sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

House prices may continue to rise over short term, but unlikely to resume momentum seen last decade, Reserve Bank says

House prices may continue to rise over short term, but unlikely to resume momentum seen last decade, Reserve Bank says

New Zealand house prices may continue to rise over the short term but are unlikely to develop the momentum seen over the last decade, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand says.

While tight housing supply, particularly in Auckland, was a factor currently contributing to rising prices, sustained momentum seemed unlikely. Housing credit growth remained subdued, and many homeowners already had significant debt loads, making it more difficult to ‘trade up,’ the Reserve Bank said in its May 2012 Financial Stability Report.

House prices still appeared elevated on a number of measures, such as relative to incomes and rents, it said.

The Reserve Bank noted the Productivity Commission’s report on housing affordability released earlier this year, which made recommendations targeted at making the supply of new housing more responsive to demand.

With still-high household indebtedness, sharp falls in house prices remained a key financial stability risk for the New Zealand economy, the Reserve Bank said. A period of stagnation in the housing market had helped to reduce this risk, with nationwide house prices sitting slightly  below their nominal 2007 peak.

In line with this stagnation, transaction activity within the housing market had been low or the past five years. Buyers became more hesitant in the weaker financial climate, and some prospective sellers chose to wait for better market conditions.

More recently, the housing market had started to return towards more normal levels of activity, in part spurred by lower interest rates, the Bank said.

“House prices are now rising again and a significant resurgence would be of concern given that they still appear elevated on a number of metrics, such as relative incomes and rents,” the Reserve Bank said.

“While house prices may continue to rise over the short term, they seem unlikely to develop the sort of momentum seen over the 2002-2007 period,” the Bank said.

“Even if confidence becomes strong, many homeowners already have significant debt loads that make it more difficult to trade up, and banks may not be willing to expand lending to the sector at fast rates in the current funding environment,” it said.

Tight supply

A factor driving recent increases in house prices had been tight supply.

“House building has been low for the past four years compared to historical rates, and relative to population growth,” the Reserve Bank said.

“The average number of people per dwelling has risen on a national basis after trending down for some years. This rise could signal pent up demand, although it may also be that post-crisis there is lower demand for housing (less interest in owning second homes, and more interest in sharing accommodation, for example),” it said.

“The Productivity Commission has recently published a study of housing affordability that makes recommendations targeted at making housing supply more responsive to demand.”

Underbuilding relative to estimated population growth was most pronounced in Auckland, where the property market had been robust recently. Prices in Auckland had increased 5.9% over the past year and sales activity had been strong.

The Reserve Bank said Auckland house prices were back at their peak nominal levels recorded in 2007, which was not true in most other regions. Rents in Auckland were also increasing relatively rapidly, it said.

Credit growth slow-down

Weak credit growth over recent years signalled a change in household behaviour, the Reserve Bank said.

“Since 2007 credit growth has slowed significantly from peak annual growth of NZ$19 billion to less than NZ$2 billion currently,” it said.

Only around half this slowdown in credit growth could be explained by the slowdown in house sales, based on the correlation between the value of house sales and net credit growth. The unexplained component of the slowdown – about NZ$8 billion over the past year – was likely to be due to a range of factors.

Scheduled principal repayments had picked up modestly over the past few years as the mortgage stock had aged and lower interest rates had front-loaded principal repayments.

“More significantly, anecdotal reports from banks indicate that the number of households making principal payments ahead of schedule has increased, with many households using some of the savings from lower interest rates to make these payments,” the Reserve Bank said.

“If all of the interest savings from lower mortgage rates were being used to make excess mortgage payments, this could explain around half of the unusual decline in credit growth. Some households may have also paid back debt by increasing their saving over and above the effect of lower interest rates, or allocating savings away from investments towards debt repayment,” the Bank said.

The gradual reduction in house prices since 2007 had helped to reduce credit growth.

“Before 2007, rapidly rising house prices meant that new buyers had to take on more debt to purchase property from existing owners who had built up large equity positions through capital gains. People reselling property bought in recent years are likely to have less accumulated equity, while for buyers, banks have tightened up on new lending with very high loan-to-value ratios,” it said.

“These factors are likely to have reduced the extent to which housing turnover drives net credit growth. On the other hand, the continuing relationship between mortgage approvals and housing transactions suggests that borrowing behaviour by purchasing households may not have changed materially.”

Equity withdrawal down, insurance payouts deposited

Anecdotal evidence also suggested there had been less topping up of existing mortgages (active equity withdrawal) over the past few years, the Reserve Bank said.

"There is currently no reliable way to gauge how important this has been, but it is likely to have been another factor behind weak credit growth," it said.

"Finally, a temporary factor is the payouts from the Canterbury earthqukes. To date it is estimated that around NZ$3 billion has entered the banking system from insurance payouts, some of which may have been used to reduce outstanding mortgage balances until rebuilding activity starts," the Bank said.

No chart with that title exists.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

38 Comments

So House prices will rise over the short term followed by another short term and so on.

With regulatory costs, labour costs, land prices and materials costs rising as i type , you can be assured the end product HOUSES will cost more.

These costs are increasing at a greater rate than wage increases, so if you cant afford a house now, you certainly wont in a years time.

The neglect and massive decline of the New Zealand building industry will cause a massive effect on the next cycle.

On previous cycles there has always been the skilled labour force available to meet demand.

There are now over 2000 Kiwi builders in NSW and QLD, ironically building houses for New Kiwi arrivals.

And with a First Home Owners Grant and a QLD $10 000 Builders Boost why wouldnt you.

With the massive fraud - colapse of the finance companies money is tight and Residential Property Developers are finding it very difficult to raise funds, ironically for a product that is abundantly apparent to be in huge demand?

So the thin vineer of supply will not meet thick heavy demand any time soon as there is a tremendous amount of lag when developing subdivisions (2 - 3 years and even building a rudimentary generic house can take 5 months. Its not like running 20 000 lightbulbs overnight.

And what of the INTERNATIONAL harm of not having a decent housing supply, expats wont come home/ cant afford to return anyone thinking of moving to NZ quickly recognise Australia as the cheaper and easier route to home ownership.

So unless huge wage increases are coming in next week, get ready for generational renting, and with almost nil rental stock being constructed, (99% is owner occupier construction) get ready to bid for your rent or take out long term leases for residential housing.

It's not like people on this Forum havent discussed this and brought it to the attention of Government, it would be nice to even say to little to late, but no effort has been made to stem the demise of the New Zealand Building Sector.

Now with the closure of Mainstream Franchised building suppliers closing massive stores across NZ and laying off staff and NZ building half the amount of houses required  the numbers might jolt someones attention.

Imagined we halved the Banking and Finance industry.

Imagined we halved Agriculture or Forestry Tourism.

Imagined we Halved Governemnt.

Up
0

Indeed 'crunch time' approaches.

 

When you say: " expats wont come home/ cant afford to return anyone thinking of moving to NZ quickly recognise Australia as the cheaper and easier route to home ownership."

 

I don't agree with this.  The demographia survey shows that housing in Australia is even more expensive (based on income) than here in New Zealand.

 

Up
0

Only in Sydney and Melbourne - which is marginally more expensive.  In Brisbane, you can still buy a nice 3br town house - 4km from the CBD for about 400K.  Try that in NZ's city with comparable popoulation i.e. Auckland.

Up
0

According to the demograpia survey, these centres I've picked because they're significantly large:

Sydney 9.2, Melbourne 8.4, Adelaide 6.7, Brisbane 6.0, Perth 5.7.

Auckland 6.4, Christchurch 6.3, Dunedin 5.2, Wellington 5.1, Hamilton 4.8.

To me this looks like houses in Australia are generally less affordable.  If you compare Auckland and Brisbane then yes, Brisbane looks more affordable than Auckland.

I think itt's generally accepted that Australia presently takes gold for most unaffordable nation, with New Zealand taking silver.

 

Up
0

Agreed

I think a key difference is that in cities such as Brisbane and Adelaide, and to a lesser extent Melbourne, whilst the median prices are high, like NZ, there are more decent buying options below the median.

For example, although the median price in Adelaide is $385,000, you can buy respectable NEW 3 bedroom houses on 300-400 square metres within 30-35 minutes drive of the CBD for circa $320,000 ie. 17% lower than median price. Similarly you can buy an average quality 3 bedroom 30 year old house in a middle of the road beachside suburb 20-25 minutes from the city for $300-320K 

Where in Auckland can you buy similar property for circa 380K? (ie. about 17% less than median)  

 

  

Up
0

I was refering to an easier route to home ownership, ie with assisted 1st home owner products in Australia.

Also in QLD there are seas of 1st Homes being constructed to meet demand eg $310 to $350k Affordable first Homes.

 

How many Affordable subdivisions have you seen in NZ lately? specifically designed for downsizers and first home owners.

Simply put  NZ has, Thin Supply ,Thick Demand.

Australia has a Constant Supply for a Constant Demand of First Home Buyers.

Up
0

Ahh, 'easier', yes I'll believe that, just not more affordable.  Indeed with the first home owners grant and a massive loan (percentage wise of the purchase price) BUYING a home becomes easy.

 

I would caution against falling for 'ease of purchase', and consider the time after the purchase, when you have to pay it back.

 

As for affordable sub-divisions in NZ I've seen, no, none, not that I'm looking.  I think going by the demographia survey the few affordable places are in towns like Gore.

 

Face it, both Australia and NZ are way over-priced compared with the likes of USA (since their massive drop).

 

Up
0

yes, check this development out in Brisbane.

http://www.ulda.qld.gov.au/_dbase_upl/FitzTourBook.pdf

attractive development, 20 odd minutes to Brisbane CBD, diverse housing options.

I understand some of the more affordable 3 bedroom homes are selling for circa 350K

Up
0

Nice.

 

You could build exactly that development in Auckland and sell it for similar prices except for one problem -  you would not be able to get Resource Consent for it.  Many of the features that make the houses affordable would not be allowed by council's urban designers or planners.  ie:

 

1 park units, low visitors car park numbers, loft units accessed off lanes, outdoor living space areas, parks/garage door frequency to frontages, no street overlooking from living areas, density, outlook etc.etc.

 

By the time you took that development and adjusted it to meet Auckland Council standards it would be like Stonefields with units at $700,000.  

Up
0

They are building exactly that type of development in Auckland with AV Jenning as the lead developer.  It's called Hobsonville Point and entry level is 2 bedroom, no garage $400k.  3 bedrooms start at $550k and it appears to be a lot denser than the example above.

Up
0

Except... for many expats, they can earn shed loads more in Aus (or elsewhere) than they can in NZ.

When you do the math, if you are already in a place, and earning a good to great income, why move back to a place where you may well be paid less than you make in Aus (or elsewhere)?

 

Up
0

Excellent Points Gibber

Up
0

"for many expats, they can earn shed loads more in Aus"... where????? I'd love to get a job there!

Only a very small minority in the minings are earning shed load.. the rest are about the same as in NZ's major cities  - just that cost of living is a tad cheaper and more opportunities for jobwise

Up
0

martinv,

agree. Aus takes the cake for property mania. NZ and Aus were broadly on a par pre GFC (with the exception of Sydney). NZ dropped 5-10% since GFC, whereas Rudd's moronic housing stimulus resulted in rises of 30% in Melbourne. Thats where the difference lies for the most part - recent falls, especially in Brisbane and now Melbourne are reducing the gap (although melbourne has a LONG way to go). Sydney is obscene, but i can at least understand why someone would pay 2 million to live within walking distance of a world class beach in a city with great climate --> much as I like Melbourne, I cannot understand why it commands such premium prices, and the yields are the lowest in the nation (2.3% grosss on the place i rent). Melbourne is certainly the most fragile at the moment and recording the largest falls, the 2 speed economy is also hitting it worst in fact the state premier has stated on a number of occasions that Vic can no longer rely on immigration and housing growth to drive the economy.

Up
0

How can this can be!!!!   Houses only go up in value.

Up
0

Ricardo, I can't find any reference to that.. so it must be you who came up with that assumption... anyway, it's an old joke and time to move along.

Up
0

 

Tell us something we don't know.

 

We paid them for writing this?

Up
0

We need and election soon and hope the outcome is similar to France!!!!

Up
0

We just had one in November.. having another one soon will bankrupt our little country.  Beside the only difference between Labour and National is the capital letters L and N

Up
0

Yep rearranging the furniture does nothing.

A clear and well formatted action plan that involves actually building houses and not talking about it would be a good start.

Up
0

Building more houses wont fix our economy...

regards

Up
0

How so?  More jobs and satisfy the demands for 1st home owners - isn't that the issue with affordable housing in NZ?

Up
0

building more homes won't fix the economy but it would make a big difference

The benefit is not just in all the design and construction jobs (and spin off )

cheaper housing also means people have more disposable income to either save / invest and/ or spend in the economy

There are clear social benefits as well - more affordable housing means it is easier to attract and retain the likes of teachers, nurses etc to cities like Auckland  

Up
0

So you are saying if we Build no new houses the current existing homes will be more affordable and magically hold more residents.

 

Houses are not all about investment, they are shelter, protection from the elements a place to store belongings.

Of course we need to build more houses, specifically Affordable houses for first home owners, or will you sell them yours at an entry price?

Up
0

Unless our population declines through net outflow of immigrants and dropping birth-rates, at least amongst those who aren't reliant on welfare (and so are less likely to be self-sufficient and home-owners)

Up
0

LOL...oh dear....

You missed "all else being equal"...so really you take a context I dont agree with.....but sure "invest", its your money, I hope.

For the rest I think Ive said enough today on my "favourite" topic(s)....that say why I do not agree with you.

regards

Up
0

France is paving its way to fiscal hell.....it just got itself a left wing economic death sentence IMHO......the only Q is what will fold first, the EU and France or the opposite, ie he cant under-write his promises.....but then I have to admit neither could the last idiot.

regards

Up
0

Lesson for the Greens

Up
0

Yes and no.....if you are in the Green party like myself then I am at odds with the ppl who have limited Green interests but lots of uh social ones....hence I almost jumped for joy when Sue Bradford and Keith Locke left...good riddence IMHO.   You see for me these two aspects are ultimately mutually exclusive........one has to win to tthe detriment of the other....

regards

 

Up
0

you need to learn the art of compromise ... my partner is a "Citrullus Lanatus" extremis ... I'm not ... we manage

Up
0

The last labour govt fueled the ecomony with reckless social spending.  You dont have to think very hard to see how this contributed to the "houses overpriced" effect.  Some people have short memories.

Up
0

No it didnt.......in 2007 NZ was the lowest spend as a % of GDP compared to many others as shown by this graph.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/big-government-and-the-cris…

What fueled the economy was borrowing cheap money to gamble in property...now sure I can accept Labour did nothing to stop that....

Some ppl just invent things.........

regatrds

Up
0

Was told about a housing development in Albany.  Cost of houses was under $400K.  Now it has Resource Consent cost is over $430K.  Apparently Council Resource Consent processing fees/costs (including contributions) were $50,000 per house.  Apparently only 2 neighbours cared enough to turn up to hearings - neither with any valid objections.

 

No wonder supply is tight.

Up
0

RBNZ need to urgently push for policy to make home ownership more affordable for people (particulalry Auckland). Not postulating like a great big GILAR about protecting equity that has been built up to un affordable levels through over borrowing.

RBNZ philosophy on shelter is misguided to the importance of peoples basic needs and its sociological and ecomomic outcomes.

Up
0

RBNZ are giving you super-low interest rates flowing through to commercial banks - making home-ownership the cheapest its been for 30 years or so.  

Up
0

Bollard should attend the auctions for houses in Auckland, Hamilton New Plymouth and other towns and cities and witness the crowds and franatic bidding before making his comments.

Recently there was an on site auction for a boring brick and tile town house in St Johns and the crowd was so large that it spilled onto the street and disrupted the traffic- something not seen for decades.

Yet another even more boring do-up by way of an on-site auction in Block House Bay drew a huge crowd and spirited bidding with the hammer finally falling at $695,000, some $120,000 over the estimate.

The major banks cutting interest rates rates yet again and rumours the the RB may shortly cut the cash rate even further willl underpin the market more firmly than ever.

It's obvious that there is a big disconnect between what Bollard says and reality.

He is no doubt, trying to jaw bone the property market down, and like most things Bollard does, it won't work.

Up
0

Maybe if the free market had been left to its own devices the housing shortage wouldn't have surfaced and also the inflation on property prices through 2000 wouldn't have occurred. The meddling by politicians has greatly influenced the current situation. When the Labour Government opened the flood gates on immigration while at the same time initiating the supplements on income for families and ensuring that tax policy was also was also beneficial to those who were in the investment housing game they set the cycle in motion for inflation in house prices and ensured that property prices would be out of reach of many people.

When Free market and Socialist policies are coupled there will always be market distortions which have detrimental effects on the populace and in this case the distortion was house prices. The Free market when left alone self corrects whereas the Free Market/Socialist combined policies meddle in the natural supply and demand process causing imbalances within the market place.

Affordable housing is not rocket science its politics and economics.

 

Up
0