Financial Debt

<html><body>
Quite surprising that nothing has been said when last Friday, the Australian government debt ticked just over $475 billion.
For the last twelve months, the government on average has been borrowing $6.35 billion each month, so what happens when they hit the debt ceiling of $500 billion? Will that then bring an end to Australia’s prized membership of the AAA – rated club?
Standard &amp; Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch have just 9 countries in the AAA club – Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and Switzerland. Should our membership be revoked that would mean that borrowing costs would increase overnight, which is not a good sign for the Australian economy. The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) currently estimates that Australian small businesses currently owe $13 billion in unpaid tax debts. Obviously, there is no impact on existing debt although when it comes time to refinance then that would be an entirely different story.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.03.18%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.03.18%20AM.png" alt="">
With the federal government recently weighing into the housing affordability debacle there are two things that I would immediately implement to critique our housing markets.
The ATO has taken over responsibility for being Australia’s biggest property manager so land banking must be the first point of call. It is estimated that Sydney now has well over 100,000 permanently vacant apartments so they should be rented out to ease the rental crisis. Look at the lost revenues the ATO is missing out on with these land banked properties, where the clear majority are owned by overseas investors. Land banking in Australia must be outlawed.
Reverse the ridiculous off-the-plan ratio back to 50 percent from 100 percent to overseas buyers. We are now going into the ninth year of 100 percent and the only clear impact we are seeing is that foreign investors have become a most dominant player. In 2016, Chinese developers acquired almost 40 percent of the Australian residential sites that were offered to the marketplace. All these properties are offered exclusively to Asia and these properties are not available for local buyers. Reducing the ratio back to 50 percent would have a big impact on housing affordability.
 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.04.36%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.04.36%20AM.png" alt="">
A recent survey by Roy Morgan Research found that approximately 7 per cent of Australian mortgage holders have little or zero equity in their homes in the twelve months to October 2016. That would equate to approximately 300,000 properties across Australia. Western Australia has the highest number with 54,000, followed by South Australia with 27,000, Queensland with 63,000, Melbourne has 50,000, Victoria has 65,000, NSW has 73,000 and Sydney has 33,000. Tasmania came in with 5,000 – these are concerning numbers when you consider the east coast has enjoyed unprecedented capital appreciation.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.05.32%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/02/20/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-20%20at%209.05.32%20AM.png" alt="">
Since 2009, Sydney home values have doubled and Melbourne have climbed 85 percent. In 2011, less than 10 percent of investors held multiple investment properties, according to Digital Finance Analytics. This has now grown to 16 percent nationally, and on the east coast multiple investment properties is now approximately 18 percent.
Really makes one wonder, just what data our elected politicians and policy makers are actually looking at or quite possibly, they don’t even understand this data?
The most recent data from CoreLogic shows that the rental yields in Sydney and Melbourne are on the decline. For Sydney, houses yield is 2.8 percent and units are 3.8 percent. In Melbourne, houses are 2.7 percent and units are 4.0 percent. It will be most interesting to see just how low these yields will go with all the new developments entering the market. It is quite clear that investors have been enjoying the unprecedented capital growth over rental yields in Sydney and Melbourne, although this is about to change.
With very few alternate investment opportunities, we don’t at this particular point in time expect to see investors retreating out of the market, although we do expect to see carnage in the CBD markets. This should not come as a great surprise as these markets have introduced thousands and thousands of new apartments, and many suburbs have constructed less than one hundred new apartments.
Whatever the case, if you like watching real estate machinations 2017 will keep you highly entertained.
To add to this, the Commonwealth Bank advised mortgage brokers this week, that from February 13, it will cease accepting refinancing applications for investment home loans. Will the other major lenders then follow suit?
ROBERT SIMEON is a director of <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/">Richardson Wrench Mosman and Neutral Bay</a> and has been selling residential real estate in Sydney since 1985. 
He has also been writing real estate blog <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/news/">Virtual Realty News</a> since 2000.
</body></html>

robertsimeon-hRNTwJyXkQ

The ticking time bomb in our property markets: Robert Simeon

<html><body>
The Agency have again pushed back their debt repayment with their major funder Macquarie.
Earlier this week The Agency, set up in 2017 by a band of former McGrath agents, updated shareholders <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/112120-the-agency-secure-two-week-extension-on-financing-as-staff-hours-get-cut" target="_blank">that they negotiated a two week extension</a> on their debt repayment to their tier one funder.
It pushed the March 31 payment to April 9.
The Agency have negotiated a further extension, with the repayment date now pushed until after Easter, April 14.
"The Board will provide a further update to the market closer to the conclusion of the extension period", the ASX update advised.
The Agency's share price has dropped 20 per cent since the initial announcement, with shares now trading at ¢4, down from ¢5.
In their first debt payment extension notice, The Agency advised it had been in discussions with other credible debt providers regarding refinancing of its primary bank debt.
All non-commissioned staff at The Agency will see their hours cut, effective mid-April, given the reduced workloads due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. 
 
 
 
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

The Agency gets funding extension until after Easter

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
<h1>The number of Australian's with no savings has increased.</h1>
If you needed A$2,000 in a hurry where would you get it? <a href="https://www.csi.edu.au/financialresilience/" target="_blank">70% of those we surveyed</a> said they would ask friends or family, although almost half said that it’s very or fairly unlikely that their social connections could help.
This is just one of the takeaways from our <a href="https://www.csi.edu.au/financialresilience" target="_blank">new report</a>, funded by NAB, that shows financial resilience is declining in Australia. Large numbers of Australians are struggling to meet expenses, pay bills and manage or recover from financial shocks despite two decades of <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/chart-pack/au-gdp-growth" target="_blank">GDP growth</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/income-inequality-ticks-down-as-the-rich-see-their-incomes-fall-abs-83883" target="_blank">declining income inequality</a> and <a href="https://www.csi.edu.au/financialresilience" target="_blank">increasing financial capability</a>.
And while more adults in Australia are reporting regular social contact, and fewer are reporting needing community or government support, the number of Australians needing support but not receiving it has increased from 3.2% to 5.3%.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/RhNx5/9/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
The problem is especially acute for those on low incomes. A recent <a href="https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/research/projects/a-new-healthy-living-minimum-income-standard-for-low-paid-and-unemployed-australians/" target="_blank">report</a> found most low-income households are unable to afford a minimum and healthy standard of living, with their incomes falling short by between A$9 and A$89 a week.
In this week’s <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6530.0Main%20Features72015-16?opendocument&amp;tabname=Summary&amp;prodno=6530.0&amp;issue=2015-16&amp;num=&amp;view=" target="_blank">Household Expenditure Survey</a>, the Australian Bureau of Statistics found that two in every five households are experiencing at least one indicator of financial stress. In households with incomes in the bottom 40%, this ratio increases to one in two.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/TzNNI/1/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
People on the lowest incomes <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6530.0Main%20Features72015-16?opendocument&amp;tabname=Summary&amp;prodno=6530.0&amp;issue=2015-16&amp;num=&amp;view=" target="_blank">are</a>:
<ul>
<li>12 times more likely to be unable to raise A$2,000 in a week for something important</li>
<li>Five times more likely to be unable to pay a utility bill on time</li>
<li>Ten times more likely to be unable to heat their homes than the highest income households.</li>
</ul>
The lowest income households are also more likely to be socially isolated than the highest income group. For example, they were at least ten times more likely to be unable to afford a special meal once a week or a night out once a month.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/US8vA/3/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
As you can see in the above graphic, the proportion of Australian adults who are financially secure has decreased significantly between 2015 and 2016, from 35.7% to 31.2%. One in eight Australians (12.6%) now experience severe or high financial stress, up from 11.1%.
In practical terms financial stress may mean a combination of limited or no savings; difficulties meeting everyday living expenses, managing debts and raising funds in an emergency; no direct access to a bank account; no access to appropriate and affordable credit and/or low levels of social support.
When you dig deeper into the data you see this is not a problem of behaviour or financial literacy. The decline in financial resilience has occurred despite a significant improvement in the proportion of people with moderate to high levels of financial knowledge and behaviour (from 50% to 55%).
This includes a knowledge of, and confidence using, financial products and services. And a willingness to seek financial advice and engage in proactive behaviours like saving, budgeting and paying more than required on debts.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/u21Ej/3/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
This leads to the conclusion that the cause of the decrease in financial resilience is due to a decline in external resources. This means people having enough money to meet living expenses and manage debts, and having access to a bank account, appropriate credit, insurance and being able to access social and community supports when needed.
We can see this by looking at data on savings.
More Australians are saving (up to 60.2% in 2016 from 56.4%). However, as you can see in the chart below, the total amount of savings has declined. Only one in two people had three months or more of income saved (a drop from 51.9% in 2015 to 49.5% in 2016). And people with savings of a month or less increased from 27.3% to 31.6%.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Xxy7t/5/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
More Australians are budgeting, too. With 51.6% following a budget in the latest survey as compared to 49.1% in 2015.
The data also shows us that an inability to access appropriate financial products and services affects a large number of Australians. This was mainly driven by increases in the number of people who only had indirect access to a bank account (from 1.2% in 2015 to 2.7% in 2016) and increases in the number of people who had no access to appropriate credit (20.2% in 2015 compared to 25.6% in 2016).
Appropriate and affordable credit is important to assist people who cannot draw on savings when they experience financial shocks, such as the sudden need to replace a washing machine or fridge, or to fix a car needed to get to work.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rJeuR/2/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
As we can see, stories of economic growth and declining income inequality aren’t capturing the whole picture. It is important that we don’t overlook the large number of people and households in Australia who are experiencing high levels of financial stress, who are struggling to pay the bills and meet basic living expenses.
Our research shows that large numbers of people and households are not prepared, or adequately supported, should a financial shock (such as an increase in interest rates or a recession) materialise.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84053/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">While most people have strong social support; more appropriate, affordable and accessible financial support from the government, communities and financial institutions is required. This is along with appropriate mechanisms to help identify people most at risk and to cross refer where required.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kristy-muir-158422" target="_blank">Kristy Muir</a>, Professor of Social Policy / Research Director, Centre for Social Impact, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414" target="_blank">UNSW</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/axelle-marjolin-161212" target="_blank">Axelle Marjolin</a>, Researcher at the Centre for Social Impact, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414" target="_blank">UNSW</a>
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/income-inequality-may-be-declining-but-financial-vulnerability-is-increasing-84053" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Income inequality may be declining but financial vulnerability is increasing

<html><body>
The aggregate household debt-to-income ratio has increased further in recent years, rising from already high levels according to RBA’s Financial Stability Review 2017.
This has raised concerns about the household sector’s resilience to unexpected declines in income or asset prices.
Debt-to-income ratios vary substantially across households; roughly 30 per cent of households owe no debt, while some other households have debt-to-income ratios that are well above the average.
One important issue for financial stability is the number and characteristics of highly indebted households.
These households are most likely to have difficulty repaying debt and sustaining consumption if their circumstances change.
If the number of highly indebted households is large, their response to adverse income shocks could amplify and propagate an economic downturn, declines in housing prices and losses at financial institutions.
This article outlines some of the characteristics of highly indebted households.
Household-level information on the distribution of debt, income and wealth is available in the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey, which collects data on owner-occupier mortgage debt every year and provides a detailed breakdown of total household debt every four years (most recently in 2014).
These data indicate that the share of households with very high debt-to-income ratios was little changed between 2006 and 2014 (Graph C1).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C1.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C1.jpg" alt="">
In contrast, the proportion of households with more moderate debt-to- income ratios increased steadily, while the share of less indebted households declined.
However, because the latest HILDA data on total debt are for 2014, it is not possible to discern whether these trends have continued more recently.
The aggregate ratio of debt to income was overall little changed between 2006 and 2014, but has since risen.
There are several ways to classify household indebtedness.
The approach used here is to classify ‘highly indebted’ households as those with debt-to-income ratios in the top 10 per cent of indebted households in a given survey year.
Over the 10 years to 2014, most households in this group had a debt-to-income ratio above 550 per cent and as a group these households accounted for around 35–40 per cent of total household debt.
While the median debt-to-income ratio of the top 10 per cent of indebted households increased sharply from around 600 per cent to over 750 per cent between 2002 and 2006, it was little changed between 2006 and 2014.
Highly indebted households steadily became more leveraged between 2002 and 2014, with the median debt-to-asset ratio of these households rising from around 50 per cent to just under 60 per cent.
The type of debt owed by highly indebted households was different to that for less indebted households.
Less indebted households mostly had owner-occupier housing debt, while highly indebted households owed a rising share of ‘other’ property debt, most of which was investor housing debt (Graph C2).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C2.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C2.jpg" alt="">
Between 2002 and 2014, the average share of highly indebted households’ total debt comprised of ‘other’ property debt increased from around 20 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
The HILDA Survey also includes information on the repayment behaviour of households.
As might be expected, highly indebted households were less likely to be ahead of schedule on both owner-occupier debt and ‘other’ housing debt than less indebted households (Graph C3).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C3.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C3.jpg" alt="">
Part of the reason is that they tended to have newer mortgage debt that had less time to amortise.
Nonetheless, the share of highly indebted households ahead of schedule on their owner-occupier debt rose between 2006 and 2014, which suggests that, like other borrowers, these households took advantage of low interest rates to pay down debt at a faster rate.
The share of highly indebted households ahead of schedule on ‘other’ property debt was lower, and increased only a little between 2006 and 2010.
This is unsurprising given the greater tax incentives to retain debt on rental properties than on owner-occupier properties.
Around one-quarter of highly indebted households were in the bottom two quintiles for income and wealth, which is a higher share than for less indebted households (Graph C4).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C4.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C4.jpg" alt="">
Lower-income households tend to devote a higher share of their income to essential living expenses (leaving less income for debt servicing), while households with lower wealth may be less able to sell assets to resolve any difficulties in servicing their debt.
Nonetheless, a relatively small share of the total stock of debt owed by highly indebted households was owed by lower income or lower wealth households.
In 2014, for instance, households in the bottom two income quintiles accounted for only 12 per cent of total debt owed by highly indebted households.
Using HILDA, it is possible to track highly indebted households over time. Households that were highly indebted in a particular year tended to reduce their debt-to-income ratios substantially in subsequent years.
For instance, in 2002 households that were highly indebted had a median debt-to-income ratio of 600 per cent, yet by 2006 the median debt-to-income ratio of these particular households had fallen to below 350 per cent and their debt-to-income ratio had fallen further by 2010 (Graph C5, left panel).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C5.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/19/Graph%20C5.jpg" alt="">
The HILDA Survey also includes questions on financial stress experienced by households over the previous year.
There was a broad-based decline in the share of households experiencing episodes of financial stress between 2001 and 2015 (the time span available in the HILDA Survey).
Nonetheless, households that were highly indebted in a particular year had a greater propensity to experience financial stress.
For instance, households that were highly indebted in 2002 were more likely to experience at least one incidence of financial stress in all other years compared with households that were less indebted in 2002 (Graph C5, right panel).
The result also holds true for other cohorts.
This suggests that a greater share of highly indebted households face financial difficulties and are more likely to be vulnerable to events that affect their ability to repay their debt, such as income declines or increases in interest rates.
Overall, these data highlight that highly indebted households can be more vulnerable to negative economic shocks and pose risks to financial stability.
In particular, highly indebted households are less likely to be ahead of schedule on their mortgage repayments and they are more likely to experience financial stress, hence could be more vulnerable to adverse macroeconomic shocks.
The consequent effects of this stress on the broader economy may be exacerbated by the disproportionately large share of investor housing debt owed by highly indebted households.
Heightened investor demand can contribute to the amplification of the cycles in borrowing and housing prices, particularly when this investment is highly leveraged.
Nonetheless, HILDA data also show that much of the debt held by highly indebted households is owed by households with high income and wealth, who are typically better placed to service larger amounts of debt.
Find the RBA's latest Financial Stability Review 2017 <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Financial Debt

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Financial Debt

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News