bought it just last year (it's probably dropped about $30,000 based on the sale price of similar homes around me). It sucks because I have a job opportunity in another city but it's impossible to sell given the equity I have in the home at the moment.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:22 AM
|
#3
|
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winebar Kensington
|
Councillor wants local approach to mortgage rules over national 'stress test'
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...al-stress-test
Quote:
A notice of motion being presented this week which asks Ottawa and the province to consider the adoption of a regional approach to lending rules, over the current “mortgage stress test,” is earning some support among councillors.
The motion — being brought forth by Coun. George Chahal.
It [stress test] “was created to deal with the unstable real estate markets in Vancouver and Toronto where red flags have been raised in recent years regarding the combination of unsustainable price appreciation and high-debt ratios,” Chahal’s notice of motion states.
But he pointed to “unintended consequences” outside those cities, including the slowing down of Calgary’s real estate market. There was also a reduction in construction and development which led to fewer jobs, an overall drop in Calgary homeowners’ property valuations, and a lower GDP, the notice of motion states.
“If you’re attempting to apply a single rule across the board because of a few situations that may not apply across Canada, then certainly we should be able to look at it slightly different in this regard.”
United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney said that if his party is elected this spring, he’d call on Ottawa to eliminate the stress test.
|
Last edited by troutman; 03-07-2019 at 11:26 AM.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:30 AM
|
#4
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: east van
|
We continue to suffer the effects of foolishly low interest rates, wouldn't need any of this if interest rates were 5%
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:32 AM
|
#5
|
Franchise Player
|
I think it's tough to look at Calgary and say sales slowdowns are a result of the stress test, and detangle it from everything else going on in the market over the past few years.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:35 AM
|
#6
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
We continue to suffer the effects of foolishly low interest rates, wouldn't need any of this if interest rates were 5%
|
Although if interest rates were 5% or higher, there would still be a real lull in the housing market. Probably even more so.
As an aside, how do people in Toronto and Vancouver even afford their homes? I make nearly six figures and under the current rules, the most expensive house I can afford is $450,000.
So in a city like Vancouver where there are virtually no homes under $1 million, what do you do?
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:36 AM
|
#7
|
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winebar Kensington
|
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...census-numbers
Quote:
The 2018 civic census released Friday puts Calgary’s population at 1,267,344, an increase of 1.7 per cent, according to data covering a one-year period from April 2017 to April 2018.
The numbers continue a turnaround in migration levels after 2016’s mass exodus — in that year, a record 6,527 people packed up and left Calgary amid a deepening economic recession.
But Calgary experienced positive net migration of 11,588 during the past year, compared to a net migration of just 974 in 2017.
|
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:36 AM
|
#8
|
Franchise Player
|
Probably a few years too late and likely a bad move considering our economy. But it will take a few years to process that and then a few more years to react appropriately. So plus one for local solutions.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:38 AM
|
#9
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: east van
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
Although if interest rates were 5% or higher, there would still be a real lull in the housing market. Probably even more so.
As an aside, how do people in Toronto and Vancouver even afford their homes? I make nearly six figures and under the current rules, the most expensive house I can afford is $450,000.
So in a city like Vancouver where there are virtually no homes under $1 million, what do you do?
|
There is nothing wrong with and it is healthy to have cyclical lulls in the housing market
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:38 AM
|
#10
|
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winebar Kensington
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
So in a city like Vancouver where there are virtually no homes under $1 million, what do you do?
|
Commute from Maple Ridge.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:38 AM
|
#11
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mckenzie Towne
|
I guess the best way to describe the changes the Government has put in place would be "killing a mosquito with a sledge hammer".
Yes, there were some issues that needed addressing, but they certainly did go too far. This was something that I, as well as the Mortgage Professionals of Canada (MPC) predicted from the very start. The Government of course did not consult MPC prior to implementing these rule changes.
I have heard rumours there could be some changes made as of March 19th, and the lead rumour is that they'll start allowing 30-year amortizations for first time buyers that are putting less than 20% down. Currently, 30 year ams are only allowed for those with more than 20% equity (not just first time buyers). I think this is a good start, but won't make a huge impact.
I said from the very beginning that the Stress Test was designed mainly to cool markets such as Toronto and Vancouver. With such a massive country and such different economies from province to province, their brush was far too wide. I don't know what it would look like, or how it would be done, but I would certainly be in favour of the stress test being either eliminated or reduced in certain provinces, such as AB. Ie - instead of qualifying at the Bank of Canada benchmark rate of 5.34%, perhaps in AB it would half a percent lower. Or for conventional mortgages, contract rate plus 1% as opposed to the contract + 2% it currently is.
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to MillerTime GFG For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-07-2019, 11:44 AM
|
#12
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
There is nothing wrong with and it is healthy to have cyclical lulls in the housing market
|
Yeah, I just hate how most politicians seem to think the market is only "healthy" when housing prices are constantly increasing. Keep the stress tests in place, price people out of the market and allow wages to catch up to housing prices over a few years.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:00 PM
|
#13
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Commute from Maple Ridge.
|
Unfortunately, you can't buy a house for $450,000 in Maple Ridge either.
__________________
I like to quote myself - scotty2hotty
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to scotty2hotty For This Useful Post:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:19 PM
|
#15
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Calgary
|
I think that Calgary didn't need it. It was definitely needed in Toronto and Vancouver to temper those markets, but it just kicked us while we were down.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:28 PM
|
#16
|
That Crazy Guy at the Bus Stop
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield Penitentiary
|
The stress test should probably be more like document rate plus 1% or based on a more reasonable benchmark, otherwise it is fine and totally necessary.
The idea that no one can afford a house or that it is hurting real estate sales isn't a good enough reason to continue down that path. We know where it leads and it isn't good.
The real problems are deeper. Wage stagnation, foreign property ownership, low interest rates for a decade that gave the perception of affordability etc.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:32 PM
|
#17
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mckenzie Towne
|
Paul Taylor, CEO of Mortgage Professionals of Canada on March 5th:
Quote:
...These premiums have also generated significant profit for the government during our recent historically low arrears and default years, with a recent $4 billion going from CMHC to the Federal Government’s general accounts via a declared special dividend.
Even the NDP – not normally associated with the mortgage industry – supports our recommendation for 30 year amortizations for first time homebuyers, because, absent defined benefit pensions the select few now have, Canada’s economy historically relies on young Canadians who can join the middle class via the growing equity (through repayment – not just continuous appreciation) in homes they own.
Our association has never asked for outright removal of the stress tests; we are reasonably asking for a reduction of them to better counter three Bank of Canada rate hikes in 2018. Without some adjustments, homes will continue to be on sale for the wealthy and unattainable for the young middle class we promised to support.
|
https://www.facebook.com/MortgagePro...341?__tn__=K-R
Mortgage arrears are around 0.24% in Canada, one of the lowest rates in the world. There is not a week that goes by where at least one client doesn't say something along the lines of "I never used to have to provide this many documents" or "why are there so many documents required?" There is major due-diligence required to determine affordability even before the stress test was implemented.
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:38 PM
|
#18
|
My face is a bum!
|
I think more affordable housing makes a city more attractive for business. The transition stings, and it sucks for all of us that bought in the "old" environment, but after things level out, this is a good thing for Calgary and Canada.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bill Bumface For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-07-2019, 12:59 PM
|
#19
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
I feel like it just isn't a good idea to purchase the most expensive house you can afford as it doesn't leave a lot of room in your budget for other things and puts you in peril if interest rates increase and squeeze you out so in that sense, the stress test is a good thing.
As a home owner, I'm not a fan of the fact that my house has dropped a fair bit in value since I bought it just last year (it's probably dropped about $30,000 based on the sale price of similar homes around me). It sucks because I have a job opportunity in another city but it's impossible to sell given the equity I have in the home at the moment.
|
Couldn't you rent out your current place and move for the new job and rent there?
|
|
|
03-07-2019, 01:01 PM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Marseilles Of The Prairies
|
House poor is probably the most easily avoidable form of poor, and yet people are so bad about buying to the top of their affordability that we need rules like this to get them to pump the brakes.
Sad.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Settle down there, Temple Grandin.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:10 AM.
|
|