How to Get ‘Unstuck’ From Your Starter Home

Source: iStock

Andrew Cordell bought his first home at the worst possible time — 10 years ago, right before the housing bubble burst.

He’s not going to make that mistake again.

“We had immediate fear put in us as homeowners,” says Cordell, 40. “We know how dangerous this can be.”

So the small “starter home” he purchased in Kalamazoo, Michigan back in 2007 now feels just about the right size.

“When we bought, we figured we’d get another home in a few years,” he says. “But the more we settled, the more we thought, ‘Do we really need more space?’ We don’t actually need a large chest freezer or a large yard. Kalamazoo has a lot of parks.”

Apparently, plenty of homeowners feel the same way.

It’s a phenomenon some have called “stuck in their starter homes.” Bucking a decades-long trend, young homeowners aren’t looking to trade up — they’re looking to stay put. Or they are forced to.

According to the National Association of Realtors, “tenure in home” — the amount of time a homebuyer stays — has almost doubled during the past decade. From the 1980s right up until the recession, buyers stayed an average of about six years after buying a home. That’s jumped to 10 years now.

Expected Median in Tenure in Home
Source: 2017 National Association of Realtors® Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends

 

Other numbers are just as dramatic. In 2001, there were 1.8 million repeat homebuyers, according to the Urban Institute. Last year, there were about half that number, even as the overall housing market recovered. Before the recession, there were generally far more repeat buyers than first-timers. That’s now reversed, with first-time buyers dwarfing repeaters, 1.4 million to 1 million.

This is no mere statistical curiosity. Trade-up buyers are critical to a smooth-functioning housing market, says Logan Mohtashami, a California-based loan officer and economics expert. When starter homeowners get gun-shy, home sales get stuck.

“Move-up buyers are especially important … because they typically provide homes to the market that are appropriate for first-time buyers,” he says. When first-timers stay put, the share of available lower-cost housing is squeezed, making life harder for those trying to make the jump from renting to buying.

Getting unstuck from your starter home

There are plenty of potential causes for this stuck-in-a-starter-home phenomenon — including the fear Cordell describes, families having fewer children, fast-rising prices, and flat incomes. But Mohtashami says the main cause is a hangover from the housing bubble that has left first-time buyers with very little “selling equity.”

Buyers need at least 28 to 33 percent equity to trade into a larger home, and often closer to 40 percent, he says. Those who bought in the previous cycle might have seen their home values recover, but many purchased with low down payment loans, leaving them still equity poor.

That wasn’t such a problem before the recession, as lenders were happy to give more aggressive loans to trade-up buyers. Not any more.

“In the previous cycle you had exotic loans to help demand. Now you don’t. [That’s why] tenure in home is at an all-time high,” Mohtashami says. “Even families having kids aren’t moving up as much.”

Fast-rising housing prices don’t help the trade-up cause either. While homeowners would seem to benefit from increases in selling price, those are washed away by higher purchase prices, unless the seller plans to move to a cheaper market.

“You’re always trying to catch up to a higher priced home,” Mohtashami says.

Cassandra Evers, a mortgage broker in Michigan, says she’s seen the phenomenon, too.

“It’s not for lack of want. It seems to be the inability to afford the cost of the new home,” she says. “It’s not the interest rate that’s the problem, obviously because those are at historic lows and artificially low. It’s because to buy a ‘bigger and better house,’ that house costs significantly more than their current home. The cost of housing has skyrocketed.”

U.S. Homebuyers and Student Loan Debt (by Age)
Source: 2017 National Association of Realtors® Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends

There’s also the very practical problem of timing. In a fast-rising market, where every home sale is competitive, it’s easy to lose the game of musical chairs that’s played when a family must sell their home before they can buy a new one.

“Folks are concerned about selling their current house in one day and being unable to find a suitable replacement fast enough,” Evers says.

Cordell, who lives with his wife and eight-year-old son, says the family considered a move a few years ago and briefly looked around. But they quickly concluded that staying put was the right choice.

“We looked at some homes and we thought, ‘I guess we could afford that. But we don’t want to be house broke’,” he says. “We don’t want to take on so much debt that ‘What else are we able to do?’ What if one of us loses our job? I guess you could say we have a Depression-era sensibility. … Who would want to get upside down on one of these things?”

The Urban Institute says this stuck-in-starter-home problem shows a few signs of abating recently. Repeat buyers were stuck around 800,000 from 2013 to 2014. Last year, the number pierced 1 million. But that’s still far below the 1.5 million range that held consistently through the past decade.

There are other signs that relief might be on the way, too. ATTOM Data Solutions recently released a report saying that 1 in 4 mortgage-holders in the U.S. are now equity rich — values have risen enough that owners hold at least 50 percent equity, well above Mohtashami’s guideline. Some 1.6 million homeowners are newly equity rich, compared to this time last year, and 5 million more than in 2013, ATTOM said.

“An increasing number of U.S. homeowners are amassing impressive stockpiles of home equity wealth,” says Daren Blomquist, senior vice president at ATTOM Data Solutions.

So perhaps pent-up repeat homebuying demand might re-emerge. Evers isn’t so sure, however.

“Most folks I talked with are no longer interested in being house poor and maxing out their debt to income ratios. They seem to be staying put and shoving money into their retirement accounts,” Evers says.

The Cordells are content where they are in Kalamazoo and plan to stay long term. If anything would make them move, it’s not growing home equity but a growing family.

“If we ended up with a second (kid), I suppose we’d have to look,” Cordell mused. “But we have no plans for that.”

4 Signs You’re Ready to Trade Up Your Home

  • YOU’VE GOT PLENTY OF EQUITY: Your home’s value has risen enough that you safely have at least 28 percent equity and, preferably, more like 35 to 40 percent.
  • YOU’RE EARNING MORE: Your monthly take-home income has risen since you bought your first home by about as much as your monthly payments (mortgage, interest, insurance, taxes, condo fees, etc.) would rise in a new home.
  • YOU STAND TO MAKE A HEALTHY PROFIT: You are confident that if you sell your home, you’d walk away from closing with at least 30 percent of the price for your new home — or you can top up your seller profits to that level with cash you’ve saved for a new down payment. That would let you make a standard 20 percent down payment and have some left over for surprise repairs and moving costs that will come with the new place. Remember, transaction costs often surprise buyers and sellers, so be sure to build them into your calculations.
  • YOU CAN HANDLE THE RISK: You have the stomach for the game of musical chairs that comes with selling then buying a home in rapid succession. Also, if you are in a hot market, you have extra cash to outbid others or a place for your family to stay in case there’s a time gap between selling and buying.



The post How to Get ‘Unstuck’ From Your Starter Home appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

How to Get ‘Unstuck’ From Your Starter Home

Source: iStock

Andrew Cordell bought his first home at the worst possible time — 10 years ago, right before the housing bubble burst.

He’s not going to make that mistake again.

“We had immediate fear put in us as homeowners,” says Cordell, 40. “We know how dangerous this can be.”

So the small “starter home” he purchased in Kalamazoo, Michigan back in 2007 now feels just about the right size.

“When we bought, we figured we’d get another home in a few years,” he says. “But the more we settled, the more we thought, ‘Do we really need more space?’ We don’t actually need a large chest freezer or a large yard. Kalamazoo has a lot of parks.”

Apparently, plenty of homeowners feel the same way.

It’s a phenomenon some have called “stuck in their starter homes.” Bucking a decades-long trend, young homeowners aren’t looking to trade up — they’re looking to stay put. Or they are forced to.

According to the National Association of Realtors, “tenure in home” — the amount of time a homebuyer stays — has almost doubled during the past decade. From the 1980s right up until the recession, buyers stayed an average of about six years after buying a home. That’s jumped to 10 years now.

Median Tenure in Home by Age
Source: 2017 National Association of Realtors® Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends

 

Other numbers are just as dramatic. In 2001, there were 1.8 million repeat homebuyers, according to the Urban Institute. Last year, there were about half that number, even as the overall housing market recovered. Before the recession, there were generally far more repeat buyers than first-timers. That’s now reversed, with first-time buyers dwarfing repeaters, 1.4 million to 1 million.

This is no mere statistical curiosity. Trade-up buyers are critical to a smooth-functioning housing market, says Logan Mohtashami, a California-based loan officer and economics expert. When starter homeowners get gun-shy, home sales get stuck.

“Move-up buyers are especially important … because they typically provide homes to the market that are appropriate for first-time buyers,” he says. When first-timers stay put, the share of available lower-cost housing is squeezed, making life harder for those trying to make the jump from renting to buying.

Getting unstuck from your starter home

There are plenty of potential causes for this stuck-in-a-starter-home phenomenon — including the fear Cordell describes, families having fewer children, fast-rising prices, and flat incomes. But Mohtashami says the main cause is a hangover from the housing bubble that has left first-time buyers with very little “selling equity.”

Buyers need at least 28 to 33 percent equity to trade into a larger home, and often closer to 40 percent, he says. Those who bought in the previous cycle might have seen their home values recover, but many purchased with low down payment loans, leaving them still equity poor.

That wasn’t such a problem before the recession, as lenders were happy to give more aggressive loans to trade-up buyers. Not any more.

“In the previous cycle you had exotic loans to help demand. Now you don’t. [That’s why] tenure in home is at an all-time high,” Mohtashami says. “Even families having kids aren’t moving up as much.”

Fast-rising housing prices don’t help the trade-up cause either. While homeowners would seem to benefit from increases in selling price, those are washed away by higher purchase prices, unless the seller plans to move to a cheaper market.

“You’re always trying to catch up to a higher priced home,” Mohtashami says.

Cassandra Evers, a mortgage broker in Michigan, says she’s seen the phenomenon, too.

“It’s not for lack of want. It seems to be the inability to afford the cost of the new home,” she says. “It’s not the interest rate that’s the problem, obviously because those are at historic lows and artificially low. It’s because to buy a ‘bigger and better house,’ that house costs significantly more than their current home. The cost of housing has skyrocketed.”

U.S. Homebuyers and Student Loan Debt (by Age)
Source: 2017 National Association of Realtors® Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends

There’s also the very practical problem of timing. In a fast-rising market, where every home sale is competitive, it’s easy to lose the game of musical chairs that’s played when a family must sell their home before they can buy a new one.

“Folks are concerned about selling their current house in one day and being unable to find a suitable replacement fast enough,” Evers says.

Cordell, who lives with his wife and eight-year-old son, says the family considered a move a few years ago and briefly looked around. But they quickly concluded that staying put was the right choice.

“We looked at some homes and we thought, ‘I guess we could afford that. But we don’t want to be house broke’,” he says. “We don’t want to take on so much debt that ‘What else are we able to do?’ What if one of us loses our job? I guess you could say we have a Depression-era sensibility. … Who would want to get upside down on one of these things?”

The Urban Institute says this stuck-in-starter-home problem shows a few signs of abating recently. Repeat buyers were stuck around 800,000 from 2013 to 2014. Last year, the number pierced 1 million. But that’s still far below the 1.5 million range that held consistently through the past decade.

There are other signs that relief might be on the way, too. ATTOM Data Solutions recently released a report saying that 1 in 4 mortgage-holders in the U.S. are now equity rich — values have risen enough that owners hold at least 50 percent equity, well above Mohtashami’s guideline. Some 1.6 million homeowners are newly equity rich, compared to this time last year, and 5 million more than in 2013, ATTOM said.

“An increasing number of U.S. homeowners are amassing impressive stockpiles of home equity wealth,” says Daren Blomquist, senior vice president at ATTOM Data Solutions.

So perhaps pent-up repeat homebuying demand might re-emerge. Evers isn’t so sure, however.

“Most folks I talked with are no longer interested in being house poor and maxing out their debt to income ratios. They seem to be staying put and shoving money into their retirement accounts,” Evers says.

The Cordells are content where they are in Kalamazoo and plan to stay long term. If anything would make them move, it’s not growing home equity but a growing family.

“If we ended up with a second (kid), I suppose we’d have to look,” Cordell mused. “But we have no plans for that.”

4 Signs You’re Ready to Trade Up Your Home

  • YOU’VE GOT PLENTY OF EQUITY: Your home’s value has risen enough that you safely have at least 28 percent equity and, preferably, more like 35 to 40 percent.
  • YOU’RE EARNING MORE: Your monthly take-home income has risen since you bought your first home by about as much as your monthly payments (mortgage, interest, insurance, taxes, condo fees, etc.) would rise in a new home.
  • YOU STAND TO MAKE A HEALTHY PROFIT: You are confident that if you sell your home, you’d walk away from closing with at least 30 percent of the price for your new home — or you can top up your seller profits to that level with cash you’ve saved for a new down payment. That would let you make a standard 20 percent down payment and have some left over for surprise repairs and moving costs that will come with the new place. Remember, transaction costs often surprise buyers and sellers, so be sure to build them into your calculations.
  • YOU CAN HANDLE THE RISK: You have the stomach for the game of musical chairs that comes with selling then buying a home in rapid succession. Also, if you are in a hot market, you have extra cash to outbid others or a place for your family to stay in case there’s a time gap between selling and buying.



The post How to Get ‘Unstuck’ From Your Starter Home appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

4 Lessons We Learned from Buying Our House at an Estate Sale

Newlyweds Laura and Chris Mericas, pictured above, stumbled upon their dream home at an estate sale in Houston, Texas. “We were never wanting to buy a brand new house,” Laura told MagnifyMoney. “We knew that whatever house we got, we would want to do work.” Photo courtesy of Laura and Chris Mericas.

Around a year ago, newlyweds Laura and Chris Mericas were eager to purchase their first home in Houston, Texas. It didn’t take long before they realized homes in the neighborhoods they liked were out of their budget, so they put home buying on hold. Laura and Chris aren’t alone — like other millennials, they’re being priced out of markets across the country. Homeownership among millennials is lower than decades past: For those under 35, 39% owned homes in 1995, compared to 43% in 2005 and just 31% in 2015, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

On the off chance that he might come across a good deal, Chris, 26, continued to look at realtor websites. A year later, he happened upon a home in the Garden Oaks-Oak Forest neighborhood in Northwest Houston that piqued his interest. The property — a three-bedroom, one-bathroom fixer-upper — was listed as part of an estate sale, and it was within their maximum budget of $350,000. They made their move.

“We found the house on a Monday and had an offer accepted by Friday,” Chris says.

But the journey was far from smooth. Here’s what they learned along the way.

You can’t judge a house by its cover photo

Browsing through realtor photos of the house online, Laura wasn’t exactly impressed. Driven by the price point, however, they decided to give it a shot.

They were pleasantly surprised.

“Because it was an estate sale and because the people selling it weren’t super motivated [to stage the home for photos],” says Laura, 25. “For whatever reason, the pictures online were awful.”

The home had belonged to a man who was born in the house and purchased it after his parents died. He had rented the home out and planned on permanently moving into the house before he passed away. It was his children who decided to sell rather than continue renting it out.

Laura says she thinks because the home was a rental property, the children were even more eager to sell it. Brian Davis, a real estate investor, says family members eager to sell estate sale properties is common.

“The adult children typically want to sell the property as quickly as possible, since it will continue to accrue costs while it sits vacant,” he says. “Mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and maintenance all add up quickly. These adult children often don’t have as strong of an emotional attachment to the house as live-in owners do, and are less likely to be offended by low offers.”

Emotions will inevitably add complications

Despite the children not being attached to the home, Laura, a freelance journalist, and Chris, a mechanical engineer, still felt unsure how to act during negotiations.

“I think the fact that it was an estate sale made it different on our end,” Chris says. “In the negotiation phase, we were a little conflicted. We don’t want to belittle the fact that they just lost their father … but in addition to that, we wanted to play off the fact that they weren’t selling this house to buy another house. It was extra income that they weren’t expecting because their father died at a young age.”

There were other offers on the table, but most were from professional house flippers who were offering land value only, so theirs was accepted quickly.

A good home inspection is everything

Laura and Chris first found their new home in early March, and they closed on April 24. All in all, the whole process took around 50 days.

“It was a pretty stressful two weeks at the beginning, getting all of our paperwork and getting all of our employment records to get the loan,” Laura says. They both had strong credit scores and were already pre-approved for a mortgage because they had looked into buying a home a year earlier, which helped speed up the process.

But it wasn’t all smooth sailing.

“We had to scramble to get the inspection done,” Laura says. The couple initially asked for 10 days to get the appraisal done, but then asked for a two-day extension because a lot of inspection companies were closed for spring break.

After their initial offer was accepted, inspectors came to look at the home and found it was rife with problems: outdated and dangerous electrical wiring, plumbing troubles, and holes in the sewer line. The inspectors said it would cost around $20,000 for these repairs, so Laura and Chris sent a second offer that took these costs into consideration.

Their offer was accepted immediately.

Fixer-uppers require a lot of imagination — and cash

In most home sales, the property is tidy and beautifully staged. Laura and Chris discovered this wasn’t the case in their estate sale. “I feel like when people are trying to sell their house, they might try to spruce it up a bit in the months leading up to it,” Laura says. “There was definitely none of that. It was dirty. There was dog hair.”

So they used their imagination. Laura and Chris always envisioned purchasing a home in need of renovation and a little TLC, so the problems with the house didn’t faze them. “We were never wanting to buy a brand new house,” Laura says. “We knew that whatever house we got, we would want to do work.”

After completing around $20,000 in necessary home renovations after closing, Laura and Chris moved in early June. Although it’s been a whirlwind few months, the couple feels lucky to have swooped in on the estate sale at the perfect moment. They say every other comparable home they saw in the same neighborhood about $75,000 more than what they paid.

“We saw an opportunity to get into the neighborhood with a steal,” Laura says. “Down the street, there are people building enormous houses. We would never be able to get into this neighborhood at that price ever again.”

Tips for purchasing a home from an estate sale

Kevin Godfrey, an agent with Douglas Elliman and the owner of Henry Laurent Estate Sales, shares his advice for purchasing a home through an estate sale.

  1. Use the estate sale as the open house. Go into the rooms, check the water pressure, inspect the foundation, and discreetly take measurements. Take your time and make sure it’s what you are looking for. A standard open house lasts for two hours, while an estate sale lasts for two days — eight hours each.
  1. If you get in early enough, the owner won’t have an agent yet. Dealing directly with them and only using real estate attorneys to finalize the transaction can save the owner the typical 4% to 6% agent fee.
  1. As with any purchase of a home, you’ll still want to do all of the necessary inspections and search the property records for liens or encumbrances.

The post 4 Lessons We Learned from Buying Our House at an Estate Sale appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

10 States Facing the Most Foreclosures Right Now

foreclosure

This summer there’s some good news. June foreclosure activity has dropped to its lowest level since November 2015. In June 2017, there were a total of 73,828 U.S. properties with a foreclosure filing, down 22% from a year ago and even more from previous years.

This is all according to ATTOM Data Solutions, curator of the nation’s largest multi-sourced property database, which released its Midyear 2017 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report, showing a total of 428,400 U.S. properties with foreclosure filings. This includes default notices, scheduled auctions or bank repossessions that occurred in the first six months of 2017. Data has been collected from more than 2,200 counties nationwide, with those counties accounting for more than 90% of the U.S. population.

Although the study is full of foreclosures, they’ve become fairly rare in the housing market.

“With a few local market exceptions, foreclosures have become the unicorns of the housing market: hard to find but highly sought after,” said Daren Blomquist, senior vice president with ATTOM Data Solutions.

As homeowners stay on top of their mortgages and housing payments, fewer foreclosures have been occurring. (If you’ve been faced with foreclosure, you’ll likely see the damage to your credit score. Not sure? You can see two of your credit scores for free on Credit.com).

Here are the ten states with the highest foreclosure rates as of June 2017.

10. New Mexico

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 272 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 10.57%

Change from January to June 2015: Up 1.77%

9. Ohio

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 229 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 18.49%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 24.33%

8. South Carolina

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 221 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 15.05%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 14.31%

7. Florida

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 217 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 33.60%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 56%

6. Nevada

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 215 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 30.59%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 40.45%

5. Connecticut

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 200 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Up 3.19%

Change from January to June 2015: Up 44.75%

4. Illinois

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 183 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 10.19%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 25.78%

3. Maryland

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 161 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 30.62%

Change from January to June 2015: Down 31.55%

2. Delaware

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 137 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Down 6.48%

Change from January to June 2015: Up 20.42%

1. New Jersey

June 2017 Foreclosure Rate: 1 in every 101 housing units

Change from January to June 2016: Up 1.8%

Change from January to June 2015: Up 8.53%

Image: fstop123

The post 10 States Facing the Most Foreclosures Right Now appeared first on Credit.com.

5 Lies Your Landlord May Tell You

Finding a place to rent can be so time-consuming and stressful that once you decide on a house or apartment that fits your budget, size, and location needs, you might not pay attention to the mundane lease terms or if the landlord is trustworthy.

However, if you have a shady landlord and lease agreement, you could pay more for your rental and be stuck handling repairs.

Andrea Amszynski, a speech therapist, thought she had a perfect situation when she found a room for rent in a five-bedroom, three-bath house when she was moving to Savannah, Ga. The room was advertised on Craigslist, and she made an appointment to view the house.

“I met the landlord, or who said he was the landlord at the time,” she says. “And he showed me all round the house.”

She signed a lease and put down $700, which included one month’s rent and a security deposit. A few weeks later, when she couldn’t get hold of the landlord, she discovered the man she paid wasn’t the landlord, but a past tenant scamming her. She filed a police report, but was unable to recover her deposit.

 

Though this is a fairly extreme case, there are other ways that landlords mislead tenants. At a time when half of renters spend at least 30% of their household income on rent and utilities, being on the lookout for these lies may keep you from spending more than you need on living expenses.

“You can break your lease any time you want.”

Another term buried in the lease that could cost tenants in the long run is “contract renewal terms.” In this situation, the rent agreement is renewed for another year if the tenant doesn’t inform the landlord within a certain period — typically 60 days — from the end of the first agreement.

“Then, if you want to get out of what they’ve written, you’ve got to pay so much money … like a whole month’s rent,” says Sarah Hubbuch, who manages two properties in Georgia and Florida.

“You’ll have to cover the cost of that repair.”

Repairs are inevitable, such as a clogged toilet, leaky pipe, air conditioning unit that blows out warm air, broken refrigerator, or burned-out light bulbs. However, problems can arise about who should pay for the repair and how quickly the repair needs to be done.

Hubbuch says things such as appliances, water heaters, or anything that could need repair after normal wear and tear should be a landlord’s responsibility to fix and cover financially.

“It’s part of the contract,” she says. “And me, personally, I would tell the landlord I can’t pay rent until these things are fixed.”

But that also may mean you’ll have to buy fans until the landlord decides to fix the AC or pick up a pack of new light bulbs.

“I can give you your security deposit back whenever I want.”

Joel Cohn, legislative director for D.C’s Office of the Tenant Advocate, says inappropriate deductions from security deposits are a common complaint filed by tenants.

“An appropriate deduction from the security deposit would be something beyond ordinary wear and tear,” he says. “So, if the tenant caused some damage to the property, then it would be appropriate for the landlord to make that deduction.”

As a property manager in California, David Roberson says the traditional security deposit of one month is more than enough for repairs. He is principal of Silicon Valley Property Management Group, which manages apartments for rent in San Jose, California.

“Most of the time, tenant damages are less than $1,000 to a unit when they’re leaving, so if you get a $5,000 security deposit (typically up to two months’ rent), that’s going to be fairly adequate to cover 99% of the damages,” he says.

If there is no damage, a tenant should receive their security deposit back in a timely manner. Depending on the state, that time frame can change. For example, in Washington, D.C., landlords have to provide the tenant with an itemized list of deductions to cover appropriate expenses. The list needs to be sent to the tenant within 45 days after they move out, and the price tag attached to repairs needs to be reasonable. Landlords then must return the remaining balance to the past tenant in an additional 30 days after the tenant received the list.

Check your state’s rental guidelines on security deposits to be sure you know when to expect your deposit back.

“I can come and go as I please.”

Understandably, a landlord may need to enter the rental at some point during the lease. Each state has its own rules for under what circumstance and with how much notice they would need to give tenants before entering the property.

“When a tenant signs a lease, they actually hold the rights to the leasehold,” Roberson says. “So for the term [of the lease], it’s their property.”

In California, he says, landlords need to get written permission to enter a property, or there has to be reasonable evidence that the tenant is violating terms of the lease, is doing something illegal, or there is an emergency.

Cohn says that in other states and D.C., generally landlords need to give a “reasonable” written notice 48 hours ahead of time in non-emergency situations.

“I can get you a great deal on the rent.”

While some parts of the lease can be clear, some landlords will try to bury items in the lease that could cost tenants.

One practice is known as concession pricing.  Cohn says he has seen this tactic used in rent-controlled buildings in Washington, D.C.

Here’s how it works: The amount for a one-bedroom apartment is $1,500, but that’s a high rent for the area. The landlord advertises it for $1,000 to attract potential renters, but reports the $1,500 to the rent administrator — the office in some large cities that controls rent — and then buries the $1,500 amount in the lease.

The landlord essentially is telling the tenant, “Yeah, this $1,500 amount, don’t worry, we’re going to give you a concession deal. You only have to pay $1,000. And, by the way, this is rent controlled, so you’re protected in terms of the amount of rent increase,” Cohn says. However, if the tenant decides to renew their lease, they may see their rent not just go up to $1,500, but $1,500 plus the rent control cap for the area. The landlord would legally be allowed to raise it that much since they told the rent administration that they were already charging $1,500 for rent.

Tips for protecting yourself as a renter:

Research your landlord before signing the lease.

Ask current tenants about their experience with the landlord. In some instances, you also may find landlord reviews online through sites such as Yelp and Review My Landlord. And if you want to confirm that the person is indeed the landlord, look up the property record online to find the owner’s name. “Most of the time the landlord should be paying the property tax, and that is public info,” Amszynski says.

Get everything in writing.

Read the lease thoroughly and ask about any lingo or terms that are confusing. In addition, get any verbal agreements, such as rental rates or promises to repair items before you move in, in writing. Protect your security deposit before you move in by walking through the rental with the landlord. “Make sure that you and the landlord go through the list of things that were already wrong with the house before you move in so they can’t come back and say you did it,” Hubbuch says.

Know tenant rights for your area.

A Zillow study in 2014 found that 82% of renters don’t understand laws on security deposits, credit, and background checks, 77% of renters don’t understand privacy and access rights, and 62% of renters don’t understand laws on early lease termination.You’ll be able to find resources online that outline tenant rights and landlord rights in your state. The Washington, D.C., Tenant Bill of Rights and the California Tenants guide are two examples of guides.

Get insured.

Renters insurance covers damage to your belongings inside a rental, but only 41% of renters said they had renters insurance, according to 2016 data from the Insurance Information Institute. Premiums average $15-$30 a month, depending on the size and location, and the average U.S. premium for renters insurance is $190 for 2014 — the most recent year available — according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. A standard renters insurance policy also covers your liability for injuries to someone else or their property while they are at your rental, but it doesn’t cover damages you might make to the property. Roberson says he requires his tenants get tenant liability insurance to cover up to $100,000 in damages from situations such as a fire or driving cars into garage doors. He offers it to them for $14.50 a month. The Insurance Information Institute notes an excess liability policy generally costs between $200 and $350 annually, which provides an additional $1 million of protection.

The post 5 Lies Your Landlord May Tell You appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

More Rich People Are Choosing to Rent Than Ever Before — Here’s Why

Renting a home or condo has become a status symbol for some wealthy Americans.

Karen Rodriguez, an Atlanta, Ga., real estate agent, says people frequently contact her who are interested in condos renting for $10,000 to $15,000 a month in properties such as the Ritz-Carlton Residences, which have floors of condos above upscale hotel rooms.

“I do see a lot of high-net-worth renters,” says Rodriguez, with Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices Georgia Properties. “They have the disposable income to pay top dollar.”

Renter households increased by 9 million during 2005-2015, reaching nearly 43 million in 2015, according to the State of the Nation’s Housing report, an annual study by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies that analyzes U.S. Census Bureau data. Of those, 1.6 million renter households earn $100,000 or more, representing 11% of all renters.

“Indeed, renter households earning $100,000 or more have been the fastest-growing segment over the past three years,” the report stated.

Here are four reasons why high earners are choosing to rent.

They’re frustrated with market trends.

stock market numbers and graph

Rob Austin, a biotech account manager in the Los Angeles area with a household income of over $350,000, rents a 1,700-square-foot townhome with his wife and two children.

In the last 10 years, 1.2 million households that earn $150,000 became renters, up from 551,000 in 2005. Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 American Community Survey, RentCafe.com reported in late 2016 that “wealthy households” that earn more than $150,000 annually increased by 217%, compared to an 82% rise in homeowners in the same income bracket.

The $150,000-and-up dollar amount served as the benchmark for “wealthy” renters because that’s the top of the bracket used in the American Community Survey to identify renters and homeowners.

Even when they had their second child in 2016, Austin says they were more steadfast to keep renting the two-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath townhome instead of buying. Prices are increasing so much that they’re “priced beyond perfection,” he says.

“It’s gotten worse,” he says. “Everything is mispriced at this point.”z

They want the next best thing.

Some buyers’ mindset is, “I don’t love it, so I’m just going to go rent a house,” says Atlanta, Ga., real estate agent Ben Hirsh.

Some may be bored with what’s on the market and are holding out for a home or condo with even more extravagant features or amenities. “They’re not happy with what’s out there,” says Rodriguez, also founder of Group Kora Real Estate Group, which sells new and luxury condos.

If they’re in a location or price range that’s hot, they could get more for their home if they sell now. Some wealthy homeowners take advantage of the resale market by going ahead and selling a home or condo and biding their time while renting. For example, if they’re sold on news about ultraluxe condos that have been announced, but are not under construction, they don’t mind renting in the interim.

“People think there’s more coming,” Rodriguez says.

Some clients have so much wealth that they’re willing to pay for the entire year up front for an unfurnished condo, she adds. Investors also have noticed the market trends and are buying condos for $1 million to $2 million with the intention to rent them out.

They don’t want a long-term commitment.

retirement retire millionaire happy couple on the beach

Some wealthy homeowners are ready to sell their million-dollar estates for a lock-it-and-leave-it lifestyle, but aren’t sold on townhome or condo living.

Instead, they’re willing to spend what can amount to the down payment on a starter home for monthly rent to experience the luxury condo lifestyle with privacy and ritzy amenities, like 24/7 room service and spa access.

“They want to test out a high-rise,” Rodriguez says. “They are people who definitely can afford to buy.”

A 2016 report by the National Association of Realtors identified the top 10 markets in the U.S. with the highest share of renters qualified to buy. The study analyzed household income, areas with job growth above the national average, and qualifying income levels (a 3% down payment in each metro area’s median home price in 2015) in about 100 of the largest U.S. metro areas. The markets that are above the national level (28%) were:

  • Toledo, Ohio (46%)
  • Little Rock, Ark. (46%)
  • Dayton, Ohio (44%)
  • Lakeland, Fla. (41%)
  • St. Louis, Mo. (41%)
  • Columbia, S.C. (41%)
  • Atlanta, Ga. (40%)
  • Columbus, Ohio (38%)
  • Tampa, Fla. (38%)
  • Ogden, Utah (38%)

The short-term mentality also may be the nature of the industry that brings people to a city. Some prospective renters whom Rodriguez meets are planning to live in Georgia for a couple of years because of work, such as jobs in the growing entertainment sector. Films such as the “Avengers” and TV shows such as “The Walking Dead” shoot in metro Atlanta.

They don’t want to live out of a suitcase in a hotel and have the income to afford high-priced rentals, joining political figures and international executives who also are among those making the same choice, Rodriguez says.

They want cash in the bank.

Townhomes sell for about $800,000 in Austin’s neighborhood in California. To make a 20% down payment, he’d have to shell out $160,000 up front.

“Why would I want to tie up $160,000 in cash in an asset that most likely is not going to go up a lot more — and more than likely has topped and has nowhere to go but down in the next cycle?” Austin asks.

Austin says he’s not wavering from his decision, although he’s “taking heat” from friends since he has the income to purchase a home.

“We’re bucking the trend by saying, ‘No thanks, we don’t want to play (the real estate market),’” he says. “We’ll just wait.”

The post More Rich People Are Choosing to Rent Than Ever Before — Here’s Why appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

Buying a House? You May Want to Avoid the 30% Rule

The 30% rule is a good place to start, but it’s not always the best gauge of how much should you spend on housing.

Ask someone the question, “How much should I spend on a house?” and there’s a good chance that they will respond with the 30% rule.

The 30% rule, which says not to spend more than 30% of your income on housing, is a good place to start, but it’s not always the best gauge of how much should you spend on housing. You don’t want to base your entire financial situation on it — especially since it’s not exactly clear what that 30% includes.

What Is the 30% Rule?

The 30% rule has been around since the 1930s, according to the Census Bureau. Back then, policymakers were trying to make housing affordable. They came up with the idea that you could spend about 30% of your income on housing and still have enough left for other expenses.

Over time, those numbers started to get used in home loans as well. A rough sketch of what you could afford, in terms of monthly payment, could be obtained by estimating 30% of your income.

Is the 30% Rule Right for You?

When deciding on your own 30% rule, it’s probably a good idea to base it on your take-home pay, rather than your gross income. Let’s say you bring home $3,500 a month. According to the 30% rule, that means you shouldn’t spend more than $1,050 on your housing payment.

Some folks like to use their gross income for this calculation, but that can get you into trouble in the long run. If you base what you spend on housing on an amount that you might not be bringing home, that can stress your budget.

Think about it: If your pre-tax pay is $3,800 a month, that lifts your max housing payment to $1,140. That’s $90 more per month. But the reality is that you are bringing home $300 less than your gross income. Trying to come up with another $90 a month could put a strain on your budget.

Don’t Forget About Extra Costs

You can use a mortgage calculator to figure out how much you should spend on housing. However, such calculators typically just include principal and interest. This doesn’t take into account other monthly homeownership costs.

If you’re thinking of buying an expensive house, don’t forget about other costs like insurance and taxes.

Experts suggest that you base your 30% figure on all your monthly payment costs, not just the principal and interest.

What Percentage of Income Should Be Spent on Housing?

But it goes beyond that for some homebuyers. When looking into buying a home or an affordable place to rent, don’t just base your estimates on your monthly payment. You should also include estimated utility costs and an estimate for maintenance and repairs.

HouseLogic suggests you budget between 1% and 3% of your home’s purchase price annually for repairs and maintenance. I like the idea of budgeting 2%. So, on a $200,000 home, that means you can expect to pay $4,000 for repairs and maintenance — about $333.33 per month.

Once you start adding in all the other aspects of homeownership, suddenly that 30% rule is less cut-and-dry. If you’re more conservative, adding up all the monthly costs of homeownership and keeping it all under 30% makes sense.

You’re less likely to overspend that way. But it might mean a smaller, less expensive home.

Consider the 28/36 Qualifying Ratio

Instead of relying on the 30% rule to answer the question, “How much should I spend on a house?”, consider using the 28/36 qualifying ratio.

According to Re/Max, many lenders use the 28/36 rule to figure out whether your finances can handle your home purchase. The 28 refers to the percentage of your gross monthly income that should be spent on your monthly housing cost. The 36 refers to the percentage of income that goes toward all your debt payments, including your mortgage.

So, if you make $3,800 in take-home pay, your monthly payment should be no more than $1,064. But, things get stickier when you calculate the 36% part of the ratio. Your total debt payments shouldn’t exceed $1,368. That leaves you about $304 for payments of other debts.

Let’s say your credit card and auto loan payments total $500. That means you’re going to have to adjust your expectations for what you can expect to pay for a mortgage. In fact, if your lender insists on the 36 part of the ratio, you have $196 less you can spend on your mortgage payment. And that might mean a less expensive house.

When figuring out what percentage of income you should spend on housing, base the calculations on your take-home pay. Even though Re/Max says many lenders use your gross pay for the 28/36 qualifying ratio, this way you’ll play it safe.

How Much Should I Spend on a House?

Everyone has to answer the “How much should I spend on a house?” question for themselves. However, the biggest reason to ditch the 30% rule is that you might not be comfortable with it.

Are you really comfortable spending 30% of your income each month on your housing? When you consider your other payment obligations, does it makes sense for you to spend so much on housing?

If you aren’t sure about the 30% rule, use your own rule. You might be more comfortable with 25% on all of your housing costs. Or perhaps you modify the rule. Maybe you spend 20% on mortgage and interest and keep your total housing costs to 25% or 28%.

No matter what you decide, the important thing is to be responsible with your finances. Only spend what you feel comfortable with on housing or rent.

Image: Portra

The post Buying a House? You May Want to Avoid the 30% Rule appeared first on Credit.com.

TRUMP VS. CLINTON: Where the Candidates Stand on Job Growth, Taxes, and Housing

trpvshrc4

With the election a month away, presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have just a few weeks left to woo voters across the U.S.

If you’re still on the fence about which candidate to vote for, your final decision may hinge on how their policy ideas could potentially impact your wallet.

We have simplified and broken down each candidate’s stance on three key issues — job growth, taxes, and housing — to help you understand exactly how each candidate’s proposals could affect your wallet.

Jobs

hillary_final

Hillary Clinton plans to create new jobs by investing $50 billion in programs that promote youth employment, small business growth, and re-entry programs for the formerly incarcerated. She plans to invest another $50 billion in the Rural Infrastructure Opportunity Fund, a publicly funded initiative that seeks to invest in public infrastructure in rural areas to attract more businesses and, as a result, more jobs for the under- and unemployed.

Clinton is also a supporter of the “ban the box” movement to get rid of the box on applications that requires job seekers to select whether or not they have a criminal past. She has proposed banning such questions on applications for federal employees and contractors. She will also require companies to only consider criminal history when it is related to the job applied for and grant the right of appeal to those who are rejected because of a criminal past.

Clinton says she will invest $25 million in small business and private investment. She wants to do that through mentorship programs and by expanding federal funding for programs that target small business development.

trump_final

Donald Trump has said he plans to relax federal regulations in order to lower the cost of doing business for major corporations in the U.S., an effort he hopes will dissuade them from moving their business (and jobs) overseas.

Trump’s plan points to energy as a source for new jobs in the future. He says will make the U.S. the world’s dominant leader in energy production by scraping programs like the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, a 2015 initiative led by President Obama to reduce carbon emissions and increase regulations on coal-powered plants. The plan has been stalled since February, when the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that questions the constitutionality of the plan.

Taxes

hillary_final

Clinton’s tax plan focuses on raising taxes on high-income taxpayers (the top 1%) and closing tax loopholes. Her plan also includes increasing estate and gift taxes. The majority of her proposed tax policies won’t affect the bottom 95% of taxpayers, according to the Tax Policy Center.

Part of Clinton’s plan is to raise taxes on higher-income taxpayers with a 4% “Fair Share Surcharge,” which would apply to those making $5 million or more annually. She also says she’ll close tax loopholes favored by the wealthiest earners in part by supporting the Buffett Rule, which would levy a 30% income tax on any individuals earning $1 million or more. The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group, has warned that such a plan would provide a meager boost to tax revenue.

In addition, Clinton wants to restore the estate tax to its 2009 level. Doing so would increase taxes on multi-million dollar estates — to as much as 65% for an estate valued at more than $1 billion for a couple — and close loopholes that deflate the value of the estates.
According to the Tax Policy Center, a left-leaning think tank, which in March completed an analysis of Clinton’s tax proposal, the plan would generate an additional $1.1 trillion in tax revenue. Households earning less than $300,000 would see little to no change in their federal income taxes, according to the analysis.

trump_final

At the core of Donald Trump’s plan are tax cuts for everybody — with an emphasis on corporations and middle- and high-income Americans. Trump says he will reduce the number of tax brackets to three from the current seven.
Under his plan, the new tiers would be:

  • 12% (married filing jointly households earning less than $75,000)
  • 25% (married filing jointly households earning between $75,000 and $225,000)
  • 33% (married filing jointly households earning more than $225,000)
    *Brackets for single filers would be half of these amounts.

The Trump plan would also increase the standard deduction for joint filers to $30,000, from $12,600, and the standard deduction for single filers to $15,000. His plan would also eliminate the death tax (aka. the estate tax) and gift taxes.
Trump’s plan would reduce the nation’s income by about $4.4 trillion to as much as $9.5 trillion over the next decade, according to several independent research groups. It would also mean increased income for all income levels, with the largest gain going to the top 1%. The top bracket could see its average annual income boosted by as much as 16%, while the bottom 80% would see a 0.8% to 1.9% rise according to the Tax Foundation. The Tax Policy Center estimates that Trump’s plan could increase the national debt by as much as 80% if it isn’t counterbalanced with huge spending cuts.

Housing

hillary_final

Hillary Clinton’s proposed policies include a $25 billion investment in housing. She plans to offer a federal match of up to $10,000 for savings going toward a down payment for people who earn less than the median income in their area. She also plans to increase access to “lending in underserved communities, support housing counseling programs and police abuse and discrimination in the mortgage market.”

Clinton says she will raise support for affordable rental housing and wants to motivate communities to try land-use strategies that may make it easier to build lower-cost rental housing near businesses. Clinton says she will also make efforts to expand living options for recipients of housing vouchers.

trump_final

Donald Trump doesn’t have a housing policy outlined on his campaign site.

Make sure to register to vote by Oct. 14.

Illustrations by Kelsey Wroten.

The post TRUMP VS. CLINTON: Where the Candidates Stand on Job Growth, Taxes, and Housing appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

MagnifyMoney: 2016 Housing Affordability Study

Housing Affordability StudyAs the cost of housing soars ever higher and household earnings remain stubbornly stagnant, how realistic is homeownership for young people today?

Saving up for a new home can feel like an endless slog for young working Americans. The upfront costs alone — the down payment, closing costs, property taxes, etc. — are enough to scare off prospective buyers who are struggling to make ends meet.

Just over one-third of Americans under age 35 owned homes as of mid-2016, down 12% from 2010, according to U.S. Census data. While homeownership rates fell across all age groups during that same period, none experienced a steeper drop-off than the under-35s.

MagnifyMoney wanted to figure out how realistic homeownership is for young Americans today — that is, how long it would take them to save up for a new home in their area if they started saving now.

Calculating Home Affordability

Our analysis revealed two different sets of buyers — those who can afford the cost of a new home in their area and those who cannot. Affordability was largely driven by a worker’s ability to qualify for a mortgage loan large enough to cover the cost of a median-priced home in their metro area. Given these two different cases, we used two methods to determine how long it would take these groups to save for a home.

For buyers who can’t afford a large enough mortgage:

We assumed that the borrower can spare 35% of their monthly income toward mortgage-related payments. Based on this amount and the current interest rates for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, we calculated the total mortgage that the borrower can afford to take.

We then took the mortgage amount they would qualify for and subtracted it from the cost of a median-priced home in their area to find the mortgage gap they need to fill. Then, we added other necessary upfront costs: 4.5% closing costs and a standard emergency cash reserve equal to one month’s mortgage payment.

We determined, based on the median income for their age, how long it would take to save that amount, assuming a 20% savings rate.

Example:

We estimate a 25 to 44 year-old homebuyer in Salinas, Calif., would reasonably qualify for a $275,385 mortgage. A median-priced home in Salinas, Calif., costs $750,000. So, she would have to save at least $474,615 to fill the mortgage gap. On top of that, she would pay another $33,750 in closing costs (assuming an estimate of 4.5%) and need to set aside a $1,274 emergency cash reserve.

In total, she would need to come up with $509,612 to be able to buy a home in her area. If she saved 20% of her income toward that goal, it would take her 46.75 years.

For buyers who can afford a large enough mortgage:

Once again, we assumed that the borrower can spare 35% of their monthly income toward mortgage-related payments. Based on this amount and the current interest rates for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, we calculated the total mortgage the borrower can afford to take.

We then determined how much they’d need to save for a 20% down payment. We added to that the cost of closing costs and a one-month mortgage reserve.

For example:

A median-priced home in Johnstown, Penn., costs $74,900. So this buyer would have to save at least $14,980 to cover a 20% down payment. On top of that, he would pay another $3,370 in closing costs (assuming an estimate of 4.5%) and set aside $1,370 in an emergency cash reserve.

In total, he’d need to save $19,720. Saving 20% of his income toward this goal, it would take him 1.85 years.

Key Findings

  • Get ready for the long haul: Of the 380 metro areas we analyzed, we found no place in America where a worker of any age group could realistically save up for a new home in less than a year.Across all 380 metro areas analyzed…
    • 45 to 65 year-olds would need an average of 4.69 years to save for a home.
    • 25 to 44 year-olds would need an average of 5.63 years to save for a home.
    • 15 to 24 year-olds would an average of 27.2 years to save for a home.
  • Where homeownership is completely out of reach:
    • In 79% of metros (79 out of 380), workers of all age groups wouldn’t be able to qualify for a mortgage loan large enough to cover the cost of a median-priced home.
    • 15 to 24 year-olds wouldn’t qualify for a mortgage loan large enough to cover the cost of a median priced home in 357 out of 380 metros analyzed (93.95%).
    • 25 to 44 year-olds wouldn’t qualify for a mortgage loan large enough to cover the cost of a median-priced home in 68 out of 380 metros analyzed (17.89%).
    • 45 to 65 year-olds wouldn’t qualify for a mortgage loan large enough to cover the cost of a median-priced home in 29 out of 380 metros analyzed (7.63%).

The least and most affordable metros for 25 to 44-year-olds

25-44-The-Most-Easiest-Places
25-44-The-Most-Difficult-Places

A closer look at the housing market for 25 to 44-year-olds:

  • The most affordable metro area: Johnstown, Penn., is the easiest place for 25 to 44 year-olds to save for a home. The key: Affordable housing is in abundance. A median-priced home in Johnstown is $74,900. With a goal of saving enough to cover a 20% down payment, closing costs, and a one-month mortgage payment reserve, the total amount workers would need to save is $19,720. Earning the median annual income for that area of $53,164, they would need just 1.85 years to save.
  • The least affordable metro area: Salinas, Calif., is the most difficult metro area for 25 to 44 year-olds dreaming of homeownership. Earning the median annual salary of $54,499 and looking at a median-priced home listed at $750,000, they would need a staggering 46.75 years to save up enough. The reason? On an annual household income of $54,499, a homebuyer would only realistically be able to qualify for a $271,000 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan, leaving a half-million-dollar gap to fill.
  • Midwest is best: 9 out of the 10 most affordable metro areas are located in the Midwest, where housing prices are significantly lower compared to other regions. On average, it would take just 2.28 years for a 25 to 44 year-old to save for a home in the 10 most affordable metros.
  • California is where homeownership dreams go to die: 9 out of the top 10 most expensive metro areas for 25 to 44 year-old homebuyers are in California.
    • The average time needed to save for a home in the top 10 most expensive metro areas is a whopping 29.15 years.
    • It would take 25 to 44 year-olds at least three years to save for a home in 7.37% of metro areas.
    • It would take 25 to 44 year-olds between three and five years to save for a home in 53.16% of metro areas.
    • It would take 25 to 44 year-olds between five and 10 years to save for a home in 34.47% of metro areas.
    • It would take 25 to 44 year-olds more than 10 years to save for a home in 5.00% of metro areas.

The least and most affordable metros for 45 to 65-year-olds

45-65-The-Most-Easiest-Places
45-65-The-Most-Difficult-Places

A closer look at the housing market for 45 to 65-year-olds:

  • The most affordable metro area: Danville, Ill., is the easiest place for 45 to 65 year-olds to save for a home today. A median-priced home in Danville is $68,200. With goal of saving enough to cover a 20% down payment, closing costs, and a one-month mortgage payment reserve, the total amount workers would need to save is $18,012. Earning the median annual income for their age group in that area ($51,975), they would need just 1.73 years to save.
  • The least affordable metro area: Homeownership dreams don’t get any more realistic with age in Salinas, Calif. It is also the most difficult metro area for 45 to 65 year-olds dreaming of homeownership. Even though this age group earns a median income 22% higher than 25 to 44 year-olds in this area, it would still take them nearly three decades (28.98 years) to save up for a median-priced home of $750,000. On an annual household income of $70,368, a 45 to 65 year-old homebuyer would only realistically be able to qualify for a $377,567 30-year fixed-rate loan, leaving a massive gap to fill — even without including closing costs and a one-month mortgage reserve.
    • It would take 45 to 65 year-olds at least three years to save for a home in 16.32% of metro areas.
    • It would take 45 to 65 year-olds between three and five years to save for a home in 57.37% of metro areas.
    • It would take 45 to 65 year-olds between five and 10 years to save for a home in 23.16% of metro areas.
    • It would take 45 to 65 year-olds more than 10 years to save for a home in 3.16% of metro areas.
  • Midwest is best: 9 out of the 10 most affordable metro areas for 45 to 65 year-olds are also located in the Midwest, where housing prices are significantly lower compared to other regions.
    • On average, it would take just under three years (2.08) to save for a home in the 10 most affordable metros.
  • The California struggle: 9 out of the top 10 most expensive metro areas for 45 to 65 year-old homebuyers also are in California.
    • The average time needed to save for a home in the top 10 most expensive metro areas for this age group is a whopping 19.72 years.

The least and most affordable metros for 15 to 24-year-olds

15-24-The-Easiest-Places
15-24-The-Most-Difficult-Places

A closer look at the housing market for 15 to 24-year olds:

Of course, we don’t know many 15-year-olds who are shopping around for a single-family home these days, but U.S. Census Bureau data limited us to this age range. However, our findings still shine a light into the challenges facing the youngest homebuyers.

  • It would take 15 to 24 year-olds at least three years to save for a home in 0% of metro areas.
  • It would take 15 to 24 year-olds between three and five years to save for a home in 1.58% of metro areas.
  • It would take 15 to 24 year-olds between five and 10 years to save for a home in 23.42% of metro areas.
  • It would take 15 to 24 year-olds more than 10 years to save for a home in 75.00% of metro areas.
  • The most affordable metro area: Sheboygan, Wisc., is the easiest place for 15 to 24 year-olds to save for a home today. Although median-priced homes are relatively more expensive in Sheboygan ($134,900) than other inexpensive metro areas on this list, young workers there earn relatively higher salaries, which enables them to save more toward future home costs. With a goal of saving enough to cover a 20% down payment, closing costs, and a one-month mortgage payment reserve, the total amount workers would need to save is $33,877. Earning the median annual income for their age group in that area ($38,510), they would need just 4.40 years to save.
  • The least affordable metro area: Santa Cruz-Watsonville, Calif., isn’t simply a difficult place for young workers to save for a home — it’s pretty much impossible. On an annual household income of $21,178, a 15 to 24 year-old homebuyer would only realistically be able to qualify for a $36,506 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan. With a median-priced home listed at $769,500, their mortgage loan would hardly make a dent. They would need 181.27 years to save enough to fill in that gap.
    • In the 10 most expensive metros, it would take 15 to 24 year-olds an average of 129.53 years to save for a home.
  • Things look much better in the South and Midwest: The 10 most affordable metro areas for 15 to 24 year-olds are also located in the Midwest and the South, where housing prices are significantly lower compared to other regions.
    • On average, it would take just under five years (4.79) to save for a home in the 10 most affordable metros.
  • Surprisingly expensive metros for 15 to 24 year-olds:
    • While 6 out of the 10 most expensive metro areas are located in California, there were some surprising findings in other states.
      • The 4th most expensive metro is Corvallis, Ore. Home prices are half as high as the most expensive metros on this list, but median incomes for this age group are among the lowest: $12,369.
      • Morgantown, W.Va., is the 6th most unaffordable metro for the youngest workers. 15 to 24 year-old workers in Morgantown earn among the lowest median incomes in the 380 metros we analyzed: $8,805.

Housing Affordability Calculator

Find out how long it would take you to save up for a home in your area.

Download the data behind this report:

Data analysis was conducted by Naveen Agarwal, MagnifyMoney Senior Data Analyst.

Metro Rankings for Ages 15 to 25

Metro Rankings for Ages 25 to 44

Metro Rankings for Ages 45 to 65

Metro Rankings for Ages 65 and Up

Metros by State: Searchable Database

Full Study Data

Appendix/Data Sources

Home prices: June 2016 median listing prices data provided by Zillow

Median income: Annual household income by age group and metropolitan area for 2014: U.S. Census Bureau.

Real Estate/Property Taxes: Real estate taxes for owner occupied units for metropolitan areas: U.S. Census Bureau

Mortgage interest rate: Bankrate.com National average on a 30-year fixed rate mortgage is 3.57% as of Sept. 1, 2016.

Downpayment: We assume a downpayment of 20%.

Savings rate: We assume homebuyers would save 20% of their annual take-home pay.

Closing costs: We assume closing costs of 4.5%.

Home Insurance rates by metro area: National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)

The post MagnifyMoney: 2016 Housing Affordability Study appeared first on MagnifyMoney.

10 States With the Biggest Foreclosure Problems

foreclosure_states

Image: iStock

The post 10 States With the Biggest Foreclosure Problems appeared first on Credit.com.