Rising to the defense of recent L.A. home buyers is recent L.A. home buyer – and writer – Chris Ayres (that's not his photo to the right).
In Sunday's LA Times, Ayres says that his only regret in buying a home in Hollywood last year is "wishing I'd borrowed more money and bought a bigger house." (See "Loving Your…
Rising to the defense of recent L.A. home buyers is recent L.A. home buyer – and writer –
Chris Ayres (that's not his photo to the right).
In Sunday's
LA Times, Ayres says that his only regret in buying a home in Hollywood last year is "wishing I'd borrowed more money and bought a bigger house." (See "
Loving Your House Again" from the Sunday
LAT.)
No hand-wringing over buying at the peak. No worries about future sale prices. Ayres is thinking he got a great mortgage before the credit meltdown, and he figures that, over time, he and other peak buyers will be fine:
Those of us who purchased nonspeculative property from 2004 to 2007 for the gratuitously self-indulgent purposes of raising a family and investing in our neighborhoods will ultimately have the last laugh.
Much of Ayres' argument falls into the "buy and hold long-term" category. Broadly speaking, over time, your value goes up. Meantime, you can deduct mortgage interest from your taxable income and deduct property taxes. Better to own and get those write-offs than not, he's saying.
Ayres also advances some arguments regarding the "real" value of money as price inflation takes hold. The real-dollar value of a current million-dollar mortgage will be only $600k in 10 years, he says. So it will appear to be relatively less of a burden then. (Ayres assumes 5% inflation for the next decade, which is very high by historical standards.)
But Ayres goes off the rails in trying to support a notion that today's peak buyer is better off – by big bucks – after 10 years. After running his numbers, Ayres says:
Net result? The penalty for having bought at the height of the worst real estate bubble in history adds up to a potential $1.1 million gain.
So where's the $1.1m? Can you tap it, spend it? Sad to say, Ayres is a journalist, but that $1.1m is fiction.
The first $400k is from writeoffs. We could quibble with those cocktail-napkin figures, but we won't. It's the last $700k that's a problem.
In Ayres' example, a home was purchased for
$1.2m in a recent peak year and is now worth $800k (an extra-large chop of 33%). Over the next decade, its value returns to
$1.3m. However, the loan is "worth" only $600k in real dollars. The gap? $700k in hypothetical equity!
If you're following at home, we hope you noted the bait-and-switch. The actual loan balance in 2018 is probably still close to $1m – but Ayres is asking you to
think of it as just $600k. The problem is revealed if the hypothetical owner successfully sells at $1.3m. The gain is $100k (minus costs of sale) and the seller gets his $200k down payment back, plus any principal paid. Sorry, the snake oil doesn't work – there's no $700k bonus.
The fact is, if prices dip sharply and return to peak over the course of a decade (as they did, roughly, in
MB in the mid-1990s), no one gets a big payday out of it. Tax writeoffs? Great. Being king/queen of your castle? Very valuable. Big equity gains? Nope.
For the "last laugh," Ayres will need to think a little more long-term.
Please see our blog disclaimer.
Listings presented above are supplied via the MLS and are brokered by a variety of agents and firms, not Dave Fratello or Edge Real Estate Agency, unless so stated with the listing. Images and links to properties above lead to a full MLS display of information, including home details, lot size, all photos, and listing broker and agent information and contact information.
Based on information from California Regional Multiple Listing Service, Inc. as of March 18th, 2024 at 10:56pm PDT. This information is for your personal, non-commercial use and may not be used for any purpose other than to identify prospective properties you may be interested in purchasing. Display of MLS data is usually deemed reliable but is NOT guaranteed accurate by the MLS. Buyers are responsible for verifying the accuracy of all information and should investigate the data themselves or retain appropriate professionals. Information from sources other than the Listing Agent may have been included in the MLS data. Unless otherwise specified in writing, Broker/Agent has not and will not verify any information obtained from other sources. The Broker/Agent providing the information contained herein may or may not have been the Listing and/or Selling Agent.