Tesi MICHAEL T. DARDA, capo economista MKM Partners:
la bolla immobiliare USA non è
esplosiva
economia è forte, Fed deve ancora
aumentare i tassi
- Prezzo mediano abitazioni unifamiliari +16,6% in
ottobre su anno prec., crescita più veloce dal 1979: - previsioni che boom finisca con crollo prezzi, che si
ripercuoterebbe sui consumi privando i consumatori del credito ipotecario, e
quindi provocherebbe recessione. - Darda prevede rallentamento dell’aumento, non crollo
dei prezzi immobiliari, sulla base del fatto che il rapporto tra prezzo
abitazioni e redditi rimane sotto le medie storiche. - C’è il problema della riduzione ventennale della quota
posseduta dai possessori di immobili (homeowner equity, ossia il valore
della casa meno il debito ipotecario ancora da pagare in rapporto al valore
complessivo) al 56,8%, ma sarebbe in linea con il valore del 1997, quando la
riduzione delle imposte sui capital gain innescò il boom immobiliare. - Mette inoltre in discussione il concetto di “prezzo
reale” delle abitazioni. Se al posto di riferirlo ai prezzi al consumo si fa
riferimento all’oro, il prezzo medio di una casa è ancora inferiore di un terzo
a quello del 1970, prima che il dollaro abbandonasse il gold standard… - L’economia resta forte, con produzione high tech +
24,8%, e mezzi di produzione +6,5% in ottobre, aumento ordinativi e vendite al
consumo. - I profitti operativi dei 500 maggiori gruppi quotati
(S&P 500) sono aumentati a due cifre (>10%) per 13 trimestri
consecutivi. Le imprese stanno riconquistando potere di determinazione dei
prezzi: hanno risorse e motivo per investire, controbilanciando il
rallentamento immobiliare residenziale. - Vi è il rischio di aumento tasse,
- mentre il rischio che Fed strozzi l’economia con alti
tassi è ancora lontano, perché negli scorsi decenni si è avuta contemporanea
recessione immobiliare e nella produzione quando i tassi a breve hanno superato
di 5 punti l’inflazione intrinseca: siamo ancora lontani 3 punti da tassi del
7%… - Rischio maggiore sarebbe sottostimare la forza
dell’economia e l’eccesso di moneta creato dalla Fed.
By MICHAEL T. DARDA
December 1, 2005; Page A16
An increasing number of economists and
strategists on Wall Street expect the recent cooling in home sales to turn into
an outright freeze in the residential real estate market. Data showing that median
home prices of existing one-family homes rose 16.6% in October from a year
earlier, the fastest pace since 1979, only reinforced the view that an
unsustainable boom is likely to end in tears. The working hypothesis is
that the undertow from a softening residential real-estate sector will
eventually weaken national home prices and pressure household asset values. The
reverse wealth effect that would ensue is expected to cut into consumer
spending and severely weaken — if not end — the current U.S. economic
expansion.
But despite the dire warnings to the
contrary, a deceleration in national home price appreciation (which is
likely) will not necessarily lead to a slump in nationwide home prices or
the negative externalities associated with it. While certain regional
real-estate markets could indeed be out of whack with the fundamentals — and
thus experience price declines — this does not appear to be a nationwide
phenomenon.
Home prices have been rising faster than
incomes, but the ratio between average home prices and incomes remains below
historical averages. Similarly, the ratio between total capitalization of
household real estate relative to capitalized incomes (i.e., incomes adjusted
for long-term interest rates) also remains below historical averages. Of
course, this is no guarantee that home prices will continue to appreciate
rapidly. It does suggest, however, that a broad-based decline in median or
average home prices, which would be a threat to the growth outlook, remains
unlikely.
The two-decade decline in homeowner equity
as a fraction of household real estate continues to be a major concern, but the Fed’s Flow of Funds data shows that homeowner equity as
a fraction of household real estate stood at 56.8% during the second quarter.
This is essentially in line with the 57% ratio that prevailed during 1997,
a year in which a drop in the tax rate on capital gains (including up to a
$500,000 homeowner exemption), helped to ignite the real estate boom in the
first place.
While some contend that the boom in
residential real estate has pushed real home prices to record — and
unsustainable — levels, this depends on the definition of real. If we use
gold (which is real) as a deflator instead of the Consumer Price Index (which
is not), the median home price stood at $216,200 as of October 2005, compared
with $334,000 (in 2005 gold-based dollars) in July 1970. In other words, while
there might be froth around the edges, median home prices have yet to fully
catch up with the decline in the value of the dollar since the U.S. left the
last vestiges of the gold standard more than three decades ago.
Unfortunately, the ongoing debate over the
existence of a house price bubble and its likely aftermath has pushed the news
of an economic acceleration out of the headlines. Business equipment production
rose 6.5% during October, more than offsetting the 4.6% decline during
September, when the effects of two major hurricanes and the Boeing strike
slashed output. High-tech production, which hasn’t missed a beat, is up
24.8% year-over-year, the fastest annual rate of increase since the tail
end of the tech boom.
Backlogs for non-defense capital goods
excluding aircraft and parts, a gauge of future
capital spending, accelerated to the fastest three-month annualized pace
since mid-2004 in the three months ending in October. The same behavior is
occurring in measures of core retail sales (sales excluding autos and
gasoline). They rose at the fastest three-month annual pace since early 2004
during the same period. These are signs of an acceleration, not symptoms
of a slowdown.
The news on the corporate sector is even
better. According to Standard & Poor’s, S&P 500 operating earnings
have compounded at double-digit year-over-year rates for 13 consecutive
quarters. After taking a nosedive during the profitless prosperity of the
late 1990s and early 2000s, corporate pricing power is back. Unit prices in
the non-farm business sector advanced 2.9% year-over-year during the third
quarter, the fastest annual increase since 1991. In short, corporations
have both profits and pricing power, which means they have the resources to
continue to spend. Since non-residential fixed investment makes up nearly
two-thirds of gross domestic investment, these trends should work to offset
any weakness that arises on the back of a slower residential real estate market.
* * *
Yet despite the favorable disposition of many
indicators of grassroots growth, there are real risks to the outlook. If
destructive tax hikes emerge from a failure to extend the 2003 tax cuts on
capital gains and dividends, asset prices would have to adjust lower to reflect
lower expected after-tax returns. At the same time, if the Fed eventually
becomes overly restrictive with short rates and liquidity, the household
and corporate sectors could weaken in unison.
While the outlook for tax policy is up in the
air, it is worth noting that dual weakness in the housing and corporate
sectors during previous decades typically followed in the footsteps of the Fed
pushing short-term interest rates five percentage points or more above the core
inflation rate. This would require a 7% funds rate at today’s 2% rate of core
inflation — three full percentage points above today’s Fed funds target
rate of 4%. With liquidity-sensitive precious-metal prices surging to levels
not seen in decades and real short rates still below historical norms, the risk
of near-term Fed overshoot is not compelling. Instead, an underestimation
of just how strong the economy is, and how easy the Fed has been, is likely to
come into further focus during the quarters ahead.
Mr. Darda is chief economist and director of
research for MKM Partners.