real estate prices, using

2005-05-13 New rules to curb surging real estate price 2@webnews ,#house#housing#estate#, 0 Housing Price /enpproperty-- New rules to curb surging real estate price Home News Center China New rules to curb surging real estate price (Agencies) Updated: 2005-05-13 10:48 China is taking a wide range of steps to curb surging real estate prices, using tax and other policies to discourage speculative dealings and ensure a supply of affordable housing, state media announced Thursday. Residents in Nanjing, capital of East China's Jiangsu Province, walk past a newly-constructed apartment building May 10, 2005. [newsphoto] The campaign, backed by seven government agencies, shows that Beijing recognizes it needs to make cooling the housing market a nationwide priority, the official Xinhua News Agency reported. Despite the government's powerful vested interest in a thriving property market, authorities worry that too much investment is going into the construction of luxury and commercial real estate and that speculative buying has pushed prices unsustainably high. Newspapers carried a notice by the State Council, China's cabinet, ordering local governments to make controlling property prices a major part of their economic policy. Average real estate prices rose by 14.4 percent year-on-year in 2004 and by 12.5 percent in the first quarter of 2005. Shanghai had the "most shocking housing prices in China," with average costs per square meter of over 10,000 yuan ($1,200), the Xinhua report said. Many urban Chinese own their homes thanks to housing reforms years ago, but cannot afford to buy new property. And low income families are generally priced out of a market that has focused on wealthy investors while neglecting construction of budget housing. The latest effort to cool the market involve the ministries of construction, finance, and land and resources, along with the State Development and Reform Commission, the State Administration of Taxation, China Banking Regulatory Commission and the People's Bank of China, China's central bank. The policy change that drew most attention in property crazy Shanghai was one requiring payment of a business tax the rate was not given on sales of property less than two years after purchase. It takes effect June 1. Local governments were ordered to clarify prices and housing sizes before granting land use rights, to limit credit for property deals and to confine real estate developers' profits to a maximum of 3 percent. Developers who fail to build within a year after buying land will be penalized, and those that fail to build within two years after buying property would lose their rights to the land, Xinhua said. The measures follow earlier, piecemeal steps by local governments. Last month Shanghai enacted a rule requiring home owners to pay off their mortgages before selling property and extending the time buyers must wait before taking ownership to 28 days, from the previous seven. In March, it imposed a tax on sales of property owned for less than a year. The measures have definitely had an impact. In April, sales of "second hand," or previously occupied apartments in Shanghai fell between 30 percent and 50 percent, depending on the district, compared with the month before, according to industry statistics published Thursday in the newspaper Oriental Morning Post. Close Today's Top News Top China News Central banker denies yuan revaluation on May 18 New rules to curb surging real estate price Hu, Soong join hands for Straits peace Beijing offers Taiwan more conveniences China and Japan seek to smooth relations Pressure on yuan revaluation won't work Beijing offers Taiwan more conveniences Angels of the ward, toast of the world Illegal explosive trade targeted Probe shows colliery workmen ignored laws New regulation in Dalian beggars belief Congestion takes its toll on bridge Go to Another Section select hot link News Center China World Business Life Sports Most Popular Photo Gallery Story Tools Related Stories Efforts to control housing prices continue House prices to maintain robust growth Housing policies pre-empt speculators Policies failing to get a grip on housing speculation China's housing prices up 14.4% last year China's housing price hike reasonable? Housing prices surge in first 10 months News Talk It is time to prepare for Beijing - 2008 Find Suppliers Trade Leads Firm Directory Product Directory China Products Gold Suppliers Hot Products Hot Buys New Products Country Search Trade Shows Advertisement

Selling home on your

Alaska Journal of Commerce: Selling home on your own can prove costly 04/22/02 [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] Home Focus In this Issue Calendar Bulletin Board Movers & Shakers Business History Archive Around the World Legals Viewpoint Profile Cartoons Contact Us Advertise with us Subscribe About Us Classified ADs Oil & Gas Special Sections Wealthbuilders Fish Factor Travel Insight Property Wise Tech Watch Law Page Philanthropy Health Book of Lists -5° 17° 9° 8° 27° 33° 35° 41° 44° 39° 35° Choose City Anchorage Barrow Bethel Cordova Deadhorse Denali Park Dillingham Dutch Harbor Fairbanks Galena Haines Homer Juneau Kenai Ketchikan Kodiak Kotzebue McGrath Nenana Paxson Petersburg Pribilof Islands Sitka Skagway Soldotna Talkeetna Valdez Wrangell Yakutat Email Newsletter Palm Pilot Delivery Letter to the editor Comments Locate a copy [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] 042202 prop_wise 2 Alaska Journal of Commerce Late night television and local radio programming is rife with infomercials and advertisements touting how easy it is to buy and sell your houses, buildings and businesses all by yourself and save staggering amounts of money to boot. -- Web posted Monday, April 22, 2002 Selling home on your own can prove costly By Ken Jelinek For the Journal Late night television and local radio programming is rife with infomercials and advertisements touting how easy it is to buy and sell your houses, buildings and businesses all by yourself and save staggering amounts of money to boot. They can be rather insulting to those of us in the real estate industry because they attempt to make us sound unnecessary, unethical and expensive. But the fact is, you really can do it yourself successfully. Cynically speaking, however, you can also fix your own car, generate your own electricity, defend yourself in court, trade your own stocks and never visit a doctor. You could probably do your neighbor's job too. One day, when everything is perfectly computerized and digital, you probably won't need a real estate agent. But for now, for the rest of us, we need the help, and that help is going to cost us. So, before you go spiraling off in your declaration of independence, ask yourself, "If it's really so easy, then why aren't all real estate transactions conducted without an agent?" You might also ask yourself if you would want to eliminate the real estate agent and take on all of his or her responsibilities when you are already bogged down with your own life in general, and especially if you haven't done it enough to do it right or do it well? Then, listen closely to your answers because we professionals in the industry are often patching up real estate transactions gone sour behind the well-meaning do-it-yourselfers. Keep in mind that I'm referring to all professionals in the industry including agents, attorneys, loan originators, title officers, processors, surveyors, tax assessors, appraisers and inspectors. But I'm referring specifically to the agent because he or she is the center in this wheel. Nationally, only three to five of every 100 home sales consists of successful "For Sale by Owner" transactions. The vast majority of those that attempt it end up hiring an agent within the first 30 days after they have realized the true cost, time and demands required for marketing and showing a home. Locally, the statistics indicate 15-17 percent of FSBOs are successful. While there are a lot of reasons for this, one of the main ones is that we have a robust seller's market with relatively low inventory. This can be quite tempting for sellers to strike out on their own because it looks easier than it is. But even the owners that sell their own homes usually sell to a buyer who has an agent paid for by the seller. The truth is that the vast majority of all real estate transactions are completed with agents involved on at least one side of the sale, and for this reason, most transactions go very smoothly. But sometimes they don't. One recent seller took the advice of a local FSBO program on pricing his home. Several programs will give you limited service for a set fee. He put an ad in the paper and sold it within three days. When the appraisal report came back he learned that he priced his home too low but was still committed to that price. Sure, he might have saved 6 or 7 percent in brokerage fees but he lost a lot more than that to the happy buyer because his FSBO consultant didn't know the market well enough. In a similar incident, a very excited couple heard of a perfect home on the market For Sale By Owner in their neighborhood. The sellers told them that they didn't want to pay any brokerage fees and proceeded to negotiate down the asking price by $9,000, which made the buyers feel special. A market analysis revealed that the starting price was already about $10,000 too high. And yet, it's going to be sold at the same market price to the buyers whether or not they have an agent paid by the seller. Recently a buyer made an offer on a duplex that was accepted with a counteroffer to increase the earnest money. Both buyer and seller agreed verbally and the only thing lacking was the buyer's signature on that change. In the meantime, the seller sold the duplex to a second buyer to get a higher price and quicker closing. He now has two accepted offers on the same property at the same time. Which party in this potential lawsuit would you like to be? Not all sellers innocently try to save money on real estate commissions. Some choose to "overlook" disclosing pertinent and sometimes legally required information to buyers because doing so might lower the final sales price or prohibit a sale indefinitely because they can't afford to fix a deficiency. How would you protect yourself without the watchful eye of an expert? Agents usually take on quite a bit of risk in marketing your house for sale or driving you around looking at homes to buy. They pay for everything up front and often don't get paid until the day it is recorded, which makes him or her, actually, quite a bargain. On the other hand, you could do it yourself. Ken Jelinek is an associate broker with RE/MAX Properties in Anchorage. He can be reached at 907-257-0196. [an error occurred while processing this directive] © 2004 The Alaska Journal of Commerce and Morris Communications Corp.

New Homes Features of

Homebuyer Incentives : ENERGY STAR What is ENERGY STAR? | Newsroom Search What are ENERGY STAR Qualified New Homes Features of ENERGY STAR Qualified New Homes Benefits of ENERGY STAR Qualified New Homes Financial Incentives Increased Comfort Higher Resale Environment Lower Cost Homebuyer Resources New Homes Partner Locator For Residential Building Professionals PRODUCTS HOME IMPROVEMENT NEW HOMES BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PARTNER RESOURCES -- Home > New Homes > Benefits of ENERGY STAR Qualified New Homes -- -- Homebuyer Incentives Because ENERGY STAR qualified new homes offer significant utility bill savings each and every month, ownership gives you access to special financing opportunities such as Energy Efficient Mortgages. These special mortgages make it easier for borrowers to qualify to purchase homes with specific energy-efficiency improvements. Contact your local ENERGY STAR lender to learn more about how buying an ENERGY STAR qualified new home can truly pay significant dividends. As a home buyer you can also reap the benefits from special utility promotions designed to encourage homeowners to reduce their energy consumption through energy efficiency. These promotions often include product rebates on home products that bear the ENERGY STAR label, reimbursement for the cost of having your home energy rated by a certified home energy rater, as well as other energy efficiency perks depending on the structure of the utility's ENERGY STAR program. The bottom line is that by installing energy efficient features in your new home such as a high SEER heating and cooling unit, low-e windows, and improved insulation, you can save money on your monthly utility bills, live in a more comfortable home, and help keep energy demand down. Our New Homes Partner Locator provides contact information for local home builders that build ENERGY STAR qualified new homes, lenders that offer energy efficient mortgages, utilities and other sponsoring programs that offer incentives for buying and building ENERGY STAR qualified new homes, and home energy raters that verify the energy efficiency of ENERGY STAR qualified new homes Resources for Homebuyers Products | Home Improvement | New Homes | Business Improvement | Partner Resources Newsroom | Privacy | Contact Us | Site Index EPA Home EPA Search DOE Home DOE Search

Real Estate Prices Still

Agricultural Economist Newsletter: Winter 2001--Farm Real Estate Prices Still Rising in Minnesota Farm Real Estate Prices Still Rising in Minnesota Steven J. Taff Average Minnesota farm real estate sales prices just keep on climbing (figure 1). This despite low output prices, rising input costs, and continued uncertainty about the future of federal subsidies. Sales price increases were seen in all parts of the state except in the northwest. In this annual sales price summary, I can provide only an overview, some cursory analysis, and--as always--a few opinions. I'll not bore you with text that simply repeats what's already shown in the charts. Instead I'll spend some time discussing how land transaction data are recorded, adjusted, and employed. I think it's useful to go through some administrative and procedural details to further our understanding of what these data are and what they are not. If this prospect makes you say, "Just show me the data, Steve," then you can stop right after the sales summary section. Or, if your impatience knows no bounds, go straight to the Minnesota Land Economics (MLE) Web site at http://apec.umn.edu/faculty/sjtaff/landdata/index.html and start working the numbers yourself. Farm Land Sales in 2000 Assessors are required to report initial assessments in late fall, based on sales data to date. That's why the data are reported on a "record year" basis: these are the sales that were, presumably, available for assessor scrutiny at the time the initial estimated market-values are calculated. Final values are set by summer, to be used in the succeeding tax year. So, for example, sales made in late 1999 are used by assessors to set initial values for January 2001. These estimates are adjusted in spring 2001, finalized in summer 2001, and then used for tax purposes in 2002. The adjusted record year 2000 sales data were therefore not available until April of this year. Figure 2 shows the distribution of all farmland sales in 2000. The bulk of the sales lie between $500 and $2,000 per acre. I excluded a small number of sales that exceeded $5,000 per acre as well as those involving parcels of land less than 20 acres in size. Both were excluded as not being plausibly "agricultural"--despite their designation on the Certificate of Real Estate Value (CRV) as "agricultural" land. (Although excluded from figure 2, these data are included in the MLE Web site data.) Even though MAE readers and MLE Web site users can view the full distribution of sales prices, most still ask for a single number that somehow captures the story behind the figures. Obviously, for a set of sales that span such a wide range in prices, any single number fails completely to accomplish this end. Movements in averages, while arithmetically correct, usually fail to tell the entire story. The particular average I use in this article is a location- and size-weighted mean (table 1). In last year's farm real estate report ( agecon.lib.umn.edu/mn/mae699.pdf ), I discussed the usefulness of such weighting as well as the desirability of examining sales data at the smallest geographic scale possible. Table 1. Minnesota farm real estate sales summary Record year Number of sales Acres sold Average price* 1996 2,504 263,728 936 1997 2,641 296,803 1,039 1998 2,724 303,968 1,113 1999 2,212 235,359 1,196 2000 2,258 250,979 1,222 * Location- and size-weighted per-acre mean Figure 1 compares the movements of actual sales price averages with those two other estimates of land value--the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) annual state estimates (based on a farmer opinion survey) and the average assessor estimates (the location- and size-weighted mean estimated market value). The University of Minnesota sales prices averages are location- and size-weighted means. The fact that all three (somewhat) independent estimates of farmland real estate values shown in figure 1 move in lockstep adds credence, I believe, to the conclusion that, on average, farmland values really are increasing in Minnesota. Geographic variations in real estate values for the past 11 years are shown in the box-and-whisker plots of figure 3. (District boundaries are shown in figure 4.) The range of sales prices for each district for each year is shown by the endpoints of the vertical lines. The ends of each box show the prices at which 25 percent of the sales were higher (or lower). The median is indicated by the horizontal bar within each box. So, for example, the median Central district farmland sale was about $1,200 per acre, with 25 percent of the sales lower than $750 and 75 percent lower than $1,850 per acre. In previous years' reports, I've noted the wide variation in average price movements among districts. Such differences were accentuated in 2000 by the continued climb of values in the South East district combined with the continued stagnation in the North West district (figure 5) . Farm Sale Data When a Minnesota property is sold, the transaction details must be recorded at the county courthouse on a form called a CRV. On it, the seller attests that such-and-such a property was sold to so-and-so on a certain date for a specific price. Other information about the property (its size, soil characteristics, prior year's estimated market value) is often entered on the CRV as well. Frequently, the per-acre prices that underlie this article and are also shown in the MLE Web site are not the prices entered on the CRV. Long before a land sales figure enters the official data base, it has been passed through an array of filters and adjustments designed to make comparison among transactions more meaningful and more reliable. Recording the Transactions There are many possible slips between an ownership change and data analysis. Of course, there is always the chance that simple recording errors are made. For example, numbers may be miscopied from bills of sale onto the CRV, or into a computer file, or into a spreadsheet. There is also a chance of misrepresentation. The person who fills in the CRV might have a reason to understate or overstate the actual sales price--perhaps to avoid a tax. This, of course, is illegal, but, as any courthouse veteran can tell you, it occasionally happens. Not every sale receives further processing. Local or state officials remove from subsequent analysis any sale not deemed "arms-length," because it was sold, for example, to a member of the seller's immediate family. Or, a sale might be pulled because the new buyer intends to convert the land to a non-agricultural use. Adjusting the Prices After this filtering, sales prices are frequently adjusted to make comparison among sales more appropriate. First, to expunge the effects of inflation, sales prices are deflated by an officially reported rate to January 2 of the year in which they were recorded. This "adjustment for time" is fairly minor in years (like the past decade) where inflation has been low. The second adjustment is "for terms." Not all farm real estate sales are for the full property. Some are made through a contract for deed, an arrangement that allows the buyer to pay a certain amount now and other amounts at stated intervals. Until the final payment is made, the property remains in the possession of the seller--even though it has been "sold." Because the full payment schedule is entered on the CRV, the Department of Revenue can calculate a present value of the initial and subsequent payments at an official discount rate. This becomes the official sales price of the property, regardless of what the buyer and seller had in mind when they sealed the deal. Adjustments don't end with a time- and terms-adjusted sales price, honestly reported and accurately recorded. In most cases, users of the data are interested in per-acre prices, not per-parcel prices. That means some chosen total price must be divided by some total acreage. But which price? Which acres? Should we use the total price or should we first subtract out the value of buildings, personal property, ancillary property, or machinery to get closer to the "true" land price? In this article (and on the MLE Web site), I choose to follow conventions established years ago in Minnesota. I report the time- and terms-adjusted total sales price, minus the value of personal property, divided by the entire acreage of the parcel. That's why, when I'm being careful, I speak of the average price of farm real estate, not of farm land . Employing the Data The sales reported here are only those recorded between October 1, 1999, and September 30, 2000. These "record year 2000" sales are so bundled because of the way real estate transactions are used to help local assessors value land for property tax purposes. Strange as it may seem, the Department of Revenue does not collect sales data merely to satisfy the data cravings of University economists like me. No, statewide sales data are collected principally to create statistics that are used to "equalize" property tax valuations across county boundaries. Each year, county assessors are required to assign an estimated market value (EMV) to each of the thousands of real estate parcels in the county. The estimate is supposed to be based on an examination of similar properties that were actually sold recently. (The combined valuations for each township, city, or county are the source of the Land Values--in contrast to the Farmland Sales--data on the MLE Web site.) Because every county has its own assessor who uses largely independent valuation procedures, there are inevitably discontinuities across county lines--even for adjacent properties. Farmer Brown wonders why Farmer Olson's land, just across the fence line in the next county, carries an assessed value that is lower by $200 per acre. The state has created an equalization procedure that is supposed to smooth over such discontinuities. Assuming that nearby properties really would sell for similar prices, any observed difference in assessed values for otherwise similar properties is presumed to be evidence that one or both of the assessors is either undervaluing (that is, assigning an EMV that is too low) or overvaluing properties. To test this, the state calculates a sales ratio (the EMV divided by sales price) for every property sold in a particular area. If an assessor systematically undervalues properties (shown by sales ratios that are consistently lower than some threshold), the state might demand the EMVs in that jurisdiction be uniformly raised, to better accord with what is thought to be "true" market conditions. How Accurate Are the EMVs? We can see for ourselves how close the final assessor estimates are by comparing actual sales prices against the previous year's estimated market values for the same property (figure 2). Each point in the figure represents one sale. For example, the rightmost point is for a property that was estimated to have a value of $4,900 per acre, but actually sold for only $2,900 per acre. While some of the estimates are obviously way off (like this example), the bulk are pretty close. In most cases, the EMV was lower than the sale price, but in a neatly predictable manner. A simple one-variable regression model, shown as the straight line in the figure, accounts for nearly 75 percent of the observed variation in farm real estate sales prices. Parting Thoughts What accounts for the ever-onward-and-upward movement of average farm real estate prices in Minnesota? We need only to round up the usual suspects, most of which I have discussed at length in previous issues of MAE . These include 1) perennial farmer optimism about future crop and livestock prices, 2) expected extensions of federal farm subsidy programs, 3) continued favorable local property tax treatment for farmland, 4) the desire of some farmers to increase the size of their current operation by buying adjacent farmland, 5) the desire of some non-farm buyers to use land as a hedge against inflation, and 6) inflation itself. An additional suspect that we need to add is the increasing prominence of location even in rural land markets. We simply can't explain current price levels on the basis of income potential (including subsidies) and speculation potential alone. Clearly, where the land sits with respect to job centers and what it looks like is influencing the price buyers are willing to pay for a particular parcel of land. As always, I caution potential land buyers and sellers about reading too much into the average land prices reported here and elsewhere. If you've got land to sell or if you have a hankering to buy land--look before you leap. The financial stakes are too high for casual empiricism. Hire an appraiser. Talk with your spouse. Check your finances. Think about the children. Be careful out there! Steven J. Taff is an associate professor and extension economist with the Department of Applied Economics at the University of Minnesota. Return to Minnesota Ag Economist Newsletter Index Page University of Minnesota Extension Service HomePage

Home Mortgage

Refinance Mortgage, Home Loan, Home Equity, Home Purchase, Debt Consolidation - LowerMyBills Loans Home Refinance Loan Home Equity Loan Debt Consolidation Loan Home Purchase Loan Commercial Mortgage Automobile Loan Find a Real Estate Agent Debt DebtWizard Debt Consolidation Loan Online BillPay Login Take the Tour Insurance Automobile Insurance Life Insurance Health Insurance Homeowner's Insurance Renter's Insurance Credit Credit Cards Free Credit Report & Score Phone & Internet Cellular Phone Long Distance Service Internet Access Satellite Select One Home Refinance Home Purchase Home Equity Debt Consolidation Property State Select One Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Home Description Single Family Multi-Family Condominium Townhouse Mobile Home Manufactured Home Your Credit Profile Excellent Good Fair Needs Improvement Poor Enter Your Email Address & Receive Our FREE Newsletter Full of Savings Tips and Special Offers Tips & Advice Browse over 200 FREE financial tips . Definitions Expert Answers Financial Tools How-To Advice LowerMyBills in the Media Calculators Home Refinance Calculators Home Equity Calculators Debt Consolidation Calculators Home Purchase Calculators (WEB06-C) (Q-1) (T-1850) (P-1336) (S-1)