Family Formation & Housing

For young couples starting families, buying their first home and/or other real estate. Covers mortgages, credit cards, interest rates, children’s education savings plans, joint accounts for couples and the like.

Real Estate Investing: The good and bad of investing in real estate

Posted By |

By David Miller, CFP, RFP

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Real estate can be a differentiator in a diversified investment portfolio. But when you watch the pundits in the media and certain TV network shows, as seen on HGTV, buying, flipping or renting a property seems like a sure way to increase your income or get rich quick. As glamourous as it seems when you take a sledgehammer to a useless wall to ‘open up the space’, the reality of making it a marketable investment is often much more daunting. What really is daunting is the sheer number of options you have when it comes to investing in real estate, and the obvious question is:

Does it make financial sense to add real estate to your portfolio?

The Positives

Real Estate does make sense in most investment portfolios but let us back up a little bit here and provide some context:

What are the primary reasons people choose real estate as an investment?

There is something reassuring about investing in real estate, as in the case of owning a rental property. You own a tangible asset and you may feel like you can see the value and the risks just by walking through the property. You may own your home, and assuming you are mortgage free, brings an incredible feeling of security and freedom.

Real estate investing can offer a stable, reoccurring income; after all, ‘who doesn’t pay their mortgage or rent?’ It also carries a fairly high certainty of a higher value over the long term; after all, “they are not making more land” (unless you’re in the South China Sea or Dubai). These are two common positive arguments.

If you look specifically at Canada, there can be times when your rate of return can be incredibly high. We experienced this with Calgary’s real estate boom from 2005-2007. The Greater Toronto Area and Greater Vancouver area from 2015-2018 have seen incredibly high growth and price increases that have been covered extensively through the media.

Real estate investing provides an interesting option that is not directly tied to overall stock market risk, which can provide you with increased diversification. Whether the stock market goes up or down, your real estate price may move independently.

The wealthy endowment funds, private pensions, institutional money and the Canada Pension Plan invest heavily in real estate, private equity and infrastructure projects that average Canadian investors either don’t know about, can’t invest or don’t invest into.

To summarize, the benefits of a real estate investment are that it is a tangible, generally stable income producing, ‘always goes up’ investment and offers other benefits not seen in the stock market. Ready to jump in with both feet? Not so fast. There are some serious pitfalls to understand and multiple options to choose from.

How can I invest into real estate?

  • Buy a rental property (putting at least 20% down)
  • Buy a commercial building
  • Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)
  • Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) of REITs
  • Mutual funds specializing in real estate
  • Private equity or debt (Mortgage pools/investment corps)

Primary Issues

Price Risk

Can real estate values fluctuate? The real answer is yes. Nationally, Canadian housing prices reduced by 4.9% on average in 2018, the worst performance since the 2008 financial crisis. Toronto and Vancouver skew the average price to high side, but even they are starting to fall off their 2017/18 highs and there are obvious concerns of a bubble bursting.

Prices for real estate are difficult to gauge as every property is different and value is in the eye of the beholder. To sell your property, you likely need to employ a realtor to get a starting price and you need to find someone else who agrees on the price to buy. Real estate negotiations can go awry quickly, which causes further delays regarding the liquidity. For this service, there is a sales cost paid to the realtor, usually 7% of the first 100,000 and 3% after, although this can be sometimes negotiated.

In an example of how poor the Calgary commercial real estate market is; this*is an article that explains how the city of Calgary is losing over $300 million in tax revenue every year as downtown core commercial property values have decreased by a collective $12 billion. This is an example of how real estate values can fluctuate to the downside and how unstable a source of income a real estate investment could be.

See the chart below for the relative volatility of the selected Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver markets when compared with the US Equity and Canadian Equity markets. While the annual volatility in the S&P 500 and TSX has been much higher relatively, this chart shows that you could lose out if you sell your real estate holding at the wrong time or pick the wrong city or neighbourhood to invest in.

 

Calgary data via CREB Monthly Average Sale Price “Attached, Detached, Apartment”, Jan 2005 to Dec 2018. Vancouver Data via CREA.ca HPI Tool Greater Vancouver Composite historical price data Jan 2005 to Dec 2018. Toronto Data via CREA.ca HPI Tool Greater Toronto Composite historical price data Jan 2005 to Dec 2018. TSX data via tmxmoney.com price history. S&P 500 data via http://www.multpl.com/s-p-500-historical-prices/table/by-year. The chart above only looks at price change and does not factor the effects of leveraging or reinvestment of interest or dividends.

Liquidity Risk

Liquidity refers to how quickly you can get your money out if you change your mind about your investment. Are you prepared to invest money into a residence only to find out it’s a money pit? What happens when you struggle to sell it when the market turns, and you could really use the extra money for something else? What if there is an emergency and you need those funds and there is no liquidity? If you are buying a stock or ETF on a major open market, the level of liquidity can be measured in volume of shares bought or sold and shares usually change hands instantaneously. While investing in stocks should be a long-term investment, at least you have the option to get out at any time almost instantly. The same is generally true in real estate; however, the liquidity premium is significantly higher. Continue Reading…

Enable, don’t label … but whatever you do don’t call them ‘seniors’!

Posted By |

By Yvonne Ziomecki, HomeEquity Bank

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

When you are a marketer you tend to look at advertising through a different lens than everyone else – sometimes you are critical, sometimes curious, and sometimes you just admire the genius.  But it’s hard to assess your own advertising through the same lens, especially when you are in your mid forties and the product you market is for people who are retired.  That’s when you call for help!

Last summer our company HomeEquity Bank, provider of CHIP Reverse Mortgages, launched new advertising campaign through a series of humorous ads developed and based on research insights, addressing the fact that older Canadians see themselves as active and able and completely in control of financial decisions related to their home.

Specifically: staying in the home they love.  Our research showed that 93%+ of older Canadians want to age in place.  We also learned that 80% of older Canadians don’t want to be called ‘Seniors’ and most prefer no labels to describe them or their peer group.

In order to better understand if our ads were hitting the mark we engaged the neuroscience research firm Brainsights to study the unconscious brain activity of 300 Canadian Boomers. Research participants were presented with approximately 1 hour of advertisements including our ads, other ads, movie trailers, promotional videos, etc.  Brainsights analyzed participants’ responses to all the content they saw. The findings revealed not only that many marketers were engaging in unconscious age bias, but also that Boomers were pushing back against offensive labels and aging stereotypes.

Research revealed 4 insights to help marketing resonate with Boomers:

•  Say goodbye to old age stereotypes. Today’s Boomers see themselves as being cheeky, mischievous, adventurous and capable. Old age stereotypes depicting 55+ Canadians as frail and fumbling will miss the mark. Continue Reading…

How federal housing policies could impact first-time homebuyers

Posted By |

By Jordan Lavin, Ratehub.ca

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

For a little more than a decade, the Federal Government has been making policies that make it harder to buy your first home in Canada.

It’s hard to blame them. The great recession of 2008-09 was principally caused by a crash in the U.S. housing market which, in turn, had been caused by lax mortgage lending standards. Hundreds of thousands of people bought homes they couldn’t really afford, and were later foreclosed on or forced to sell. Left behind was a glut of housing inventory and an equal glut of people who had lost everything. The ripple effect was felt throughout the world, including here in Canada.

Fortunately, the mortgage problem was isolated to the United States. But the repercussions hit Canada hard, and interest rates fell to unprecedented lows as a response to the worsening economic situation. During the recovery, mortgage rates in Canada continued to fall and house prices quickly rose. In hot markets like Vancouver and Toronto, the average price of a home nearly doubled between 2010 and 2016.

All this left government officials on this side of the border wondering if it was possible for the mortgage and housing market to fail here. With the compounding worry of a housing market crash – what if prices went back down as quickly as they had gone up? – they began making new policies with the goal of making it more difficult for Canadians to qualify for a mortgage, especially if that mortgage were to be insured by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC).

Among the changes: Limiting amortization length for insured mortgages to 25 years; Limiting CHMC insurance to homes purchased for under $1-million only; Establishing a minimum down payment of 5% and then increasing the minimum for homes over $500,000; and expanding a “stress test” to eventually force all mortgage borrowers to qualify at a higher interest rate than they would actually pay.

This cocktail proved poisonous for first-time homebuyers. High house prices, harder qualification criteria and lower earning potential forced first-time homebuyers to get creative, finding new ways to afford homes.

Today, the government is looking at two new policy changes that could have an impact on first-time homebuyers.

A return to 30-year insured mortgages for first-time homebuyers

Currently, the longest you can take to pay back an insured mortgage (mortgage insurance is usually required when you have a down payment of less than 20%) is 25 years. But one policy change the government says they’re looking at is increasing that limit to 30 years.

This is a boon to affordability, at least at the qualification level. Ratehub’s mortgage payment calculator shows that the monthly payment on a $500,000 mortgage at today’s best rate of 3.29% will be $2,441 when amortized over 25 years, or $2,181 when amortized over 30 years. Since mortgage affordability is based on a fraction of your income, a lower payment equals a higher purchase price you can qualify for.

But there’s a significant downside. The obvious is the additional 5 years of mortgage payments later in life. If you’re over 35, signing a new 30-year mortgage could keep you making payments into retirement. Continue Reading…

Prairies and Eastern Canada most affordable for single home buyers, study says

Posted By |

By Penelope Graham, Zoocasa

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Despite recent reports that home prices in Canada’s tightest markets are starting to cool, skyrocketing values over the last five years mean purchasing real estate is still financially unfeasible for many prospective buyers – especially those trying to do so on their own.

However, while this certainly is the case in the Vancouver and Toronto markets – where average home prices rose 35 and 58% between 2014 – 2019, respectively – a new study from Zoocasa reveals homeownership isn’t out of the cards for buyers willing to expand their search.

Where can single purchasers afford a home?

To find which markets can be considered affordable on a solo budget, the study sourced average home prices for 20 cities across the nation. It then calculated, assuming a 20% down payment, mortgage rate of 3.29%, and a 30-year amortization, the minimum income required to purchase the average home in each market. That amount was then compared to actual median income data of “persons living alone who earned employment income” as reported by Statistics Canada.

The numbers reveal that for single purchasers earning the median income, 10 markets can still be considered affordable: and all are located within the Prairie and Eastern Canadian provinces.

Regina takes the top spot for single buyer affordability; there, an earner bringing in$58,823 would qualify to purchase a home at the average price of $284,424, and have an “income surplus” of $20,025. This surplus indicates the buyer is not purchasing at the top of their affordability, an important consideration when interest rates are on the rise.

The other most affordable cities include Saint John, where the average home priced at $181,576 could be purchased on an income of $42,888 with $18,038 left over, and homes on the Edmonton MLS, where earning $64,036 would net a $17,826 surplus on the average home price of $338,760. Calgary, Lethbridge, Winnipeg, and Halifax can also be considered to be affordable markets based on the study’s criteria.

Vancouver, Toronto, still well out of financial range for solo buyers

On the least affordable end of the scale is Vancouver, where the average home costs $1,109,600: out of the range of the local median single income of $50,721 to the tune of $88,361.

Affordability also remains steep for single buyers in the Toronto market, despite overall higher earnings and lower average home price: there, an income of $55,221 would fall $46,858 on the average home price of $748,328. Victoria rounds out the top three with an average home price of $633,386, $39,359 below what the median income of $86,400 can afford. Continue Reading…

FP: How retired seniors can use their spouse as a tax asset

Posted By |

My latest Financial Post column has just been published in the print edition of the Wednesday paper (Feb. 27, page FP8), under the headline Top tax asset in Retirement? Think Spouse. Click on the highlighted text to access the full story  via the National Post e-paper. Or for the website edition, click on this clever headline: Your biggest tax asset in Retirement may be sleeping right beside you.

The column looks at how senior couples approaching Retirement or semi-retirement face a slightly different tax situation than when both were working in full-time jobs. There’s limited scope for income splitting when you’re working but Pension Income Splitting — introduced more than ten years ago — is a real boon for senior couples that enjoy one fat employer-provided pension and the other does not.

For tax purposes, up to half of the pension can be “transferred” to the lower-income spouse’s hands, thereby reducing some of the highly-taxed income for the pension recipient, and putting more of the pension into the low-taxed hands of the spouse receiving some of the transfer. Note this doesn’t actually mean they receive the pension: it all happens on the tax returns, and is easily handled by tax software when you choose to file your taxes jointly as a couple. Note that unlike in the United States, there is no formal joint tax return for couples in Canada: each spouse must file on their own but the tax software makes it relatively smooth by creating so-called “Coupled Returns,” which helps optimize who claims deductions like charitable or political contributions and the like.

Because the column has to fit in the paper and included several sources (some of whom blog here at the Hub), I’ve taken the liberty of adding some of the points made that did not appear in the column or had to be truncated.

Income splitting options limited under age 65

Under age 65, the options for income splitting are very limited, says Aaron Hector, vice president of Calgary-based Doherty Bryant Financial Strategies.  “Generally here you are only looking at payments out of defined benefit plans (of which  up to 50% can be split) or spousal loans from non-registered investments.”

Doherty Bryant’s Aaron Hector

More from Aaron Hector:  “If each spouse has their own registered plan (RRSP/RRIF/LIRA/LIF) then the withdrawal from their own personal plan can be taxed fully to them. So if one spouse is working, they may not need or want to draw any additional income from their registered plans, but the spouse who is not working can choose to draw down their registered plan. It is important to note that regular RRSP withdrawals will never qualify for income splitting, even after 65. The withdrawals need to come from a RRIF to be eligible for income splitting. Sometimes people are hesitant to convert their RRSPs into RRIFs because they don’t yet want to commit to the subsequent forced annual taxable RRIF withdrawals. What is less commonly known is that someone can convert only a portion of their RRSP into a RRIF, leaving the remaining RRSP balance untouched until it is forced into being converted into a RRIF by the end of the year in which they turn 71. Furthermore, if someone converts to a RRIF early (ie. before 71) then they will always have the option to convert their RRIF back into a RRSP anytime before 71. Doing so would allow them to ‘turn off the taps’ that is the RRIF income stream. Once you turn 65 (but not before) withdrawals from RRIFs and LIFs become eligible for income splitting. Only the spouse who’s RRIF/LIF is being drawn upon needs to be 65; the recipient of the income splitting can be younger than 65. However, in this case the recipient spouse will not get the “pension income tax credit” until they are also 65.

It’s also important to note that when it comes to these income splitting provisions, age 65 at any point of the year is sufficient. If you turn 65 on December 31, then the same 50% splitting provisions apply to you as if your birthday was on January 1. (ie. the splittable portion does not get pro-rated in the year you turn 65 depending on your specific birth date). Because of the age 65 significance, and also as a hedge against future governments changing the tax rules (ie. taking away pension income splitting rules, which have not always been allowable) I try to have my client couples have an even amount of money in their registered plans. Spouse 1 should add up their RRSP, LIRA, Spousal RRSP, etc.. and the total should be close to the same total of spouse 2. If there is a discrepancy, then Spousal RRSP contributions should be utilized to even things out. This allows flexibility in income planning and withdrawals in the years prior to age 65. I caution on Spousal RRSP contributions the closer someone is to needing the money because of the 3 year-rule. The 3-year rule is such that if a withdrawal is made in the year of a contribution, or either of the next two calendar years, then the income from that withdrawal will be attributed (ie. taxed) back to the contributing spouse instead of the Spousal RRSP account holder.”

Taxation of Non-registered income works differently

Income from non-registered accounts works a bit differently, Aaron notes: Continue Reading…