Carlmont Associates Partners with Re/Max Star Properties

Most of you know we’ve been operating out of the Carlmont Associates office in Belmont. Effective today, Carlmont Associates has joined a partnership with Re/Max Star properties.  

Our level of service and commitment to our clients will be unaffected except that we'll have access to the benefits the number one real estate franchise in the world can offer.LuxuryHomes

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

(Redwood City, CA Nov. 20, 2010)—Re/Max Star Properties, a real estate leader in San Mateo County with projected sales of over 200 million dollars for 2010 announced today that it has added the premier Carlmont Associates team and premium location in central Belmont to its local group of Peninsula offices.  â€œCarlmont Associates is a well established, centrally located real estate firm serving the Belmont area for over 50 years and we’re proud they’ve chosen to join forces with us”.

“We are both pleased and excited by this merger”, said Tom Diridon, one of the principals of Carlmont Associates. He, his wife Eda Diridon and partner Gary Rossetto couldn’t be happier”. Mr. Rossetto mentioned, “It will bring state of the art systems, services and global name brand recognition and lead generation systems of RE/MAX to Carlmont Associates allowing us t better serve our clients.”

“This move will bring major benefits to the local consumers and its agents by the ability to offer more marketing solutions, exceptional financing opportunities and unmatched after the sale protection”.

New 3.8% “Real Estate Sales Tax” gets a lot of play

You may have already heard through an errant email or co-worker that hidden in the health care bill was a provision for adding a 3.8% sales tax on the sale of your home.

We’ve even been forwarded emails with the story contained in a newspaper article. So is there any truth to it? Well, sort of.

The much ballyhooed 3.8% tax in the health care bill which takes effect in 2013 is actually a Medicare tax on investment income—not a real estate tax per se. That alone might not make you feel any better but read on.

According to factcheck.org , which did extensive research, there are very limited circumstances in which this tax would be levied.

As it would apply to real estate, first your income would need to be over $200,000 a year ($250,000 for married couples filing jointly).

 Now if you’re selling your principle residence, the first $250,000 of gain for single tax filers and $500,000 for those who file jointly would be exempt from taxation—as it currently stands for capital gain taxation.

The 3.8% tax would, as we understand it, apply only to the portion which might exceed this threshold. It’s also important to note that this tax is on the gain, not the sale price. So if you were to sell a home you and your spouse bought for $500,000 several years later (you need to have lived in the home two of the past five years) for $800,000, you would have a gain of $300,000. This is of course is further diminished by any capital improvements you made to the property and selling costs but to keep it simple we’ll use the higher figure of $300,000. Based on this you would still owe no capital gain tax nor would you owe the new Medicare Tax even if your income was over the $250,000 threshold because your gain was only $300,000—less than the allowable first $500,000 which is forgiven.

So several things need to happen before you would be subject to the tax:

  • Your income must exceed the thresholds mentioned above.
  • Your gain on the sale of your home must exceed the allowable forgiven limits.

Note that this capital gain exclusion is for your principle residence only so high wage earners who sell their investment properties would be subject to this new tax on that gain—assuming they had gain to tax.

As far as we can tell the viral nature of this email succeeded in part because it resonates with what many readers feared about the health care bill—that it would be caulk full of special interest groups’ and hidden agendas. Further exacerbating this was that many email authors added their own spin by including miscalculated and outrageous examples of how the tax would be applied. Their agenda was then further picked up by those who wish to freighted people into voting the way they would want by saying, as the email I received said, “People have the right to know the truth because an election is coming in November!”

I couldn’t agree more and we hope this explanation is closer to that truth.

Now for the inevitable disclaimer: The information contained in this newsletter is educational and intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute real estate, tax or legal advice, nor does it substitute for advice specific to your situation. Always consult an appropriate professional familiar with your scenario.

Bay Area Housing Prices Rise– Case-Shiller Report June 2010

We’re thinking we should simply name this series after our last post, “There you go again”, in honor of the media whenever it manages to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Typically, bad news is negative news since that’s what sells, but sometimes when the media get scooped by another outlet, they will try and dig up an opposing opinion in order to get a piece of the attention; further managing to confuse (or mislead) their audience.

We see it over the spectrum of issues, but one common theme is they are typically issues that are “hot buttons” with their audience, like the economy, housing, jobs etc.

It’s not hard to point out their lack of diligence—to dig a little deeper and ask “why”. So why don’t they do it? In today’s sound-bite media world it’s not about accurate reporting so much as getting the story out there fast and first.

We tend catch slanted real estate reporting since it is what can easily spot, but it’s prevalent in many other areas as well.

Take our last post pointing out the misleading report on housing sales decline. Almost simultaneous with that report was a report on the median price increasing. So they managed to exaggerate the report on the sales decline and overstate the median price increase. What’s a person to do?

If you’re like us we’re sure you’d like to reply on the news you hear as accurate, but unfortunately, that’s not always the case. Sometimes you have to dig deeper. Of course we’ll try and take some of that burden off of you. If you check in here regularly we try and ferret out the real stuff from the fluff.

What was wrong with their story about the median price increase in the Bay Area? On the surface nothing—the median price did increase in the Bay Area. But they are insinuating by the context in which they issue the report  that the median price increase is representative of home values going up. In fact, often times the median price changes have more to do with the mix of larger or smaller homes selling than it has to do with varying prices.

As in when the media reported that the sales of homes had decreased in San Mateo County by the highest margin in 15 years, but failed to mention that the data they were basing their story on had yet to be released and was only estimated. They also reported that the median price in San Mateo had increased without mentioning that is was in all likelihood a result of larger homes selling rather than prices increasing, as reported by the California Association of Realtors who provided the information they relied on.

This is from the California Association of Realtor press release. The same one cited in articles discussing the Bay Area median price gain.

“Note: Large changes in local median home prices typically indicate both local home price appreciation, and often, large shifts in the composition of housing market activity. Some of the variations in median home prices for July may be exaggerated due to compositional changes in housing demand…”

And indeed if one digs deeper they find that foreclosures, which pulled the median prices down, and which accounted for nearly 50 %of all sales had dwindled significantly.

Did the values of homes in the Bay Area rise? In some areas in fact they did, just not as much as reported. The case-shriller report which looks at the same house selling repeated times, and thus considerably a more reliable source, shows that indeed values have been rising steadily since April of 2009.

As with the report on declining sales, in the end is their report wrong? No. just not as accurate as it could be.

Suppressing Consumer Confidence–It’s all in the headlines

There you go again…Int4

That line was made famous by Ronald Reagan when he was running for office against President Jimmy Carter in 1980. It was used by then Mr. Reagan as a way to diffuse opponents who harped upon the same issues over and over.

Well the media is at it again. The media loves its headlines and of course they need to sell papers so it’s not put past them to choose a sensational attention grabbing headline and find data to support it.

Take the August 19, 2010 report on home sales in the Bay Area. The headline in the San Jose Mercury read “Peninsula home sales plunge in July”. Define plunge?

They reported, “After steadily rising for several months, Peninsula home sales plummeted to near-historic lows in July as demand remained tepid and the federal homebuyer tax credits that had helped caffeinate the marketplace in the past year finally went away".

When were these “near historic lows”? How near and how low were they?

Clearly the article is saying sales are down, and they are, but they fail the test of balanced journalism when they neglect to add the caveat “as expected”.

The accuracy of their article is subject to scrutiny as well. I reviewed our own analysis which we do every month since I didn’t recall being impressed by the large discrepancy in year-over-year sales mentioned in their article.

Our data is mined from the Multiple Listing Service. It doesn't contain all home sales—just ones which were listed with real estate agents. The percentage of homes which transfer ownership without the involvement of a real estate professional remains consistently a small percentage of all the homes which transfer—consistent being the operative word since the delta from one month to another is negligible.

Our statistics showed 385 single family homes closed escrow in July 2010, down from 393 in July 2009. According to our data the number of fewer sales this July compared to last were just eight, or 2%.

The San Jose Mercury claimed it was the lowest month for home sales in 20 years. But how many fewer homes sold? They don’t say. They also don’t mention that Dataquick, the source cited in their article as the resource for their reporting, issued a statement on August 19th, 2010 (the date cited as being used by the San Jose Mercury) saying that they only estimated the sales for San Mateo County:

“San Diego-based MDA DataQuick is a division of MDA Lending Solutions, a subsidiary of Vancouver-based MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates. MDA DataQuick monitors real estate activity nationwide and provides information to consumers, educational institutions, public agencies, lending institutions, title companies and industry analysts. Because of late data availability, sales were estimated in Alameda and San Mateo counties.”

But more to the point, industry experts predicted that home sales would drop after the expiration of the housing stimulus tax credit on May 1, 2010. Last year—the year used for comparing sales—the tax credit was still available in July.  One only has to go back to 2007 to see sales as low as they were this July, not 20 years.

In Santa Clara county they report: “1,159 single-family resale homes that closed escrow represented a drop of 24.3 percent from the 1,531 sold a year earlier, making this the second-slowest July since 1990, according to figures released Thursday by the real estate information service MDA DataQuick.

I didn’t bother to verify any of this information. But let’s assume it’s more accurate than what they reported about San Mateo County. Sales haven’t been this low since…1990. Why does that date ring a bell? It’s the date of the last housing downturn. So what their report tells us is home sales drop when the housing market drops, and sales have not started to pick up yet, because they no doubt will someday.

But what the report does is continue to fan the flames of consumer skepticism. Unless and until the housing market recovers, the rest of the country will suffer. Responsible reporting might help us get back on track sooner rather than later. We expect the facts—the news—good or bad. Just don’t skew what you choose to report to further your own agenda.

Sale SMC

California state first-time buyers tax credit deadline Aug. 15

State first-time buyers tax credit deadline Aug. 15
The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) recently announced it will accept applications for the California first-time home buyer tax credit through midnight on Sunday, Aug. 15, 2010.  The FTB believes it will have received more than enough applications to cover the $100 million allocated for eligible first-time home buyers.  It will continue to accept applications for the new-home portion of the state tax credit.

Due to the high volume of faxes, consumers may experience some delays and difficulties in connecting to the FTB fax number during normal business hours.  It can take several minutes or possibly up to an hour to connect and transmit the fax.  Buyers who receive a busy signal are advised to try again later. The fax number is open 24 hours a day, so consumers may fax applications during non-business hours when the line is not as busy.

More info.

Don't forget, for a limited time we're offering a 1% credit to any first-time homebuyers who use our services. Check our web site for details.

Bay Area Housing Affordability Index 2010 (HAI)

 
The California Association of Realtors tracks the "HAI" which is the Home Affordability Index. Their methodology can be found here, but in a nut shell they take into consideration the median home price for a particular area, the median income, the current interest rates and mash it into an index which essentially says what percentage of the population can qualify for the median price home assuming they put 20% down and have 30% (which is conservative) income to debt ratios. The higher the index the more home people can afford to buy a home. Since there are three variables which could affect this outcome, a dramatic shift in any one could influence the affordability trend. In the case of today's market two of the three variables are in favor of home affordability-low interest rates and lower median home prices. The third-income-has impacted these number to some degree and kept the index from being even higher as wages have remained stagnate and unemployment is high.

What this means to you is if you are considering whether to buy a home in the Bay Area, unless you are concerned over your job security this is one of the best times to purchase a home in the Bay Area in decades. 

HAI

 

THE ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE C.A.R.'S TRADITIONAL HOUSING AFFORDABILITY INDEX (HAI)THE ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE C.A.R.'S TRADITIONAL HOUSING AFFORDABILITY INDEX (HAI)

Step 1. MEDIAN PRICE: C.A.R.'s housing affordability index is based on the median price of existing single-family homes sold from C.A.R.'s monthly existing home sales survey. Starting in 1987, this survey is based on reports of closed escrow sales from 80 Boards or more of REALTORS® and multiple listing services around the state. Prior to 1987, the survey was based on reports from 45 Boards.

Step 2. DOWNPAYMENT: It is assumed that a household can make a 20 percent downpayment on the median-priced home. Therefore, the loan amount needed to purchase a home would be 80 percent of the median home sales price.

Step 3. INTEREST RATE: Using the national average effective mortgage interest rate on all fixed and adjustable rate mortgages. This is represented by the effective composite rate for previously occupied homes, which is reported monthly by the Federal Housing Finance Board.

Step 4.The monthly payment for PRINCIPAL, INTEREST, TAXES AND INSURANCE (PITI) is computed as the sum of three parts: -Monthly mortgage payment, based on the terms of the mortgage in Steps 2 & 3. -Monthly PROPERTY TAXES are assumed to be 1 percent of the median home sales price divided by 12. -Monthly INSURANCE PAYMENTS on the house are assumed to be 0.38 percent of the median home sales price divided by 12. The results of these three calculations are added together to find the PITI or total monthly payment for a household that buys the median priced home.

Step 5. It is then assumed that the monthly PITI can be no more than 30 percent of a household's income. Thus, the monthly housing payment is divided by .3 to come up with the MINIMUM INCOME NEEDED TO QUALIFY FOR A LOAN on the median-priced home.

Step 6. Starting in 1988, data for the distribution of households by various income ranges was obtained from Claritas. INCOME DISTRIBUTION figures were developed based on the projected percent change in the annual median household income. Prior to 1988, household income utilized in the housing affordability index was based on projections by C.A.R. using the 1980 census data as a base. (I wonder who "projects" incomes-my emphasis and what criteria is used for that)

Step 7. The minimum income amount calculated in Step 5 is multiplied by 12 to determine the minimum annual income needed to qualify. This amount is compared to the income distribution of households. The percent of the households with incomes greater than or equal to the minimum income becomes the HOUSING AFFORDABILITY INDEX (HAI). NOTE: The quarterly HAI series begins in 2006, prior to that the series was monthly. The quarterly HAI for a given geographic area in a particular quarter is based upon the quarterly median price for that area as well as the quarterly income distribution for that area.

What if I get lousy neighbors?

Finding a home with great neighbors can be the luck of the draw.

When we help Buyers find a home many are concerned about who their new neighbors might be, I’m reminded of my childhood experiences trying to lay claim to the perfect campsite.

When I was a young, like so many of our generation, our parents took us on summer camping trips as a frugal way to enjoy a vacation. As we entered the campground, finding the perfect campsite was always a moment of great anticipation. Competition was fierce for the great sites; as with most people who want to get away for the weekend they also want to get away from other people—being a social society, we want to be close, but not too close. We’d drive through the entire campground before selecting the perfect spot—one with seclusion, beauty and because we had a camper, it had to be level. Of course we’d check out who our nearest neighbors would be too. My parents wanted to avoid parking in a spot near a bunch of rowdy kids, which was where the interests of my parents and I parted.

Settled in on the perfect spot, we began to enjoy our week-long vacation. As would often happen, we’d wake up Monday morning and see that our weekend neighbors had vacated to return home. That left us with a new dilemma—who would be our new neighbors? We knew we had no control over who might choose to park next to us and wondered if they would evaluate us as we did our neighbors, (looking back I’m sure many seniors chose to drive on past our campsite after spotting three active kids playing around).

I was always interested in who would we get as our new band of travelers. Of course we had no control over who our camp fellows might be, and often provisionally contemplated moving to a new campground should our new nomadic neighbors prove too loud.

Finding a home with great neighbors is reminiscent of these camping expeditions. Like finding the perfect site, you quickly learn that the neighbors you have today may not be the ones you get tomorrow as like you, they too can move. Sometimes you’re lucky enough to get the quietest neighbors in the world and then they decide that Johnny needs a companion and the next thing you know you’re waking up during the night to Rex’s midnight pangs of loneliness.

While it’s prudent to pay attention to a neighborhood and who your new neighbors might be, keep in mind that you should not rely on today as a constant —good or bad. Your neighbors could easily be here today and gone tomorrow.

 

Home Sales Decline As Tax Credits Expire – WSJ.com

"Some 60% of the 109 economists and other analysts surveyed by MacroMarkets LLC expect home prices to decline this year, up from 40% in May."

via online.wsj.com

I found this amusing. If their numbers are right, at 66% the economists are no better than the Supreme Court Justices at arriving at a consensus, and probably no more accurate than our local weather announcer when they do.

Why Are Interest Rates So Low and What Does it Mean to Me?

Unasked2 copy Whether you are thinking of buying or already own a home the current historically low interest rates may help you save thousands of dollars.

Rates in the last week have averaged the lowest point since records were first kept over 30 years ago. Refinancing today may help you save hundreds of dollars in monthly interest payments but even more important are the long term savings.

Rates are low right now because the financial crisis in Europe is driving the appetite for U.S. bonds which in turn raises the price and lowers the yield (interest) payment. And since mortgage rates roughly track the 10 Year Treasury Bond you can see where rates are headed and why. Rates are the lowest they’ve been–period.

If you think about the past 30 year trend of interest rates, which have averaged around 9%, it’s easy to guesstimate that the odds are good rates will be higher in the future rather than lower. What does that mean to you? If you are considering a purchase it means that there are two ways to look at it: if you buy a home at today’s rates either your monthly payment will be substantially lower or you can buy a considerably larger home for the same amount of money. In fact a payment on a $1,000,000 home ($800,000 loan) would be around $4,234 per month as opposed to $6,437 at the average historic 9% rate. But that doesn’t even begin to tell the whole story.

Not everyone stays in their home for Fhfb_contract_rate30 years but this offers up a substantial savings in interest payments. Most people aren’t aware of the long term costs of home ownership so you’ll be interested to note that at today’s rate your total interest payments over 30 years would total $725,000 and at the historical 9% rate it would be as high as $1,517,000–over double the interest payment for the same home. What could you do with an extra $793,000?

Perhaps rates will never be as high as they were back in the late 70’s and early 80’s but rates have still averaged 6.7% over the last 15 years during a time of historically low rates.

Case-shiller MSANow combine this with the recent decrease in home values and it’s hard to argue that waiting to buy a home will significantly benefit you.

$8,000 Tax Credit Extended to September 30, 2010

Missed out on the $8,000 first-time homebuyer tax credit?

 You'll be glad to know you can still receive $8,000 when you buy your first home through us.

 How do we do it? Simple. If you buy a home through us between now and September 30th, 2010 we will credit you 1% of the purchase price up to $8,000 in escrow for your closing costs.

 What's the difference between our credit and the government tax credit?

Well for starters you won't have to wait until next year's tax filing to get the refund-we credit it to you at closing so you can really put it to work.*

 Call us for details.

 

 Drew & Christine Morgan

"Helping People Make Good Decisions"sm

 

Carlmont Associates

1940 Ralston Ave.

Belmont, CA 94002

01124318 & 01174047

Office: 650-508-1441

Fax:    650-591-4329

 

*Some restrictions apply.