What can we expect next from UK house prices?

A feature of the credit crunch era has been the way that central banks have concentrated so much firepower on the housing market so that they can get house prices rising again. Of course they mostly hide under the euphemism of asset prices on this particular road. For them it is a win-win as it provides wealth effects and supports the banking sector via raising the value of its mortgage book. The increasingly poor first time buyer finds him or herself facing inflation via higher prices rather than wealth effects as we note the consumer inflation indices are constructed to avoid the whole issue.

This moves onto the issue of Forward Guidance which exists mostly in a fantasy world too. Let me give you an example from the Bank (of England) Underground Blog.

 It is reasonable to suppose that the more someone knows about a central bank and how it conducts policy, the more confidence they will have that the central bank will act to bring inflation back to target.

Really? To do so you have to ignore the two main periods in the credit crunch era when the Bank of England “looked through” inflation above target as real wages were hit hard. Yet they continue to churn out this sort of thing.

 And Haldane and McMahon, using the institutional knowledge score discussed above, show that for the UK, higher knowledge corresponds to greater satisfaction with the Bank, and inflation expectations closer to 2% at all horizons.

So according to the Bank of England you are none to bright if you disagree with them! I think it would have been better if Andy Haldane stuck to being a nosy parker about others Spotify play lists.

The area where the general public has I think grasped the nettle as regards central banking forward guidance is in the area of house prices. The Bank of England loudspeakers have been blaring out Yazz’s one hit.

The only way is up, baby
For you and me now
The only way is up, baby
For you and me now

Indeed even if things go wrong then we can apparently party on.

But if we should be evicted
Huh, from our homes
We’ll just move somewhere else
And still carry on

Where are we now?

If we switch to the current state of play we are in a situation where the new supply of moves to boost house prices have dried up. For example the Term Funding Scheme ended in February and after over four years of dithering the Bank of England raised Bank Rate to 0.75% in August. Combining this with the fall in real wages after the EU leave vote led to me expecting house prices to begin to fall but so far only in London has this happened. One factor in this has led to a blog from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research or NIESR last week.

The key point is that although the political turmoil was of great concern, the impact on bond prices followed a pattern we have seen before in which risk rises but expectations of a policy response militate against the risk.

The politics may be of great concern to the NIESR but the UK Gilt market has been driven by the intervention of the Bank of England. Not only has it already bought some £435 billion of it but its behaviour with the Sledgehammer QE of August 2016 has led to expectations of more of it in any setback. The irony is that good news may make the Gilt market fall because it makes extra QE less likely. The impact of this has been heightened by the way the Bank of England was apparently willing to pay pretty much any price for Gilts in the late summer of 2016. For the first time ever one section of the market saw negative yields as the market picked off the Bank of England’s buyers.

Mortgage Rates

This is where the Gilt yield meets an economic impact. If we think about mortgage rates then they are most driven by the five-year yield. On the day of the August Bank Rate it was 1.1% and of course according to the Bank of England the intelligent observer would be expecting further “limited and gradual rises” along the lines of its forward guidance. Yet it is 0.96% as I type this and the latest mortgage news seems to be following this. From Mortgage Strategy.

TSB has reduced interest rates by up to 0.35 per cent on mortgages for residential, home purchase and remortgage borrowers.

Changes applied include reductions of up to 0.35 per cent on five-year fixed deals up to 95 per cent LTV in its house purchase range; reductions of up to 0.25 per cent on two-year fixes up to 90 per cent LTV; and up to 0.30 per cent on five-year fixes up to 90 per cent LTV for remortgage borrowers.

That was from Friday and this was from Thursday.

Investec Private Bank has announced cuts to a series of its fixed and tracker mortgages.

Reductions total up to 0.50 per cent, and all within the 80 per cent – 85 per cent owner-occupier category.

Specifically, the variable rate mortgage has been cut by 0.50 per cent, the three-year fixed rate product by 0.10 per cent, the four-year by 0.15 per cent, and the five-year fixed rate by 0.20 per cent.

So the mortgage rates which had overall risen are in some cases on the way back down again. We will have to see how this plays out as Moneyfacts are still recording higher 2 year mortgage rates ( 2.51% now versus the low of 2.33% in January). I am placing an emphasis on fixed-rate mortgages because of the recent state of play.

The vast majority of new mortgage loans – 96% – are on fixed interest rates, typically for two or five years.

Currently half of all outstanding loans are on fixed rates, equating to about 4.7 million households.  ( BBC in August).

Lending

According to UK Finance which was the British Bankers Association in the same way that the leaky Windscale nuclear reprocessing plant became the leak-free Sellafield this is the state of play.

Gross mortgage lending across the residential market in October was £25.5bn, some 5.6 per cent higher than last October. The number of mortgages approved by the main high street banks in October was 4.1 per cent lower than last October; although approvals for house purchase were 3.6 per cent higher, remortgage approvals were 13.5 per cent lower and approvals for other secured borrowing were 1.3 per cent lower.

If they are right this seems to be a case of steady as she goes.

Comment

The situation so far is one of partial success for my view if the monthly update from Acadata is any guide.

House prices rebounded in October, up 0.4% – the first increase since February. The annual rate of price increases
continued to slow, however, dropping to just 1.0%.
Despite this, most regions continue to show growth, the exceptions being both the South East and North East, which show modest falls on an annual basis. The average price of a home in England and Wales is now £304,433, up from £301,367 last October.

So no national fall as hoped ( lower house prices would help first time buyers) but at east a slowing of the rise to below the rate of growth of both inflation and wages. There is also plenty of noise around as one official measure is still showing over 3% growth whilst the Rightmove asking prices survey shows falls. As ever the numbers are not easy to wade through as for example I have my doubts about this.

In London annual price growth has slowed substantially in the last month, falling to just 1.8%, yet there has still been an increase of £10,889 in the last twelve months with the average price in London now standing at £620,571.

The noose around house prices is complex as for example we have seen today in the trajectory of mortgage rates and reporting requires number-crunching as this from Politics Live in the Guardian shows.

GDP per head would fall by 3% a year, amounting to an average cost per person a year of £1,090 at today’s prices.

I would like to see an explanation of why it would fall 3% a year wouldn’t you? Much more likely the NIESR suggests a 3% fall in total and just for clarity it is against a rising trend. Of course if we saw falls as reported in the Guardian we would see the 18% drop in house prices suggested by some before the EU referendum whereas so far we have seen a slowing of the rises. But the outlook still looks cloudy for house prices and I still hope that first time buyers get some hope in terms of lower prices rather than help to borrow more.

Podcast

Advertisements

Was October a sign of the end of austerity for the UK Public Finances?

A feature of the past few months or so is that much of the economic data for the UK has been good, at least for these times. This was repeated by the CBI Industrial Trends Survey yesterday.

Manufacturing output growth picked up in the quarter to November, and firms saw overall order books rebound from a fall in October, according to the latest monthly CBI Industrial Trends Survey.

If we look into the detail we see this.

35% of businesses said the volume of output over the past three months was up, and 17% said it was down, giving a balance of +18%. This was above the historic average (+4%) and a slight pick-up from October (+13%).

So in spite of the ongoing problems for the car sector the manufacturing sector has been growing and above trend. Of course the trend for growth has not been much meaning that over the past few decades it has shrunk as a percentage of our economy but at least it is in a better phase and orders look solid too.

29% of manufacturers reported total order books to be above normal, and 19% said they were below normal, giving a balance of +10%. This was above the long-run average (-13%) and followed a weakening in October (-6%).17% of firms said their export order books were above normal, and 17% said they were below normal, giving a normal balance (0) – above the long-run average of -17%, and marginally higher than October (-4%).

I am not quite sure how to treat the export order books as that implies they were always shrinking, but anyway in relative terms we are doing better than usual. Speaking of exports overall take a look at this I spotted the other day.

Will I have to change the theme of trade deficits that I have run with for over twenty years now? It is way to early to say anything like that because any good month seems quite often to be followed by a reversal. But overall there has been an improving trend in there.

Bank of England

Yesterday several policymakers including Governor Carney were called to give evidence to the Treasury Select Committee. I would like to use the written evidence of Michael Saunders to illustrate their thinking, as it should in my view be questioned much more than it is.

With economic growth having been above potential for six or seven years, the spare capacity created by the recession has now probably been used up.

Hands up anybody who thinks that the past six or seven years have been “above potential”? Also if it has been this is quite a downgrade on the past as whilst I am far from a fan of extrapolating the previous boom we are way below its trends and need to understand why. Whereas the policies that have got us here from the Bank of England have apparently been a triumph. This swerve from central bankers from we saved you to the future is grim does not get challenged anything like enough. I would argue that the many of the problems have been created by their policies.

He is at it again here.

In turn, underlying pay growth (measured by private sector average weekly earnings excluding
bonuses) has picked up from 2-2½% a year ago to about 3% in June-August. This is close to a target consistent
pace, given the subdued trend in productivity growth.

As ever we see a central banker cherry-picking the data to get the answer he wants but let;s be fair. After all with their performances they are unlikely to be keen on bonuses! But there is a suggestion here that 3% wages growth is as good as it gets. Yet the same models which via their output gap theories suggest we can’t grow very fast are the same ones which previously told us that wage growth would be 5% plus if we had an employment situation like we do now.

Also the two statements below need challenging.

Under-employment has fallen markedly over recent years, with the net balance of desired extra working hours now around zero.

Okay so traditional output gap and full employment theory. But how does it go with this?

Overall, a U6-type  underemployment measure (which combines unemployment, IVPTs and the marginally attached) has fallen to 11.8% of the workforce in June-August from 12.6% a year ago.

It seems that there is quite a gap here as we recall that the level we have been guided to for the unemployment rate has dropped from 7% to 4.25% over the past five years, again with much less challenge than should have happened.

Oh and if you are struggling with currency trends Governor Carney provided his thoughts on the matter. From Bloomberg.

“There will be events that move sterling up and events that move sterling down,” he said. “That will likely continue for the next little while.”

The Public Finances

The picture here has been set fair and to some extent that continued today in the official figures.

Borrowing in the current financial year-to-date (YTD) was £26.7 billion: £11.2 billion less than in the same period in 2017; the lowest year-to-date for 13 years (since 2005).

As you can see this picked up the pace on the previous year, and FYE stands for Financial Year Ending.

Borrowing in the FYE March 2018 was £40.1 billion: £5.5 billion less than in FYE March 2017; the lowest financial year for 11 years (since FYE 2007).

So we need to borrow less than we did which means that in relative terms the debt issue is fading as the economy has been growing.

Debt at the end of October 2018 excluding Bank of England (mainly quantitative easing) was £1,598.5 billion (or 75.0% of GDP); a decrease of £33.6 billion (or a decrease of 4.0 percentage points) on October 2017.

Oh and as a technical point it is not mainly QE it is mainly the Term Funding Scheme and if we put the Bank of England back in the ratio is falling more slowly and is 84% of GDP.

The end of austerity?

October itself had an interesting kicker which will be immediately apparent below.

Central government receipts in October 2018 increased by 1.2% compared with October 2017, to £59.9 billion; while total expenditure increased by 7.7% to £65.4 billion.

I have looked into the numbers and if we look just at taxes growth seems to have remained at around 4%. The extremely complicated business as to how we account for interest on the Bank of England’s QE holdings seems to have subtracted about £1 billion which makes up the difference.

Moving to expenditure the explanation is about as clear as mud.

This month, much of the increase in spending was in the current account, with notable growth in both the expenditure on goods and services as well as net social benefits. Over the same period, interest payments on the government’s outstanding debt have increased; due largely to movements in the Retail Prices Index to which index-linked bonds are pegged.

So we spent more because we spent more. As to the index-linked debt we will have to monitor that as overall the numbers are down this financial year and with the oil price now at US $64 that will help.

As ever it is complicated as you see last October we thought we borrowed £8 billion but the figures ( as happens often) have improved.

Borrowing (Public sector net borrowing excluding public sector banks) in October 2018 was £8.8 billion, £1.6 billion more than in October 2017;

Comment

So the overall good economic news has led to a number higher than before for the UK fiscal deficit! It is a reminder that these numbers are erratic as back in July we were noting harsh austerity and now October says “spend,spend,spend.” Whilst there may be some flickers of change in for example the £700 million extra for the troubled local authority sector we need to see more before there is a clear change of direction.

One thing we can be sure of however is the first rule of OBR Club, where OBR stands for the Office of Budget Responsibility. When I checked last October’s it had around half the year’s data but apparently had learnt nothing.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecast that public sector net borrowing (excluding public sector banks) will be £58.3 billion during the financial year ending March 2018, an increase of £12.5 billion on the outturn net borrowing in the financial year ending March 2017.

Up is always the new down for them. Well we should have realised October might be a dodgy month when the OBR released this on the 29th.

On 29 October 2018, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) revised their official forecast of borrowing for the financial year ending (FYE) March 2019 down by £11.6 billion to £25.5 billion.

 

The Bank of England is now re-writing history about UK house prices

Yesterday saw the latest in a series of interviews on the Iain Dale show on LBC Radio by Ian McCafferty of the Bank of England. Actually it was the last by Ian as he is about to depart the Bank of England. Before I start I should point out that we were colleagues back in my time at Baring Securities which feels like a lifetime ago mostly because it is! His main claim to fame was declaring that the German Bundesbank would not do something at a meeting and then the door was opened by someone keen to tell the room some news which I am sure you have already guessed.

Moving forwards in time to yesterday Ian had more than a little trouble with the concept of full employment as he assured listeners that the UK was at full employment at the moment. This was really rather breathtaking as it showed a lack of understanding on two major levels. Firstly if we just stay with the unemployment rate those who read my update yesterday will be aware that Japan has seen an unemployment rate some 2% lower or nearly half ours. An odd thing to miss as our shared history involved specialising in Japanese economics and finance. Also it was a statement that on the face of it made no nod at all to the concept of underemployment where people have some work but not as much as they would like. So in his world both Japan and underemployment seemed not to exist.

Presumably Mr.McCafferty was trying to bolster the case for last week’s interest-rate rise in the UK which of course needs all the bolstering it can get but he ended up being challenged by the host Iain Dale. The response was a shift to claiming we are around the natural or equilibrium rate of unemployment but of course this led to another problem. On this road he ended up pointing out that the Bank of England has had more than a few of these but he did at least avoid a full confession that they started the game by signalling that a 7% unemployment rate was significant but now tell us that the equilibrium rate is 4.25%. Thus the reality is that they have chased the actual unemployment rate like a dog chases it tail although to be fair to dogs they usually tire of the game once the fun stops. Whereas should we live up to the song “Turning Japanese” the Bank of England will have chased the “equilibrium rate of unemployment” from if we are generous 6.5% to 2.5%.

House Prices

As you can imagine this subject came up and it was interesting to hear an explanation of UK house price rises omitting the role of the Bank of England. You might have thought that having gone to the effort of producing the bank subsidy called the Funding for Lending Scheme in the summer of 2012 and then produced research saying it had reduced mortgage rates by up to 2% that you might think it was a factor. This would be reinforced by the fact that it was in 2013 that house prices in the UK began to turn and head higher. There is also the Term Funding Scheme which began in August 2016 which amounted to some £127 billion of cheap liquidity ( 0.25% back then) for the banks which even the casual observer might think was associated with the record low mortgage interest-rates which were then seen.

This seems to be a new phase where the Bank of England sings along with Shaggy “It wasn’t me.” The absent-minded professor Ben Broadbent was on the case on the 23rd of July.

But it should be borne in mind when reading – as one often does – that QE has done little except boosted
prices of assets like shares and houses, or even led to a “boom” or “bubble” in those markets.

The research quoted was from colleagues of his who have voted for this QE and I am sure many of you would love to be judge and jury on your own actions! Later he tells us this about UK house prices.

But the latest figure is barely any higher than it was in the middle of the last decade.

So it is the same as the level that contributed to the crash? Not quite so good and whilst it may not be that much of an issue when your salary plus pension benefits total £356,000 many will note that real wages are 6% below their peak according to the official data.So house prices compared to wages are rather different.

Also there is this issue.

Broadly speaking I don’t think any of these things is true. It’s not new; it’s not exactly printing money; equity
and house prices are in real terms still comfortably below their pre-crisis levels; inequality hasn’t risen – nor,
according to the most detailed analysis available, did easier monetary policy have any net impact on it.

I guess he has never seen that bit in the film The Matrix where the Frenchman describes the role of cause and effect. Also on the subject of inequality I note that FT Alphaville has pointed out this.

In London and the South-East of England, this shift has been profound – real prices are nearly 30 per cent higher in London, and 10 per cent higher in the South-East and East.

Some house owners are indeed more equal than others it would appear. But this brings us back to Ian McCafferty who assured us on LBC that the ratio of house prices in London to the rest of the country “is now re-establishing itself at close to its more normal long-term level” . Is 30% higher the new “close to”?

Inevitably the issue of Brexit came up and sadly our intrepid policymaker seemed to struggle with both numbers and words in this regard. Here is the Reuters view on this.

“We are getting stories on (how) the numbers of French and German and other European bankers that are coming to London have fallen quite sharply over the last couple of years,” McCafferty said in a question-and-answer session on LBC radio.

You might think that he would know the numbers via contacting the banks rather than listening to “stories”. Also he had opened by saying there had been an “exodus” of such bankers which of course evokes the thought “movement of jah people” a la Bob Marley. The response from the host was that the number of bankers in the City had risen which then got the reply that the inflow had slowed which again is somewhat different to the initial claim. As this is an issue that is both polarised and political an independent ( his words not mine) should be ultra careful in this area rather than giving us vague rhetoric which falls apart at any challenge.

Oh and before we move on from housing there was this bit.

a number of those who are renting particularly those who work in the City.

Was he thinking of Governor Carney who of course got a £250,000 annual rent allowance?

Comment

There is much that is familiar here as we note that the Bank of England is looking to re-write history in its favour. There are two initial problems with this and the first is the moral hazard in you and your colleagues judging your own actions. On this road Napoleon could have written a counterfactual account of how his retreat from Moscow was a masterly example of the genre. Also there are clear contradictions in the story of which two are clear. The rise in asset prices seems able to boost the economy on the one hand but to have had no impact on inequality on the other. London house prices can have soared and become completely unaffordable in central London to all but the wealthiest and yet are close to normal long-term trends.

Only last week we were guided towards three interest-rate rises but now there seems only to be two.

Britain is “now at full employment” and so can expect “a couple more small interest rate rises” in the next two to three years to stop the economy from overheating, according to Bank of England policymaker Ian McCafferty. ( Daily Telegraph which failed to spot the full employment issue)

Maybe it is because they are only raising them so they can later cut them.

Higher interest rates will also give the Bank room to cut them once more if the economy hits a troubled spell in the years ahead.

 

What is happening to the UK housing market and house prices?

The last year of two has seen something of a change in the environment for UK house prices. The most major shift of all has come from the Bank of England which for the moment seems to have abandoned its policy where the music was “Pump it up” by Elvis Costello. This meant that when around 2012 it saw that even what was still considered an emergency Bank Rate of 0.5% plus its new adventure into Quantitative Easing was not enough to get house prices rising it introduced the Funding for Lending Scheme. This reduced mortgage rates by around 1% quite quickly and had a total impact that rose towards 2% on this measure according to Bank of England research. This meant that net mortgage lending improved and then went positive and the house price trend turned and then they rose.

The next barrage came in August 2016 with the “Sledgehammer QE” and the cut in Bank Rate to 0.25%. This was accompanied by the Term Funding Scheme (TFS) which was a way of making sure banks could access liquidity at the new lower Bank Rate and it rose to £127 billion. This was something of a dream ticket for the Bank of England as it boosted both the “precious” ( the banks) and house prices in one go,

However that was then as the Bank reversed the Bank Rate cut last November and the TFS ended this February. So whilst the background environment for house prices is favourable they have risen to reflect that and for once there are no new measures to keep the bubble inflated. Also we have seen real wages fall and then struggle in response to higher inflation.

Valuations

This morning has brought news about something which has not happened for a while now but is something which is destabilising for house prices. From the BBC.

There has been a “significant” rise in homes being valued at less than what buyers have agreed to pay, the UK’s largest mortgage advisers have said.

These “down valuations”, by lenders, can mean buyers having to pay thousands of pounds extra, up front, to avoid the sale collapsing.

Estate agents Emoov said it reflected surveyors predicting a financial crash.

UK Finance said lenders, which it represents, were right to ensure property values were realistic.

The organisation said borrowers also benefited from houses having an “independent valuation”.

Emoov are an interesting firm that have recently completed a crowdfunding program and perhaps want some publicity but for obvious reasons estate agents usually stay clear of this sort of thing. If we step back for a moment we note that whilst they are mostly in the background surveyors do play a role in price swings via their role in providing a base for mortgage valuations. They should know the local market and therefore have knowledge about relative valuations but absolute ones is a different kettle of fish. If they get nervous and start to be stricter with valuations then the situation can snowball though mortgage chains. As to the numbers the BBC had more.

Emoov, one of the UK’s largest digital estate agents, said one in five of its sales now resulted in a down valuation.

Two years ago, it was fewer than one in 20, it added.

This is the highest rate since the UK’s financial crash in 2008, according to agents from 10 mortgage adviser groups contacted by the Victoria Derbyshire programme.

There is a specific example quoted by the BBC.

Phil Broodbank, from Wirral, bought his house for £180,000 a few years ago and spent up to £25,000 renovating it.

When the time came to remortgage, a surveyor valued his house at £200,000 without visiting it in person – in what is known as a “drive by”.

This valuation was £20,000 lower than a local estate agent had valued the property.

One bonus is that “drive by” in the Wirral does not quite have the same menace as in Los Angeles. Also these have been taking place for quite some time now but there were fewer complaints when the bias was upwards. The response from UK Finance is fascinating.

“Although the valuation is carried out for the lender, borrowers also benefit from a realistic independent valuation as it could help them avoid paying over the odds for the property they are buying.”

How do they know it is “realistic” especially if it was a cursory observation from the road? Also as the valuation is for the lender there are always going to be more interested in downturns that rises as of course the bank is more explicitly vulnerable then. In case you are wonder who UK Finance are they took over the British Bankers Association.

Borrowing Limits

The Guardian pointed out over the weekend that some old “friends” seem to be back.

this week Clydesdale Bank said it will grant first-time buyers mortgages of 5.5 times a borrower’s income and lend up to £600,000 – and the buyer only needs a 5% deposit.

A little care is needed as this is for the moment only available to those classed as professionals by Clydesdale Bank who earn more than £40,000 a year. Also there is a theoretical limit in that according to Bank of England rules mortgage lenders are supposed to keep 85% or more of their business using a 4.5 times times a borrower’s income. But if history is any guide these things seem to spread sometimes like wildfire and this industry has a track record that even a world-class limbo dancer would be envious of in terms of slipping under rules and regulations.

This bit raised a wry smile.

But mortgage brokers said they were relaxed about Clydesdale’s new deal.

As it is a potential new source of business they are no doubt secretly pleased. Also I did smile at this from the replies.

 5.5 times of income is nothing unusual. In Australia this is very common and goes as high as 7 to 9 times. ( GlobalisationISGood )

This Australia?

Rising global interest rates are combining with bank caution on lending, via extreme vetting of loan applications in the wake of financial services Royal Commission revelations, to generate a mini-credit crunch.

That’s putting further pressure on house prices, whose falls are gathering pace. ( Business Insider )

What this really represents if we return to the UK is another sign that houses are unaffordable for the ordinary buyer. Another factor in the list is this.

While 25-year terms were the standard in the 1990s, 30 years is now the norm for new borrowers, with many lenders stretching to 35 years to make monthly payments more affordable. ( Guardian )

 

Comment

We do not know yet how the two forces described today will play out in the UK housing market but down valuations seem to be a stronger force. After all Clydesdale will only do a limited amount of its mortgages and fear is a powerful emotion. Mind you some still seem to be partying like its 2016.

The billionaire founder of Phones4u John Caudwell has claimed his Mayfair property development will be “the world’s most expensive and prestigious apartment block”.

The entrepreneur, who turned to property after selling his mobile phone company for £1.5bn in 2006, plans to convert a 1960s multi-storey car park in the heart of Mayfair into 30 luxurious flats.  ( City-AM).

As to hype well there is this.

“I see London as the epicentre of the world and I see Mayfair as the epicentre of London. Therefore, I see my building site as the epicentre of the world,” Caudwell told City A.M. “I can’t think of anywhere better for people to live.”

Meanwhile I am grateful to Henry Pryor for drawing my attention to this. From the Independent in August 2000.

Roger Bootle, who predicted the death of inflation five years ago, says Britain has seen the last of extreme gyrations in house prices…………Nationwide, Britain’s largest building society, reported yesterday that the price of the average home fell 0.2 per cent, or £319, to £81,133 between June and July.

As of this June it was £215,844.

 

 

 

UK house price growth continues to slow

Yesterday we looked at a house price bubble which is still being inflated whereas today we have a chance to look at one where much of the air has been taken out of the ball. Can a market return to some sort of stability or will it be a slower version of the rise and fall in one football match demonstrated by Maradona last night? Here is the view from the Nationwide Building Society.

Annual house price growth fell to its slowest pace for five
years in June. However, at 2% this was only modestly below the 2.4% recorded the previous month.

As you can see the air continues to seep out of the ball as we see another measure decline to around 2% reaching one of out thresholds on here. Or to put it another way finally house price growth is below wage growth. Of course that means that there is a long way to go to regain the lost ground but at least we are no longer losing it.

The Nationwide at first suggests it is expecting more of the same.

Indeed, annual house price growth has been confined to a
fairly narrow range of c2-3% over the past 12 months,
suggesting little change in the balance between demand and supply in the market over that period.
“There are few signs of an imminent change. Surveyors
continue to report subdued levels of new buyer enquiries,
while the supply of properties on the market remains more of a trickle than a torrent.

Although I note that later 1% is the new 2%

Overall, we continue to expect house prices to rise by
around 1% over the course of 2018.

Every measure of house prices has its strengths and weaknesses and the Nationwide one is limited to its customers and tends to have a bias towards the south but it is reasonably timely. Also there is always the issue of how you calculate an average price which varies considerably so really the best we can hope for is that the methodology is consistent. According to the Nationwide it was £215,444 in June.

The Land Registry is much more complete but is much further behind the times as what is put as April was probably from the turn of the year..

As of April 2018 the average house price in the UK is £226,906, and the index stands at 119.01. Property prices have risen by 1.2% compared to the previous month, and risen by 3.9% compared to the previous year.

As you can see the average price is rather different too.

Bank of England

It will be mulling this bit this morning.

Annual house price growth slows to a five-year low in June

This is because that covers the period in which its Funding for Lending Scheme ( replaced by the even more friendly Term Funding Scheme) was fully operative. When it started it reduced mortgage rates by around 1% and according to the Bank of England some mortgage rates fell by 2%. I think you can all figure out what impact that had on UK house prices!

Or to put it another way the house price falls of 2012 and early 2013 were quickly replaced by an annual rate of house price growth of 11.8% in June 2014 according to the Nationwide. So panic at the Bank of England changed to singing along with Jeff Lynne and ELO.

Sun is shinin’ in the sky
There ain’t a cloud in sight
It’s stopped rainin’ everybody’s in a play
And don’t you know
It’s a beautiful new day, hey hey

Some of them even stopped voting for more QE as it has mostly been forgotten that nearly a quorum wanted more of it as the economy was kicking through the gears.

Although some at the Bank of England will no doubt have their minds on other matters.

Simon Clarke MP said the figures had “disturbing echoes” of the MPs’ expenses scandal. “One of the most important aspects of the culture of any public institution is of course that it provides value for money to the taxpayer,” he added.

“In the last two-and-a-half years two members of the FPC, Mr Kohn and Mr Kashyap, have incurred £390,000 in travel expenses, which is simply a staggering sum.”  ( The Guardian).

Regular readers will recall I did question a similar situation regarding Kristin Forbes on the Monetary Policy Committee who commuted back and forth from the US. I do not know if she benefitted from the sort of largesse and excess demonstrated below though.

The pair are based in the US and Clarke said the £11,084.89 flight for Kashyap from Chicago to London would leave his constituents “gobsmacked”.

Kohn spent £8,000 on a flight from Washington to London and £469 on taxis as part of expenses for a single meeting.

As ever a sort of Sir Frank ( h/t Yes Prime Minister ) was brought forward to play a forward defensive stroke.

“Having seen these committees in action, and seen the contributions they’ve made, as high as their expenses have been, also staggering has been their contribution,”

I was hoping for some enlightenment as the their “staggering contribution” as I do not recall ever hearing of them. The man who thinks this also submitted this about his role as a bank CEO so I guess he might also believe in fairies and the earth being flat.

The key, I always found, was to begin the process by
considering life from the customer’s perspective and then to build products and services that responded to real needs – whilst taking utmost care to build the TCF principles into every operational step in the firm’s business model.

Oh and I have promoted Bradley Fried the chair of the Court to a knighthood although of course those of you reading this in a couple of years or so are likely to be observing his K.

Looking ahead

Yesterday’s mortgage data from UK Finance had a two-way swing. Let us start with the positive.

Estimated gross mortgage lending for the total market in May is £22.2bn, 8.8 per cent higher than a year earlier. The number of mortgage approvals by the main high street banks in May has also risen, increasing by 3 per cent compared to the same month a year earlier.

Except that the latter sentence was not so positive when broken down.

 As in April, increased approval numbers were driven by remortgaging, some 18 per cent more than a year earlier.  In contrast, approvals for house purchase were 3.8 per cent lower than the same period a year earlier.

In case you are wondering about who or what UK Finance represents it is the new name for the BBA. The title of British Bankers Association became so toxic that they decided to move on.

Comment

So the winds of change are blowing and not only at the O2 where the Scorpions played the weekend before last. The era of Bank of England policy moves to push asset price higher is over at least for now although of course the stock as opposed to the flow remains. If it stays like that we could see house prices for once grow at a similar rate to rents and wages but I doubt it because the Bank of England is a serial offender on this front.

And when the electricity
Starts to flow
The fuse that’s on my sanity
Got to blow
System addict
I never can get enough
System addict
Never can give it up ( Five Star and I mean the pop combo not Beppe Grillo)
In the shorter-term will Mark Carney fire things up again or spend his last year here thinking about his legacy and some Queen?
Because I’m easy come, easy go
A little high, little low
Anyway the wind blows, doesn’t really matter to me, to me

Why is the Bank of England preparing for a 0% interest-rate?

Sometimes events have their own motion as after enjoying watching England in the cricket yesterday which is far from something I can always I had time to note it was Mansion House speech time. My mind turned back to 2014 when Bank of England Governor Mark Carney promised an interest-rate rise.

There’s already great speculation about the exact timing of the first-rate hike and this decision is becoming
more balanced.
It could happen sooner than markets currently expect.

Of course four years later we are still waiting for the unreliable boyfriend to match his words with deeds. Indeed last night he was sailing in completely the opposite direction as shown by this.

The additional capital means the MPC could, if necessary, re-launch the TFS in future on the Bank’s balance sheet, cementing 0% as the lower bound.

We have learnt in the credit crunch era to watch such things closely as preparations for an easing on monetary policy have so regularly turned into action as opposed to tightening for which in the UK we have yet to see an outright one. All we have is a reversal of the last error ridden cut to a 0.25% Bank Rate as I note that the extra £60 billion of QE, Corporate Bond QE and Term Funding Scheme are still in existence.

There was another mention of a 0% interest-rate later in the piece.

Although the principles guiding the MPC’s choice of threshold still hold, with the lower bound on Bank Rate
now permanently close to 0%,

In the words of Talking Heads “is it?”

The Lower Bound

This has been an area which if we keep our language neutral has been problematic for Governor Carney to say the least! For example last night’s speech mentioned an area I have flagged for some time.

relative to the effective lower bound on Bank
Rate of 0.5% at that time

When the statement was originally made there were obvious issues when we had countries that had negative interest-rates well below the “lower bound”. As an example the Swiss National Bank announced this yesterday morning.

Interest on sight deposits at
the SNB remains at −0.75% and the target range for the three-month Libor is unchanged at
between −1.25% and −0.25%

As they are already equipped for a -1.25% interest-rate and have a -0.75% one it is hard not to smile at the “lower bound” of Mark Carney. The truth in my opinion is that it means something quite different and as ever the main player is the “precious” or the banks.

In August 2016, the MPC launched the Term Funding Scheme (TFS) in order to reinforce the pass-through
of the cut in Bank Rate to 0.25% to the borrowing rates faced by households and companies.

As you can see it is badged as a benefit to you and me which of course is a perfect way to slip cheap liquidity to the banks. After all competing for savings from us must be a frightful bore for them and it is much easier to get wholesale amounts and rates from the Bank of England.

Bank of England balance sheet

There are changes here as well.

With the Chancellor’s announcement tonight of a ground-breaking new financial arrangement and capital
injection for the Bank of England, we now have a balance sheet fit for purpose and the future.

What arrangement? There will be a capital injection of £1.2 billion this year raising it to £3.5 billion. That can go as high as £5.5 billion should the Bank of England make profits bur after that it has to be returned to HM Treasury.

The gearing for liquidity operations is quite something to behold.

The additional capital will significantly increase the amount of liquidity the Bank can provide through
collateralised, market-wide facilities without needing an indemnity from HM Treasury to more than half a
trillion pounds. This lending capacity would expand to over three quarters of a trillion pounds when, as
designed, additional capital above the target level is accrued through retained earnings.

On the first number the gearing would be of the order of 140 times.Care is needed with that though as the Bank of England does insist on collateral in return for the liquidity. Mind you that is not perfect as a guardian as those who recall the episode where the Special Liquidity Scheme was ended early due to “phantom securities”. If you do not know about that the phrase itself is rather eloquent as an explanation.

Reducing the National Debt

Yesterday was  good day for data on the UK public finances but that may be dwarfed by what was announced in the speech.

Today’s announcement increases the amount of risk the Bank can carry on its balance sheet. As a result,
the Bank plans to bring the £127 billion of lending extended through the TFS onto our balance sheet by the
end of 2018/19 the financial year.

That had me immediately wondering if the Office for National Statistics will now drop the requirement for this to be added to the UK National Debt. this would bring us into line with rules elsewhere as for example if you will forgive the alphabetti spaghetti the TLTROs and LTROs of the European Central Bank are not added to the respective national debts. Such a change would reduce our national debt from 85.4% of GDP to below 80%. I am sure I am not the only person thinking that would be plenty to help finance the suggested boost to the NHS should you choose.

QE

There was a change here and this reflects the 0.5% change in the “lower bound”

Although the principles guiding the MPC’s choice of threshold still hold, with the lower bound on Bank Rate
now permanently close to 0%, the MPC views that the level from which Bank Rate can be cut materially is
now around 1.5%.
Reflecting this, the MPC now intends not to reduce the stock of purchased assets until Bank Rate reaches
around 1.5%.

Let me offer you two thoughts on this. Firstly as the Bank of England has yet to raise interest-rates from the emergency 0.5% level then discussing 1.5% or 2% is a moot point. Secondly this is a way of locking in losses as you will be driving the price of the Gilts owned lower by raising Bank Rate. Even holding the Gilts to maturity has issues because you get 100 back and in the days of the panic driven Sledgehammer QE buying where market participants saw free money coming and moved prices away the Bank of England paid way over 100.

Comment

It is hard not to have a wry smile at Governor Carney planning for a 0% Bank Rate as one of his colleagues joins those voting for a rise to 0.75%. Of course Governor Carney wants a rise to 0.75% eventually, say after his term has ended for example. The irony was that the person who has put so much effort into trying to be the next Governor voted for a rise. As to how Andy Haldane’s campaign has gone let me offer you this from Duncan Weldon.

Next month: 6 votes to hold 2 votes to hike And one vote for something involving a dog and a frisbee.

There was a time when people used to disagree with my views about Andy Haldane whereas now the silence is deafening in two respects. One is that I do not get challenged on social media about it anymore and the other is that if you look for the chorus line of support that used to exist it appears to have disappeared and in some cases been redacted.

Moving to more positive news there has been rather a good piece written by the England footballer Raheem Sterling and whilst no doubt there has been some ghostwriting the final message is very welcome I think.

England is still a place where a naughty boy who comes from nothing can live his dream.

 

 

 

 

 

 

London House Prices are falling on one measure and also rising!

This morning has seen Rightmove update us on the UK property market and in response we have learnt where Bloomberg journalists live.

London house prices fell the most since the beginning of the year in June as the capital’s property market continued to lag behind the rest of the country.

The price of property coming to market in London dropped by 0.9 percent, bringing the average price to 631,737 pounds ($838,000), property-website operator Rightmove said in a report Monday. Values fell 1 percent from a year earlier, marking the 10th negative month in a row.

The rest of the country only gets a brief look in.

Nationally, prices grew 0.4 percent on the month and 1.7 percent on an annual basis.

Then it is time to get back to the heart of the matter.

In London, “new-to-the-market sellers recognize that the traditionally busier spring selling season is drawing to a close,” said Rightmove Director Miles Shipside.

Oh and as it is Bloomberg there is a consistent scapegoat for pretty much all seasons.

London’s property market has been hit particularly badly by uncertainty surrounding Britain’s impeding exit from the European Union.

Actually we get a reminder of what Rightmove really say from property industry eye.

New asking prices have bounced up to another record, averaging £309,439.

This morning Rightmove said asking prices for properties new to the market are 0.4% up on last month, and 1.7% up on June last year.

The Rightmove data is not for the price at which property is sold it is what sellers are asking for the property or trying to get. In terms of a rising price by this measure then it is a northern thing as the stock available has declined.

From the west midlands northwards, stock has fallen away since a year ago, by between 2.2% and 10.4% in Scotland.

Stock has also dwindled in Wales, by 10.3%.

Whereas prices are under pressure from something of a wave of more housing stock coming onto the market in the south.

By contrast, the amount of available stock has shot up almost 25% on a year ago in the east of England; by 20% in the south-east; by 16.4% in London; 8.2% in the south-west; and by 4% in the east midlands.

Land of Confusion

I am using the Genesis lyric because if we move to LSL/Acadata we get told something very different about London house prices.

Despite the lack of movement in prices, there is one big change in the market this month: London and the South East are no longer a brake on the market. Taking into account these two regions, there was a 2.2% annual price growth – taking them out of the equation, the growth rate is lower – at 2.1 %. It reverses the trend of most of last year.

Although we have learnt from past experience to feel something of a chill when we read something like this.

This is partly due to a change in methodology, which better captures sales of new build properties. These tend to cost more than existing homes and have a particularly strong impact on the average price in London.

In fact the major impact from this is on flats in London.

This was particularly pronounced for flats, where new build flats sold at an average premium of almost
a third (32.3%). They also made up a substantial proportion of sales of all flats, accounting for more than a quarter (26.4%), whereas new builds accounted for just 2.4% of sales of detached properties.

Once you have done that you get this.

The revised figures in London, taking into account new build properties, show annual growth of 2.9%, the lowest since March 2012. Prices also fell on a monthly basis, down 0.3%, taking the average house price in the capital to £636,947.

In case you are no aware the issue of how to treat new builds is a difficult one and is one where the official Office for National Statistics series has had trouble too. Obviously a brand new property cannot have a price rise per se but you can calculate an index based on say quantity like size or number of bedrooms. Much more difficult and perhaps impossible is to allow for the quality of the property.

Also treating London as one market gets a bit of a critique from reality below.

A number of London boroughs are recording big falls over the 12 months to April 2018. They include the City of London (down 24.9%, albeit on a small number of sales), Southwark, down 19.1% (largely as a result of high value properties sold the year before); and Wandsworth, down 13.1%. Growth has been more modest, with only Kensington and Chelsea, the most expensive borough, recording double-digit growth, up 10.4% to £2.17 million. The next highest increase over the year was Lambeth, where prices increased 5.8%.

The issue at this level is that you are down to a small number of sales in some cases leading to large swings. For obvious reasons people like to view the data for Kensington and Chelsea but if it is based on only a handful of sales it is to say the least problematic. Although sometimes just one sale can be crystal clear at least for it.

For those wondering if the previous owners had overpaid back in 2013 I did ask.

Number Crunching

Moving on here is some Monday morning humour from the British Chambers of Commerce.

The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) has today (Monday) slightly downgraded its growth expectations for the UK economy, forecasting GDP growth for 2018 at 1.3% (from 1.4%) which, if realised, will be the weakest calendar year growth since 2009, when the economy was in the throes of the global financial crisis. The BCC has also downgraded its GDP growth forecast for 2019 from 1.5% to 1.4%.

Yes they think they can forecast GDP growth to 0.1%!

Next come courtesy of those suffering from a type of amnesia.

Households could be left up to £1,000 a year worse off because of Brexit trade barriers, a report will suggest.

Global consultancy firm Oliver Wyman will say that under the most negative scenario of high import tariffs and high regulatory barriers the cost to the economy could total £27bn.

The problem here is the authors so with the help of FT Alphaville let me show you how their crystal ball has worked out in the past.

It has long been known that consulting firm Oliver Wyman crowned Anglo Irish the world’s best bank in 2006 — just when Anglo was actually… well, you know the story.

Sadly, the report that bestowed this fateful distinction has (quite unaccountably!) vanished from the Oliver Wyman corporate site.

Or this.

North American Investment Bank – Bear Stearns (SPI 230) is the best-performing company in this year’s most improved sector, investment banking.

Comment

After a barrage of contradictory numbers let us step back and take stock. We see that the background for UK house prices is not what it was. For example the Term Funding Scheme of the Bank of England ended in February and whilst it still represents some £126.6 billion of cheap liquidity for the banks it is now gently declining. Other factors such as a 0.5% Bank Rate and £435 billion of QE have been at play in raising prices but that has worn off now. Perhaps we are still seeing the influence of the Help To Buy scheme in the North but unless prices fall more in London many are still above its cap of £600,000.

A welcome development is that house price growth seems to have fallen back in line with wage growth although of course the official numbers still disagree (3.9%). Even that development has the issue of course that it does not help with prices being much too high in many parts of the country. As to detail all we can honestly say is that house price inflation has fallen and some parts of London especially in the centre are seeing falls.

Moving onto my new measure which refers to a block of around 80 flats near the US Embassy in Nine Elms there was an improvement this week, There were signs of life (open windows etc) in 12 as opposed to 8.