Bruce Coleman Mortgage Brokers

604-688-6002

CMHC’s move to hike mortgage insurance premiums prompts competitors to follow – Ask a Vancouver Mortgage Broker

Canadian Mortgage News

CMI 101 Series

Dreyer Group 101 Series

Financial FYI Series

First Time Buyers

Home Buying 101

Home Insurance

Latest News

Mortgage Rates

Refinancing

Retirement Planning

Self Employed

The cost of mortgage default insurance is about to go up for most consumers after competitors moved quickly to follow Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp.’s decision to raise premiums.

Vancouver Mortgage BrokerIn Canada’s housing market here’s what $500 K buys: A lake in Edmonton … a condo in Toronto

The Canadian Real Estate Association has predicted that the national average price for a home will be $391,000 this year.

But it’s hard to compare how far your buck will go in Canadian cities using that figure, since the average prices at year’s end are so very different: $785,574 in Vancouver and $320,693 in Montreal, for instance. So we’ve found a round figure in the middle and asked, what could approximately $500,000 have bought homebuyers in various markets across the country? Read on to find out.

The federal agency announced Friday it is increasing premiums across the board, effective May 1. The change does not impact existing homeowners and is expected to raise up to $175-million for CMHC.

“The higher premiums reflect CMHC’s higher capital targets,” said Steven Mennill, CMHC’s vice-president of insurance operations, in a release. “CMHC’s capital holdings reduce Canadian taxpayers’ exposure to the housing market and contribute to the long term stability of the financial system.”

CMHC said in a conference call with journalists to discuss the premium change that it should cost the average Canadian about $5 per month on their mortgage.

Canadians must buy mortgage default insurance if they have less than a 20% downpayment and are borrowing from a financial institution covered by the Bank Act. The insurance covers banks in the event of default and is ultimately backstopped by the federal government. There is close to $1-trillion backed by Ottawa, including private players.

At the top end of the market for someone with a mortgage for 95% of the value of their home, the premium CMHC charges will go from 2.75% to 3.15%. On a $450,000 mortgage, the fee — it is charged up front and often tacked onto the mortgage, would rise from $12,375 to $14,175.

CMHC controls about 70% of the mortgage default insurance market in Canada with private players Genworth Canada and Canada Guaranty holding the rest.

Genworth announced it too would raise premiums across the board by an average of 15%. Its increases will take effect May 1 too.

“All three insurers have the same standard premiums today. By the time CMHC hikes its fees in May, I suspect the privates will have announced matching increases,” said Rob McLister, editor of Canadian Mortgage Trends, before Genworth matched the hike.

Tyler Anderson/National Post
Tyler Anderson/National PostCMHC controls about 70% of the mortgage default insurance market in Canada with private players Genworth Canada and Canada Guaranty holding the rest.

A key issue will be whether the hike, it’s only 10 basis points for mortgages that are 65% loan to value, leads to people trying to buy ahead of the increase.

On the call with journalists, CMHC officials indicated they didn’t expect any of this so-called front-running to happen. However, when mortgage rates were set to climb, consumers did try to buy early to beat the increase — albeit interest increases have a far greater impact on consumer costs.

Finn Poschmann, vice President, research with the C.D. Howe Institute, said he thinks the increase will lead to a jump in sales ahead of the May 1 price change. “As a share of closing costs, it is a pretty big hit,” said Mr. Poschmann. “On a monthly basis it’s not that much. The change goes by the application date not the closing date so even if you are going to be closing a couple of months later, you are facing an incentive to get the mortgage application in.”

He applauded the change because it means CMHC is operating in a more professional manner.

“This is much better risk management and risk pricing,” said Mr. Poschmann. “And it is a sensible, scaled increase in premiums for rising loan to value ratios.”

Last year, the federal government announced that CMHC would fall under control of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Then in late 2013 it announced it had brought in a former investment banker, Evan Siddall, to run the Crown corporation.

7 Myths About Dividend-Paying Stocks Separate the myths from the facts on the value of dividend-paying stocks. – Consult with a Vancouver Mortgage Broker

Canadian Mortgage News

CMI 101 Series

Dreyer Group 101 Series

Financial FYI Series

First Time Buyers

Home Buying 101

Home Insurance

Latest News

Mortgage Rates

Refinancing

Retirement Planning

Self Employed

7 Myths About Dividend-Paying Stocks-  Separate the myths from the facts on the value of dividend-paying stocks.

Vancouver Mortgage BrokerThe most common misconception among investors may be the value of investing in dividend-paying stocks. Almost every week, someone contacts me to extol the virtues of investing in what they call “high quality, dividend-yielding securities.” Often, their interest is spurred by the recent high performance of these stocks. According to one paper by Gregg S. Fisher, published in the Journal of Financial Planning, the FTSE High Dividend Yield index of U.S. stocks returned a whopping 26 percent between the period of Jan. 1, 2011 and Sept. 30, 2012. During the same period, the Standard & Poor’s 500 index fell short, returning 19 percent.

There are many myths on the benefits of investing in these stocks. Here are some of the most common ones:

Myth No. 1: Dividends hold up in bad markets. There is a perception that dividend-paying stocks will hold up better when the market declines. If that were the case, you would think the stock of General Electric, a member of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, would help prove that point. GE paid a quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share in 2008. In 2009, during the global recession, GE cut its dividend to $0.10, commencing in the second quarter of 2009.

GE was not alone. In 2009, a whopping 57 percent of dividend-paying companies, located in 23 developed markets, either reduced their dividends or eliminated them altogether.

Myth No. 2: Dividend-paying stocks outperform the market. From 1991 to 2012, the simple average annual returns of dividend-paying stocks and the market were both 9.1 percent. During the same period, stocks not paying dividends had a simple average annual return of 11.1 percent, though the higher returns came with greater volatility.

Myth No. 3: Dividend-paying stocks provide adequate diversification.  If you focus only on investing in dividend-paying stocks, you are ignoring 39 percent of the global companies that do not pay dividends. An investor who invests only in dividend-paying stocks is sacrificing diversification. Approximately 53 percent of global small-cap stocks pay dividends. If your portfolio is made up entirely of dividend-paying stocks, you are excluding 47 percent of global small-cap stocks.

Myth No. 4: Dividends are a reliable source of future income.  A change in tax policy can dramatically affect future payment of dividends. In the U.S., dividends are taxed favorably compared with ordinary income tax rates. For individuals in an income tax bracket that not exceeding 35 percent, dividends are taxed at only 15 percent. However, there isn’t any assurance this policy will not change, or that foreign countries will not alter their tax policy toward dividends.

Myth No. 5: Dividends are tax efficient.  Dividends are more tax efficient than ordinary income because they are taxed at a lower rate. However, they are less tax efficient than capital gains, because you are taxed on dividends in the year in which they are paid, but you are not taxed on capital gains until you sell the stock.

Myth No. 6: Buying dividend stocks is a prudent way to obtain exposure to value stocks.Fisher’s analysis of more than 30 years of high dividend-yielding stocks compared those stocks’ returns with the broader stock market. The paper concluded that it wasn’t the dividends associated with high-yielding stocks that drove performance. In fact, the author, Gregg S. Fisher, concluded that the “ … yield factor associated with high dividend-yielding stocks actually detracted from performance.”

If dividends didn’t account for the returns, what factor did? It was the value factor, which refers to the purchase of stocks that have low prices compared with earnings or other metrics (like book value). The study concluded there are better ways to get exposure to value stocks than buying high dividend stocks. It recommended simply tilting your portfolio toward value stocks.

Myth No. 7: Dividend-paying stocks are a substitute for bonds. Some investors believe they can improve their yields, without taking additional risk, by dumping bonds from their portfolio and substituting higher dividend-paying stocks. This analysis is incorrect on several levels.

First, dividend-paying stocks are (obviously) stocks. They have significantly greater risk than high quality, short-term bonds. Comparing the returns of these two investments doesn’t make any sense.

Second, there is a better way to increase expected returns. You can do so by increasing your allocation to stocks. The purpose of bonds is to lessen periods of volatility. You should take a total return approach to investing. The stock portion of your portfolio is where you should take risk. You should not take any meaningful risk with the bond portion.

Third, if the market drops, the value of the stocks of dividend-paying companies would also likely decline, and the dividends could be reduced or even eliminated. Proponents of buying dividend-paying stocks often dismiss or ignore these risks.

Dan Solin is the director of investor advocacy for the BAM Alliance and a wealth advisor with Buckingham Asset Management. He is a New York Times best-selling author of the Smartest series of books. His next book, “The Smartest Sales Book You’ll Ever Read,” will be published March 3, 2014.

Pimco sees Canadian housing market falling as much as 20% – Consult with a Vancouver Mortgage Broker

Canadian Mortgage News

CMI 101 Series

Dreyer Group 101 Series

Financial FYI Series

First Time Buyers

Home Buying 101

Home Insurance

Latest News

Mortgage Rates

Refinancing

Retirement Planning

Self Employed

Vancouver Mortgage BrokerPacific Investment Management Co. forecasts Canadian home prices falling as much as 20% in the next five years, removing the boost from household spending that contributed to faster-than-expected growth last quarter.

In Canada’s housing market here’s what $500 K buys: A lake in Edmonton … a condo in Toronto

 

 

Bank of CanadaFrom four bedrooms in Windsor to one-bedroom in Vancouver, check out how far $500,000 goes in 8 major markets across Canada. Read on

“Canadian housing is overvalued,” Ed Devlin, the London-based head of Pimco’s Canadian portfolio, said by telephone. “I would expect to see it happening at the end of this year, we’re going to start to see housing roll over.”

The world’s largest manager of bond funds has been reducing its holdings of Canadian debt after a run of strong profits, he said. The housing decline, which could be cancelled out or reduced to 10% when accounting for inflation, will cause a pullback in consumer spending, capping economic growth this year in Canada around 2%, Devlin said.

Though that is less than the 2.3% growth forecast by the Bank of Canada, it should still be enough to keep the central bank from cutting interest rates as exports pick up some of the slack, he said.

Consumer spending helped boost Canada’s gross domestic product by 2.9% in the last three months of 2013, data showed last week. More recent data has shown signs the housing market is cooling, with new-home construction falling twice as fast as economists forecast in January.

“It’s not a collapse, it’s a correction. We think the Canadian economy can handle it,” said Devlin. “It’s going to be a headwind to consumption as people don’t have the same kind of wealth effect and are more anxious about their house than they have been in the past. They’ll consume less.”

According to the IMF, Canada has the most overvalued housing market in the world

Bank of CanadaThe report, which aims to put global housing markets in perspective, puts Canada at the top of the overvalued scale, 85% above the historic average of house prices to rent. Read on

Pimco isn’t the only one warning the market is overvalued. Deutsche Bank, for instance, issued a report in December that said Canada’s housing market was the most overvalued in the world, pegging prices as being 60% too high.

Last month both the International Monetary Fund and TD economists said Canadian home prices were overvalued by 10%.

The IMF’s report said that when compared to other advanced economies and income and rents in Canada, home prices remain high, even as home sales have stalled. It does note that not all Canadian markets are overvalued, however, and that outsized prices tend to dominate in the country’s largest cities, such as Toronto.

The Canadian housing market and worries about a real estate bubble have been key concerns for policy-makers for several years. Recent indicators have suggested the market may be headed for a soft landing instead of a bubble bursting, but concerns have persisted.

Get ready for house prices to continue to rise in Toronto- Ask Bruce Coleman, Vancouver Mortgage Broker

Canadian Mortgage News

CMI 101 Series

Dreyer Group 101 Series

Financial FYI Series

First Time Buyers

Home Buying 101

Home Insurance

Latest News

Mortgage Rates

Refinancing

Retirement Planning

Self Employed

Vancouver Mortgage BrokerIt’s only two weeks of data, but the Toronto Real Estate Board is reporting the first 14 days of February saw existing home prices continue to rise.

Safe as houses? Canadians think their homes will fund their retirement

Almost a quarter of Canadians say they are planning on using their home as their primary source of income once they retire — here’swhy that’s not a great strategy

The average sale price of an existing home reached $547,107 for the first weeks of February, that was a 7.8% increase from the same period a year earlier.

“Price growth well above the rate of inflation will be the norm for the remainder of the year. Over the same period, mortgage rates are expected to remain low, thereby keeping home ownership affordable in the Greater Toronto Area,” said Jason Mercer, senior manager of market analysis, in a release.

Mortgage rates have been trending back down for fixed rate products for five-year lengths, with some brokers suggesting the magical 3% barrier has been breached again.

There could be some upward pressure on prices from a pullback in new listings too. TREB said new listings over the same period are off 6.1%.

“The annual rate of decline was less than experienced last month,” said Dianne Usher, president of the board, talking about new listings. “This may point to an improvement in the listings situation moving forward, which would help alleviate some of the pent-up demand that currently exists in the marketplace.”

Sales have not pulled back either. There were 2,767 sales through the first 14 days in the GTA which is a 1.3% increase from a year earlier for the same period.

Detached prices are rising fastest. The average detached home sold for $710,949 during the period, a 10.4% increase from a year earlier. Semi-detached homes rose 2.1% in value, townhouses 8.8% and condominiums 5.3%
twitter.com/dustywallet


SEO Powered By SEOPressor