Home » Real Estate » Home Ownership Down To Lowest Level in Decade

Home Ownership Down To Lowest Level in Decade

MoneyhousescaleHome ownership is down to it’s lowest level in a decade.

We should be happy.

This is going to sound antithetical to most real estate industry folks, but it is the truth. Home ownership is not designed for everyone, and for many it is a curse not a blessing.

The cost of a home is more than just the mortgage. Property taxes, repairs, maintenance, and insurance are costs that add up for the homeowner. When a lifelong renter buys a home they have never had to worry about these costs, they were always “included in the rent.”

The landlord typically had a strong cash position on the property so that the other costs could be absorbed in the rent and still be profitable. But for the lifelong renter who now owns the property these costs can be overwhelming.

Social programs coming from Washington and supported by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac created the concept that improving home ownership was a right and a noble goal for all of us. But as the meltdown of the real estate market has shown, it has been a devastating blow for millions of families.

So as the home ownership levels regress back to their traditional levels, celebrate and do not mourn the transition.

It truly is better for all of us in the long run.

Nearly 3 million fewer Americans now own homes compared to the first quarter of 2005, when homeownership peaked at 69.1%, the Census Bureau found. During the third quarter of 2010, the homeownership rate was down to 66.9%, unchanged from a quarter earlier. That’s the lowest rate since the second quarter of 1999.

Meanwhile, a great number of homes sit empty. For owner-occupied homes, the vacancy rate remains at 2.5%, the same as in the second quarter, but well up from the sub-2% levels seen mid-decade.

For rental properties, the vacancy rate actually dropped in the third quarter, to 10.3% from 10.6% three months earlier. But that’s still up from the 9.9% rate of 24 months ago.

“There’s a big inventory glut out there and it’s probably worse than reported,” said Pat Newport, an analyst with IHS Global Insight. “The data is muddled because they don’t account for foreclosures not for sale.”

6 comments

  1. Couldn't agree more about home ownership not being for everyone. Back when FHA was still still allowing DPA, it was just astonishing to me that buyers could purchase a house with no skin in the game. These are the people who care less about their yards and drag community values down. There are just some people who don't need to own a home.

  2. Here's to hoping that we pull out of this stronger than before. It the wold of ups and downs, we may be headed for a huge peak following this valley.

  3. Great post, Tom. I particularly support your comment, "The landlord typically had a strong cash position on the property so that the other costs could be absorbed in the rent and still be profitable. But for the lifelong renter who now owns the property these costs can be overwhelming." I own 5 single family properties and many of my tenants were previous home-owners, and from this small sample of the renting population, I can say with confidence that all of my renters appreciate returning to a predictable and fixed monthly rent payment.

  4. I agree. When the house or anything else will geht older, you have many cost for repairs and maintenance. And in Germany you must make sometimes a check for "renewable energy and energy efficiency".

  5. We had a family friend that has an issue with their landlord. I will have them read your article – GREAT…

  6. i agree, renting is more typical today because people nowadays moves from place to place depending on their work locations and businesses. So home owning is not advisable to those people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>