Toni’s Real Estate blog: LALivingNow.com Rotating Header Image

Fast Facts

Calif. median home price: December 2011: $285,920 (Source: C.A.R.)
Calif. highest median home price by region/county December  2011: Marin: $693,880 (Source: C.A.R.)
Calif. lowest median home price by region/county December 2011: Madera: $106,000 (Source: C.A.R.)

Calif. Pending Home Sales Index: November 2011: 109.8, an increase of 11 percent compared with the prior year.
 
Calif. Traditional Housing Affordability Index: Third quarter 2011: 52 percent (Source: C.A.R.)

Mortgage rates: Week ending 1/12/2012 30-yr. fixed: 3.89% fees/points: 0.7% 15-yr. fixed: 3.16 fees/points: 0.8% 1-yr. adjustable: 2.76% Fees/points: 0.6% (Source: Freddie Mac)

Bookmark and Share
contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

Tip of the Week: Unexpected IRS refund

If you receive an unsolicited email that appears to be from the IRS requesting that you file a “tax refund request,” do not fall victim to this identity theft scheme.
Numerous people are receiving unsolicited email informing them that a $9,390.55 IRS tax refund is due to them if they complete a tax refund request form. The email code will be forged to appear as if it originated from a trusted source, usually the IRS or an IRS tax preparer, but viewing the “message header” or “message source” will reveal its origin to be something else, and the link will not lead to a trusted domain, but one controlled by identity theft criminals.
If you file a tax return and a refund is due, you will automatically receive your refund. You will never be contacted by the IRS, and there is no tax refund request form. Never disclose personal information to any unsolicited inquiry, as compelling as the story may be.
If you have questions or concerns about any IRS tax refund you may have due, you should access the official IRS “Where’s My Refund” online application at the following destination: http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96596,00.html.

Bookmark and Share
contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

Voters Place High Value on Homeownership, Oppose Policies That Make It More Difficult to Own a Home

By an overwhelming margin, American voters strongly value homeownership and would oppose efforts to weaken or eliminate the mortgage interest deduction or diminish a federal role to help qualified home buyers obtain affordable 30-year mortgages, according to a new nationwide survey gauging likely voters’ attitudes towards homeownership and housing policy issues.

“The American electorate is sending a clear message that owning a home remains a cornerstone of the American Dream and preserving a federal commitment to homeownership is essential to maintain a thriving middle class and get housing and the economy back on track,” said Neil Newhouse, a partner and co-founder of Public Opinion Strategies.

Conducted on Jan. 2-5 on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders by the Republican and Democratic polling firms of Public Opinion Strategies in Alexandria, Va., and Lake Research Partners in Washington, D.C., the comprehensive survey of 1,500 likely voters includes data from key political “swing areas,” including National Journal political analyst Charlie Cook’s swing House and Senate seats and Stuart Rothenberg’s presidential swing states. The survey, which has a margin of error of ±2.5 percent, is a follow-up to a similar national poll conducted last May.

The poll shows that three out of four voters – both owners and renters — believe it is appropriate and reasonable for the federal government to provide tax incentives to promote homeownership. This sentiment cuts across regional and party lines, with 84 percent of Democrats, 71 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Independents agreeing with this statement.

Also, two-thirds of respondents say that the federal government should help home buyers to afford a long-term or 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage.

Moreover, 73 percent of voters oppose eliminating the mortgage interest deduction. These figures held firm across the political spectrum, with 77 percent of Republicans, 71 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of Independents against doing away with the mortgage interest deduction.

Meanwhile, 68 percent would be less likely to vote for a congressional candidate who proposed to abolish the deduction, a figure that was virtually identical across all party affiliations (69 percent of Independents and 68 percent of Democrats and Republicans).

A majority of voters are also against proposals to reduce the mortgage interest deduction, eliminate the deduction for interest paid for a second home, limit the deduction for those earning more than $250,000 per year, scale back the deduction for home owners with mortgages above $500,000 and do away with the deduction for interest paid on home equity loans.

“With the 2012 election season in full swing, candidates running for the White House and Congress would be wise to heed the will of the American voters, who have expressed broad support for government policies that encourage homeownership and oppose efforts to make it more difficult to get a home loan and to tamper with the mortgage interest deduction,” said Celinda Lake, president of Lake Research Partners.

Among the poll’s other key findings:

  • 96 percent of home owners are happy with their decision to own and 84 percent who are “underwater,” or owe more on their mortgages than their home is worth, expressed the same sentiment.
  • 79 percent of home owners would advise a family member or close friend just starting out to buy a home, and 69 percent of those who are underwater on their mortgage would offer the same advice.
  • 74 percent said that despite the ups and downs in the housing market, owning a home is the best long-term investment they can make.
  • Homeownership and a retirement savings program are considered by voters to be their best long-term investments.
  • 78 percent of respondents said that owning their own home is very important to them.
  • Nearly seven out of 10 voters who are not currently home owners (68 percent) said it was a goal of theirs to buy a home.
  • Job uncertainty and saving for a downpayment and closing costs are the biggest barriers to buying a home.

The survey findings are consistent with the results of other public opinion surveys. In a New York Times/CBS News poll conducted in June, 89 percent said that homeownership is an important part of the American Dream and more than 90 percent indicated that it is important for the federal government to continue the mortgage interest deduction.

According to a Pew Research Study conducted last March, 81 percent of respondents agree that buying a home is the best long-term investment a person can make and 81 percent of renters surveyed said they would like to buy a house.

“Even in a down housing market, homeownership remains a core American value, with the vast majority of citizens who do not currently own a home saying they want to buy a home,” said Bob Nielsen, president of the National Association of Home Builders and a home builder from Reno, Nev. “Those running for office in November need to understand that voters will not look kindly on any candidates who seek to dismantle the nation’s long-term commitment to homeownership.”

Poll results can be downloaded at www.nahb.org/homeownershippoll.

Bookmark and Share
contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

California home sales rise in December, posting 11-month sales high

California home sales rise in December, posting 11-month sales high, C.A.R. reports

LOS ANGELES (Jan. 17) – California home sales rose for the third consecutive month in December, marking the highest level since January 2011, according to data from the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (C.A.R.).  Sales also were up from a year ago, marking the sixth consecutive annual increase.

“With the economy slowly improving, home buyers – investors and first-time buyers alike – took advantage of affordable  interest rates and made a push to close escrow by the end of year,” said C.A.R. President LeFrancis Arnold.  “Robust sales over the past few months signal the housing market is treading above water on its own in the first full year without the government stimulus that has helped housing in the last couple of years.”

Closed escrow sales of existing, single-family detached homes in California totaled a seasonally adjusted annualized rate of 520,940 in December, according to information collected by C.A.R. from more than 90 local REALTOR® associations and MLSs statewide.  December’s sales were up 3.3 percent from November’s revised pace of 504,420 and were up 0.1 percent from the revised 520,330 sales pace recorded in December 2010.  The statewide sales figure represents what would be the total number of homes sold during 2011 if sales maintained the December pace throughout the year.  It is adjusted to account for seasonal factors that typically influence home sales.

The statewide median price of an existing, single-family detached home posted its second consecutive monthly gain, increasing 1.8 percent to $285,920 in December, up from a revised $280,960 in November.  However, the median price was down 6.2 percent from the revised $304,770 median price recorded in December 2010.

“Fourth quarter sales were stronger than we expected, thanks to recent improving consumer confidence and an economy that’s slowly showing signs of growth.  As a result, sales came in slightly above our fall projection,” said C.A.R. Vice President and Chief Economist Leslie Appleton-Young.  “For 2011 as a whole, sales reached a preliminary 497,860 homes sold statewide, up 1.1 percent from the 492,290 homes sold in 2010.  However, the statewide median price declined 6.3 percent for the year, to reach a preliminary $285,950, down from the revised $305,010 recorded in 2010.

“Home prices are stabilizing for the distressed market, where we see robust demand, but we continue to see downward pressure on home prices in some higher end markets,” said Appleton-Young.

Other key facts of C.A.R.’s December 2011 resale housing report include:

  • Housing inventory remains tight throughout California, with the Unsold Inventory Index for existing, single-family detached homes declining to 4.2 months in December, down from 5.0 months in November and down from a 5.0-month supply in December 2010.  The index indicates the number of months needed to deplete the supply of homes on the market at the current sales rate.
  • Thirty-year fixed-mortgage interest rates averaged 3.96 percent during December 2011, down from 4.71 percent in December 2010, according to Freddie Mac.  Adjustable-mortgage interest rates averaged 2.79 percent in December 2011, compared with 3.31 percent in December 2010.
  • The median number of days it took to sell a single-family home edged up to 58.7 days in December 2011, compared with a revised 58.0 days for the same period a year ago.
  • View Unsold Inventory by price range.

Note:  The County MLS median price and sales data in the tables are generated from a survey of more than 90 associations of REALTORS® throughout the state, and represent statistics of existing single-family detached homes only.  County sales data are not adjusted to account for seasonal factors that can influence home sales.  Movements in sales prices should not be interpreted as changes in the cost of a standard home.  Median prices can be influenced by changes in cost, as well as changes in the characteristics and the size of homes sold.  Due to the low sales volume in some areas, median price changes in December may exhibit unusual fluctuation.

Leading the way…® in California real estate for more than 100 years, the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (www.car.org) is one of the largest state trade organizations in the United States, with more than 155,000 members dedicated to the advancement of professionalism in real estate. C.A.R. is headquartered in Los Angeles.

# # #

December 2011 County Sales and Price Activity
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

Dec-11 Median Price of Existing Single-Family Homes Sales
State/
Region/
County
Dec.
2011
Nov.
2011
  Dec.
2010
  MTM%
Chg
YTY%
Chg
MTM%
Chg
YTY%
Chg
California
Single-
family
(SAAR)
$285,920 $280,960   $304,770 r 1.80% -6.20% 3.30% 0.10%
California
Condo/
Townhomes
$225,270 $224,720   $240,970 r 0.20% -6.50% 13.80% 1.50%
Los
Angeles
Metro.
Area
$265,830 $269,440   $278,360   -1.30% -4.50% 12.50% -3.00%
Inland
Empire
$172,430 $173,150   $178,240   -0.40% -3.30% 10.40% -1.40%
San
Francisco
Bay Area
$455,750 $467,680   $495,520 r -2.60% -8.00% 6.30% -1.40%
                   
San Francisco
Bay Area
                 
Alameda $450,000 $457,890   $478,740 r -1.70% -6.00% -4.40% -5.80%
Contra-Costa
(Central
County)
$518,560 $520,830   $568,600   -0.40% -8.80% 30.30% 11.80%
Marin $693,880 $736,410   $753,680   -5.80% -7.90% -13.20% -8.60%
Napa $344,830 $339,470   $350,000   1.60% -1.50% 20.40% 19.10%
San
Francisco
$633,580 $646,800   $678,190   -2.00% -6.60% 1.40% 1.10%
San
Mateo
$595,000 $735,000   $699,500 r -19.00% -14.90% 2.80% -9.70%
Santa
Clara
$535,000 $560,000   $548,000 r -4.50% -2.40% 6.40% -13.70%
Solano $190,200 $190,770   $204,290   -0.30% -6.90% 20.50% 18.70%
Sonoma $325,260 $321,290   $344,680   1.20% -5.60% 1.30% 10.70%
Southern
California
                 
Los
Angeles
$306,950 $291,260   $328,140 r 5.40% -6.50% 14.60% -4.60%
Orange
County
$484,630 $487,610   $499,810 r -0.60% -3.00% 9.00% -5.60%
Riverside
County
$203,650 $200,080   $205,220   1.80% -0.80% 12.00% -4.30%
San
Bernardino
$128,450 $135,280   $134,760   -5.00% -4.70% 7.80% 4.00%
San Diego $359,930 $356,410   $375,790   1.00% -4.20% 16.20% 5.60%
Ventura $391,060 $410,530   $441,570   -4.70% -11.40% 21.10% 5.30%
Central
Coast
                 
Monterey $275,000 $270,000   $235,000 r 1.90% 17.00% -1.40% -5.80%
San Luis
Obispo
$366,670 $354,170   $377,550   3.50% -2.90% 18.00% 32.00%
Santa
Barbara
$429,410 $365,620   $453,850   17.40% -5.40% 25.40% 9.30%
Santa Cruz $475,000 $415,000   $512,500 r 14.50% -7.30% 19.50% 23.30%
Central
Valley
                 
Fresno $140,480 $145,770   $145,280   -3.60% -3.30% 13.70% 14.20%
Kern
(Bakersfield)
$132,000 $134,000 r $125,000   -1.50% 5.60% -5.70% -11.40%
Kings
County
$130,560 $154,280   $158,000   -15.40% -17.40% 26.60% 65.30%
Madera $106,000 $103,330   $143,080   2.60% -25.90% 24.20% -51.20%
Merced $106,110 $117,000   $117,500   -9.30% -9.70% -2.30% -22.30%
Placer
County
$255,560 $256,440   $271,740   -0.30% -6.00% 5.30% 0.00%
Sacramento $162,820 $165,890   $179,040   -1.90% -9.10% 8.70% 11.00%
San Benito $259,200 $245,000   $279,900 r 5.80% -7.40% 14.30% -5.10%
Tulare $127,660 $126,670   $131,510   0.80% -2.90% 6.20% 11.00%
Other
Counties in
California
                 
Amador $142,220 $190,000   $173,330   -25.10% -17.90% 47.10% 47.10%
Butte
County
$198,750 $207,950   $230,000   -4.40% -13.60% 4.00% 31.30%
Humboldt $227,630 $223,440   $248,440   1.90% -8.40% 21.30% 24.70%
Lake
County
$114,170 $128,750   $113,750   -11.30% 0.40% 12.30% 23.70%
Tuolumne $156,670 $157,500   $177,780   -0.50% -11.90% 19.00% 19.00%
Mendocino $204,170 $190,000   $220,830   7.50% -7.50% 30.00% 6.10%
Shasta $148,570 $154,000   $176,870   -3.50% -16.00% 10.70% 5.90%
Siskiyou
County
$131,250 $123,330   $163,330   6.40% -19.60% 18.20% 0.00%
Tehama $132,000 $105,000   $136,670   25.70% -3.40% 12.20% 24.30%

 

December 2011 County Unsold Inventory and Time on Market
(Regional and condo sales data not seasonally adjusted)

Dec-11 Unsold
Inventory
Index
        Median
Time on
Market
       
State/Region/County Dec-11 Nov-11   Dec-10   Dec-11 Nov-11   Dec-10  
California
Single-family  
4.2 5   5   58.7 56.6   58 r
California
Condo/Townhomes
4.6 5.8   5.5 r 69.8 67.5   64 r
Los Angeles
Metropolitan Area
4.8 5.7   5.2   62.5 59.7   57.3  
Inland Empire 4.4 5.1   4.7   54.6 53.5   48.3  
San Francisco
Bay Area
3.5 4.3   4 r 64.8 59.2   65.6 r
                     
San Francisco
Bay Area
                   
Alameda 2.9 3.5   3.5   82.5 82.8   84.4  
Contra-Costa
(Central County)
2.8 4.8   4   87.9 86.4   97.9  
Marin 4.7 5   4.7   83.8 66.9   82.4  
Napa 5.8 8.1   7.8   80.3 88.7   84.2  
San Francisco 4.7 4.7   4.2   53.3 42   55.6  
San Mateo 2.9 3.7   3.2 r 40.4 29.9   44.1 r
Santa Clara 2.6 3.4   3.1   32 28.3   34.6 r
Solano 3.9 5.1   5.2   48.3 50.8   51.6  
Sonoma 4.7 5.5   5.4   81.9 88   84.5  
Southern
California
                   
Los Angeles 4.7 5.6   5.3   62.3 59   56.3 r
Orange County 5.8 7   6.1 r 81.5 80.7   82.3 r
Riverside County 4.5 5.3   4.3   57.1 55.7   52.9  
San Bernardino 4.2 4.7   5.2   49.6 49.5   47.9  
San Diego 5 6.4   5.9   61.8 58.7   59.5  
Ventura 5.7 7.5   5.7   75.5 69.3   83.1  
Central Coast                    
Monterey 4.2 4.6   4.9 r 48.4 39.5   45.5 r
San Luis Obispo 4.2 5.7   7   58 63.9   68.3  
Santa Barbara 5 7   6 r 78 65.2   73.7 r
Santa Cruz 3.8 5.3   5.5 r 57.6 46.1   49.5 r
Central Valley                    
Fresno 3.2 4.1   NA   35 36.3   48.9  
Kern (Bakersfield) 2.5 2.5 r 4.6 r NA NA   NA  
Kings County 3.7 5.1   7.5   77.7 46.8   36.4  
Madera 3.8 5.5   6   51.5 36.4   54.8  
Merced 3.8 3.8   3.6   37.4 46.7   35.3  
Placer County NA NA   NA   NA NA   NA  
Sacramento 1.8 2.1   3.4   42 41.9   48.5  
San Benito 3 4.2   4.3 r 51.1 50.9   45.5  
Tulare 3.8 4.1   5.3   35.4 41.7   39.3  
Other Counties
in California
                   
Amador 5.6 9.4   8.3   91 61   75.5  
Butte County 4.5 5.2   7   53.1 74.3   66.8  
Humboldt 5.5 7.6   7.3   67.6 88.4   64.6  
Lake County 6.4 8   9.8   111.9 108.7   95.4  
Tuolumne 5.9 8.1   7.4   91 77.6   64.6  
Mendocino 6.1 7.5   7.8   81.7 72.6   78.7  
Shasta 4.6 5.3   6.5   47 52.3   65.4  
Siskiyou County 8.3 11.5   NA   65.4 123.4   121 r
Tehama 5.7 7   7.6   70.7 65.8   47.9  
Bookmark and Share
contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

Among the Wealthiest One Percent, Many Variations

CNBC:

Adam Katz is happy to talk to reporters when he is promoting his business, a charter flight company based on Long Island called Talon Air.

But when the subject was his position as one of America’s top earners, he balked. Seated at a desk fashioned from a jet fuel cell, wearing a button-down shirt with the company logo, he considered the public relations benefits and found them lacking: “It’s not very popular to be in the 1 percent these days, is it?”

A few months ago, Mr. Katz was just a successful businessman with five children, an $8 million home, a family real estate company in Manhattan and his passion, 10-year-old Talon Air.

Now, the colossal gap between the very rich and everyone else — the 1 percent versus the 99 percent — has become a rallying point in this election season. As President Obama positions himself as a defender of the middle class, and Mitt Romney, the wealthiest of the Republican presidential candidates, decries such talk as “the bitter politics of envy,” Mr. Katz has found himself on the wrong end of a new paradigm.

As a member of the 1 percent, he is part of a club whose name conjures images of Wall Street bosses who are chauffeured from manse to Manhattan and fat cats who have armies of lobbyists at the ready.

But in reality it is a far larger and more varied group, one that includes podiatrists and actuaries, executives and entrepreneurs, the self-made and the silver spoon set. They are clustered not just in New York and Los Angeles, but also in Denver and Dallas. The range of wealth in the 1 percent is vast — from households that bring in $380,000 a year, according to census data, up to billionaires like Warren E. Buffett and Bill Gates.

The top 1 percent of earners in a given year receives just under a fifth of the country’s pretax income, about double their share 30 years ago. They pay just over a fourth of all federal taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center. In 2007, they accounted for about 30 percent of philanthropic giving, according to Federal Reserve data. They received 22 percent of their income from capital gains, compared with 2 percent for everybody else.

Still, they are not necessarily the idle rich. Mr. Katz, who sometimes commutes by amphibious plane and sometimes carries luggage for Talon Air passengers, likes to say he works “26/9.”

Most 1 percenters were born with socioeconomic advantages, which helps explain why the 1 percent is more likely than other Americans to have jobs, according to census data. They work longer hours, being three times more likely than the 99 percent to work more than 50 hours a week, and are more likely to be self-employed.

Married 1 percenters are just as likely as other couples to have two incomes, but men are the big breadwinners, earning 75 percent of the money, compared with 64 percent of the income in other households.

Though many of the wealthy lean toward the Republican Party, in interviews, 1 percenters expressed a broad range of views on how to fix the economy. They think that President Obama is ruining it, or that Republicans in Congress have gone off the deep end. They favor a flat tax, or they believe the rich should pay a higher marginal rate.

Some cheered on Occupy Wall Street, saying it was about time, while others wished the protesters would just get a job or take a bath. Still others were philosophical — perhaps because they could afford to be — viewing the recession as something that would pass, like so many previous ups and downs.

Of the 1 percenters interviewed for this article, almost all — conservatives and liberals alike — said the wealthy could and should shoulder more of the country’s financial burden, and almost all said they viewed the current system as unfair. But they may prefer facing cuts to their own benefits like Social Security than paying more taxes. In one survey of wealthy Chicago families, almost twice as many respondents said they would cut government spending as those who said they would cut spending and raise revenue.

Even those who said the deck was stacked in their favor did not appreciate anti-rich rhetoric.

“I don’t mind paying a little bit more in taxes. I don’t mind putting money to programs that help the poor,” said Anthony J. Bonomo of Manhasset, N.Y., who runs a medical malpractice insurance company and is a Republican. But, he said, he did mind taking a hit for the country’s woes. “If those people could camp out in that park all day, why aren’t they out looking for a job? Why are they blaming others?”

To many, 99 vs. 1 was an artificial distinction that overlooked hard work and moral character. “It shouldn’t be relevant,” said Mr. Katz , who said he both creates job and contributes to charitable causes. “I’m not hurting anyone. I’m helping a lot of people.”

The Enclave

The placid sliver of Long Island that F. Scott Fitzgerald immortalized in “The Great Gatsby” as West Egg and East Egg seems almost to have shrugged off the recession.

A stretch of northwest Nassau County that includes Great Neck, Manhasset and Port Washington, this area has the country’s highest concentration of 1 percenters, and one of the lowest unemployment rates in the state. Houses in Port Washington are worth only 10 percent less than they were at their peak, according to the Standard & Poor’s Case-Shiller Home Price Index, a far smaller decline than in the rest of the country. Yearly sales at the Americana Manhasset, the upscale granite and glass shopping center, have already exceeded their prerecession high. Even in down times, the 1 percent has staying power, being far more likely than any other group to stay where they are rather than slip to lower rungs of the economic ladder.

“I definitely see it around me,” said Anu Chandok, 36, an oncologist in Lake Success, referring to the country’s economic pain. “It just personally hasn’t affected me yet.”

The area’s residents include Anthony Scaramucci, the investor who was ridiculed for asking why President Obama was treating Wall Street “like a piñata,” and Bruce R. Bent, the financier now charged with fraud stemming from the Lehman Brothers collapse. Bernard L. Madoff once lived here; many of the victims of his scam still do.

But there are also people whose fortunes had little to do with Wall Street, including the founders of family businesses like J&R, the electronics retailer, and Arizona Beverages. Susan Isaacs, the best-selling writer whose crime novels — replete with cashmere bathrobes and murdered periodontists — draw an arch portrait of suburban life, resides in Sands Point.

In interviews, 1 percenters in this area tended to characterize their success as a product of talent and hard work, and many did indeed rise from humble beginnings. But they also tended not to dwell on the advantages conveyed by factors like race or family background. Studies show that whites have more upward mobility than blacks and that parental education level is a strong predictor of success.

Only two racial groups make up a greater share of the 1 percent than of the population as a whole: whites, at 82 percent, and Asians, at 7 percent. This corner of Nassau is 77 percent white, 11 percent Asian and only 3 percent black. Those figures include a number of large ethnic enclaves, including families of Iranian, Russian and, more recently, Chinese and Korean, heritage.

Residents say they like the area’s diversity. “As a politician, I go to black Baptist churches, Orthodox synagogues, Catholic churches,” said Jon Kaiman, the supervisor of the Town of North Hempstead, which encompasses the area. “Some people live in $10 million houses and some people live in half-million-dollar houses, and their kids are playing basketball together.”

The 1 percent are family-oriented, nearly twice as likely to be married as everyone else. They have more children, but not more cars, than middle- and upper-middle-class families. For them, education is critical. A vast majority of 1 percenters graduated from college, and in a whopping 27 percent of couples, both partners have advanced degrees.

Voters in this area tend to lean further left than wealthy people as a whole. Nationally, a Gallup poll found, people who make at least $500,000 a year are more Republican-leaning than everyone else (57 percent for the high earners compared with 44 percent). The respondents were more likely than other people to identify as moderate.

This part of Nassau, on the other hand, has traditionally voted Democratic, except for pockets like Manhasset. But its status as a dependably liberal stronghold can no longer be taken for granted, said Robert Zimmerman of Great Neck, a top Democratic fund-raiser. “There’s a lot more tea in the vermouth now,” Mr. Zimmerman said.

Some factors of political change may include the shock of the financial crisis, disappointment with Obama administration policies, and the steady influx of ethnic groups that tend toward the conservative.

Defining the Wealthy

Financial benchmarks in this area can differ radically from those in places where more people are struggling to put food on the table. Many of Nassau’s affluent families think of themselves as practically middle class, saying that property values and taxes are so high that $380,000 does not go very far.

“On Long Island, it’s barely a living,” said Steven R. Schlesinger, a lawyer and professional poker player. “In Plano, it’s a living.”

There is something to that. Aspen’s 1 percent is very different from Akron’s. In some areas there are so many 1 percenters that the whole income hierarchy can shift. It may take $380,000 to be in the national 1 percent, but it takes $900,000 to be among the top 1 percent of earners in Stamford, Conn. Compared with that, the price of admission to the 1 percent in Clarksville, Tenn., is a bargain at $200,000. Of course, the cutoff is only one measure, and perhaps not the most telling one. The average income of the 1 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center, is $1.5 million, and the superrich — the 120,000 tax filers that make up the top tenth of this group — earned an estimated average of $6.8 million in 2011.

The gap between rich and poor also varies widely. The 1 percent in Manhattan makes $790,000 or more, or 12 times the borough’s median income. In Macon, Ga., the 1 percent is far less lofty. The cutoff there is $270,000, roughly six times the median income.

Location also affects politics. The wealthy in poorer states are more likely to vote Republican than the wealthy in rich states.

The 1 percent also has a different makeup in different cities. Nationally, for example, doctors are more likely than any other profession to be in the 1 percent — one in five is. But in Macon, your surgeon is far more likely to make the local cut than in Manhattan, where financial managers and bankers have crowded doctors off the dance floor.

Still, David Mejias, a divorce and personal injury lawyer who once served as a Democratic legislator for Nassau County, said that the system everywhere was skewed in favor of the self-employed and business owners who could deduct part of the cost of their cars, trips, dinners and even collectibles like art.

“Not only do we make more money, but if you do a lifestyle analysis, we make a lot more money,” he said. “Before we even get paid, most of our life has been paid for already.”

The cutoff for the 1 percent varies depending on how income is calculated. On the low end, an analysis of census data puts the cutoff at $380,000 for a household and provides a wealth of demographic characteristics that were used in this article. On the high end, the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances, which uses a broader measure of income that includes capital gains, yielded a cutoff of $690,000 in 2007, the most recent year of data available. The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, makes projections based on Internal Revenue Service data and adjusts for people who do not file taxes. It puts the cutoff at $530,000 per tax return in 2011. Even by that gauge, though, $380,000 would still put a family well above the 95th percentile. There is little current data that would allow a measurement of the 1 percent by wealth.

A higher proportion of 1 percenters (two in five) than 99 percenters (one in five) has inherited money, according to the Federal Reserve survey. The top earners got 10 percent of the inherited wealth in the country. Still, a majority of those earners reported no inheritance.

Dr. Chandok, the Lake Success oncologist, said that her husband, also a doctor, was still paying off his student loans. The couple has a nanny, but Dr. Chandok’s father-in-law does the shopping and cooking.

Dr. Chandok said she had never heard the Occupy Wall Street slogan “We are the 99 percent.” Two children and 11-hour workdays, she said, do not leave much time for politics.

But when the slogan was explained as a complaint against the wealthy’s growing share of income, she shook her head. “I spent four years in undergraduate school, four years in medical school, three years as a resident and three years as a fellow,” she said. “You have to look at the people who are complaining.”

An Uneasy Silence

By e-mail or telephone, via friends or via silence, dozens of 1 percenters declined to be interviewed for this article.

Some envisioned waking up to protesters on the lawn; others feared audits by the I.R.S. or other punitive government action. A managing director at a financial firm said he did not want to dignify the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street by participating in an article on the 1 percent. An investor who had already been the target of protesters said he feared for his family’s safety.

From one vantage point, these responses may seem extreme. But there is no doubt that the troubled economy has focused anger on the fact that the rich have grown richer and the middle class, over the last decade, has lost ground. Several 1 percenters mentioned the riots in Britain and Spain; one said he kept his plane fueled up. In a recent survey, the Pew Research Center found that Americans now ranked conflict between rich and poor as stronger than timeworn clashes between immigrants and the native-born, blacks and whites, or young and old.

Many wealthy people have decried what they call class warfare. But that does not mean they think the system is not unjustly rigged in their favor. The investor who declined to be identified because he feared for his family said it was not fair that he paid a lower rate on his investment income than he would on a salary and asked why he should receive Social Security or Medicare.

But, he said, singling out the rich was not the answer. “If you pay $50 million in taxes, is that fair or unfair?” he asked. “When a tax is specifically designated for a tenth of a percent of the economy, it’s hard not to feel targeted.”

Perhaps he might have taken comfort in a small placard that was on view one autumn day in Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan, the center of the Occupy Wall Street protests.

“We are,” the sign said, “the 100 percent.”

Bookmark and Share
contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

Bartiromo: JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon sees housing at bottom

This year kicked off with some improving economic data on jobs, on retail spending and even a rally in the stock market. So does the good news suggest the economic recovery is finally taking hold and 2012 will be a positive new day for job seekers? For some answers, I caught up with Jamie Dimon, who heads the USA’s largest bank with $2.2 trillion in assets and operations in more than 60 countries. In a series of interviews during his firm’s health care conference last week, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase was optimistic and said the troubled housing market has bottomed. He pointed to innovation in health care as a testament to America’s strength and heft. Our interview follows, edited for clarity and length.

Q: You have a great vantage point in deciphering where we are in this recovery, with a huge consumer banking and capital markets business. How does the economy look in 2012?

  • COLUMN: Bartiromo: Toys R Us CEO looks abroad
  • COLUMN: U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO looks to energy for job growth
  • A: Barring a disaster out of Europe, I do see a fairly broad, growing economy. The economy is in a mild recovery, which is strengthening. Corporations are in outstanding financial shape. They’re earning money. They’ve got plenty of capital, plenty of wherewithal. Middle-market companies, of which most are private companies with sales of between $20 million and $2 billion, they are in fabulous financial shape and have good margins. They have a lot of capital and liquidity. We see small businesses in better shape. But we are not seeing a huge formation of small businesses yet.

    Q: Where is the loan growth?

    A: In two months, as of September, we’ve seen small-business loans up 70%, middle-market loans up 18%. And, hopefully, confidence, which is the secret sauce, will come back, too.

    Q: What are you most worried about?

    A: Europe. It’s the biggest fly in the ointment.

    Q: Do you think the European Central Bank and the leaders there have responded to the crisis in the right way?

    A: The ECB changed what could be collateral for the European banks, which is important. They made what a bank can use as collateral much wider, and they put unlimited use of three-year lending. It was a huge move, much bigger than the market reaction we saw. It’s possible that this one thing has removed all funding issues for the big European banks. It gives them breathing room and can help support asset prices in the meantime. The European banks are still being forced to raise capital and by that, they still have to sell assets. They’re being forced to sell assets to raise even more capital at precisely the wrong time. It’s not a massive amount, but you’re starting to see assets for sale, loans for sale. It’s tough. You can’t do a good job for shareholders raising capital with huge discounts for some assets.

    Q: Are there opportunities for JPMorgan in all of this? Do you look at that situation and say you want to be a buyer of certain assets? How do you buy in that environment?

    A: We want to be good citizens there. We’ve cut back exposures there, but we’ve kept all the client business going, a great risk to ourselves. But we think it’s very important that we’d be doing business in Italy 50 years from now, but we’re trying to be very careful on that. In the meantime, there are certain assets we’re looking at. There are certain businesses we’re looking at.

    Q: What about housing in the U.S.?

    A: We have seen the worst. We are at the bottom. We may hug along the bottom for a while, but we are at the bottom. People think housing is terrible, but the early indicators tell you a lot about where it will be in 18 months or so. Supply and demand are rapidly coming in balance. Renting is now more expensive than buying in half of America. We’re adding 3 million Americans a year. In the next 10 years, we have 30 million more Americans. Those 30 million Americans are going to need 15 million homes, or something like that. Household formation has gone so low. You had kids move back home — and, yes, by the way, it doesn’t work for them, either. And household formation we think will have to go close to a million and a half. Once it goes to (that), housing construction will probably have to go up to a million and a half. Two million jobs, and all this shadow inventory stuff will be getting better, not worse. And it’s the rate of change which is important, not the absolute level.

    It’s still terrible, by the way. But we think it’s going to get better over time. And then hopefully, maybe, we’ll have some rational policies around housing which will make it better. So housing is near the bottom. Once you see employment start to grow 300,000, 400,000, 500,000 a month, you better buy that house you want really soon because it’ll change in price right away.

    Q: Is there a plan that you would envision to get some of that 90% mortgage origination away from the government-run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and instead coming from the private sector?

    A: Yes. Almost everything being originated today is being sold to Fannie and Freddie. There’s a certain amount of jumbo mortgages which the banks originally keep for themselves. You can design a mortgage system that is different without a Fannie and Freddie, but there are principles you have to have, to have a good system. If the government wants to do social policy, it should not be done in a quasi-public company. If you have a mortgage guarantee company which is done by the U.S. government, it should be guaranteed by the originators, i.e., the shareholder. You can set up a system that the government’s not involved at all, but you have to transition there over 10 or 15 years because Fannie and Freddie are so big. Mortgages will cost a little bit more, but it actually may be a healthier system. So you could do either one. I just hope people who are responsible for this sit down and do it very thoughtfully.

    Q: The Federal Reserve is conducting new so-called stress tests. We will learn the results in March. JPMorgan has submitted a plan to handle potential stress. How will your firm come out on this?

    A: There’s a very good thing about the stress test. I don’t agree with all of it. But I agree with stress tests. You should be able to look at a JPMorgan and say, “Can you handle massive stress?” But the stress here is 13% unemployment, home prices down 20%, equity markets down 50%, a catastrophe in the markets and a catastrophe in Europe. And, yes, we can handle all that and be well above the 5% tier-one capital required. I’m hoping what it shows is that American banks — there may be an exception or two — are extremely well capitalized and can handle extreme stress, and maybe one day we’ll just take this issue off the table. I also believe, by the way, they can prove the point I’ve been making, that at one point we’ll get into too much capital because we’re going to have to hold on to more capital than this number. That’s too much, and maybe this helps prove that.

    Q: Shareholders of JPMorgan saw their stock fall in 2011 (down 20%, including dividends). How will you return value to shareholders? Will you raise your dividend after the stress-test results come out?

    A: That’s a board-level decision, but when we raised it the last time, back to $1 a share, we did tell the world that the intent is that every year we will look at it and hopefully give shareholders a little bit more.

    Q: Are interest rates going to go up in 2012?

    A: Rates are going to go up. The faster things improve, the sooner you get higher rates. So the first part of higher rates is a good thing. Going back to a normal (yield) curve would be a great thing if this was accompanied by growth and not high inflation. There’s some people who are afraid you’re going to have too much inflation when this all turns around. That’s a legitimate concern, too.

    Q: What is it going to take to get jobs created in this country again?

    A: You’re starting to see it already, and a little of that becomes self-sustaining. Because if you got a job, you might buy a new car. You might buy a house. People get married, they have babies. That creates more demand. So we have a very broad-based economy, a very strong America. It’ll recover. It always has. Even after the worst of the worst. I’m going back to after the Civil War, after World War II, after we had the malaise in the ’70s, it recovered each time. And I’m not sure you can always point out the one thing that made it recover other than just the good old American spirit that we all like to work and we all want to grow and we all want to expand. Right now we seem a little overly depressed.

    Q: What do you want to say to the Occupy Wall Street protesters who are upset about the income gap and upset about the banks making money while they feel that they’re not making any money?

    A: When people complain, I always try to listen to where the legitimate complaints are. So here’s what’s legitimate. There’s more income inequality in America than some years ago. I think that that’s not a good thing. That’s generally true. The second is, if you look at the institutions of America, not just banks, and if you look at Washington and Wall Street, we let them down. That’s true, too. Once you go beyond that, you start to become indiscriminate. You should be asking, “What will you do to fix it and change it?” Whether it’s better regulations, better laws, progressive taxation. We should all try to do our part.

    Q: You have talked a lot about demonizing of the industry in recent years. Would the pressure on banks be alleviated under a different administration, and will you support President Obama this year in the November election?

    A: What I would hope for: that there is no so-called pressure in the industry. That we had rational collaboration about how to build a great country with great rules and regulations that allow business to thrive. If business doesn’t thrive, it hurts America. We need improved relations, more collaboration, more thought and more consistency as we go about trying to make sure we have the best country in the world. Not scapegoating and finger-pointing. I haven’t decided what I’m doing in terms of who to support. Yes, I’m still a Democrat, but I find it very hard to listen to at least the left part of that party right now, and I don’t know what I’m going to do yet.

    Bookmark and Share
    contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

    USA Today: Housing outlook is more upbeat

    Optimism is building that the housing industry is nearing a bottom — finally.

    Home sales and home building are forecast to rise this year after sliding steeply the past five years in housing’s worst downturn since the Great Depression.

    Recovery is expected to be slow, and home prices are widely expected to fall this year. But investors are betting on the start of an upturn, bidding up home builder stocks and causing them to outperform the broader stock market.

  • MORE: Bartiromo: JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon sees housing at bottom
  • MORE: O.J. Simpson faces foreclosure on Miami house
  • Chief executives are more positive. JPMorgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon said last week that housing is near its bottom but could stay there a year. Stuart Miller, CEO of home builder Lennar, said the market has started to stabilize because of low prices and record-low interest rates.

    Market researcher RBC Capital Markets has also turned from a “bearish” view on housing to saying that 2012 “will mark a step in the right direction.”

       

    Many economists expect home prices to fall more this year because of foreclosures and other properties sold at very low prices.

    As foreclosures pick up this year, “prices will drop,” says Stan Humphries, Zillow chief economist. He says home prices won’t bottom until later in 2012 or next year.

    On average, prices have fallen by about a third since 2006.

    “This year will feel a lot better to builders, investors and real estate agents than to consumers,” says Jed Kolko, economist for real estate website Trulia.

    Housing’s outlook is brightening with signs of a better economy. Last month, U.S. employers added 200,000 jobs, and the unemployment rate fell to 8.5%, lowest in nearly three years.

    While an economic shock could derail progress, “there’s now more evidence of improvement in the economy, and housing will follow the economy,” says David Crowe, chief economist at the National Association of Home Builders. More improvement is expected for:

    Sales. Existing home sales will rise 12% this year after a 2% increase last year, and new home sales, coming off a horrid year, will jump 74% this year, Moody’s Analytics predicts.

    November’s existing home sales hit their highest mark in 10 months, and new home sales were the year’s second best, IHS Global Insight says.

    Construction. Single-family housing starts will rise 37% this year, Moody’s predicts, after falling 9% last year.

    Home builder stocks are on a run. The S&P 1500 homebuilding index is up 38% since mid-October, vs. 7% for the S&P 500.

    Bookmark and Share
    contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

    Higher Rates – for Commercial Owners

     WSJ:

    Interest rates are at the lowest levels in decades, but commercial property owners looking to refinance shouldn’t expect to lock in those rates any longer.

    FLOAT

    Puerto Rico’s El Conquistador Hotel, owned by Blackstone Group

    At the height of the boom years, many owners of office buildings, hotels, shopping malls and other commercial real estate financed their properties using five-year mortgages, most of which are set to mature next year.

    But lenders are warning property owners that refinancing won’t be automatic, and the low mortgage rates in the headlines probably won’t apply to them anymore. If properties are underwater, lenders are requiring owners to put in additional cash. In other cases, lenders will offer to refinance, but at substantially higher interest rates.

    Analysts say the hard line that lenders are taking could be especially harsh on adjustable-rate, or floating-rate, loans, where the difference between the old rate and the new rate will be greatest. Some ARMs, which followed interest-rate benchmarks in recent years, are currently under 1%. The rates are tied to the international interest-rate benchmark—the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, and are often reset monthly or quarterly.

    According to Trepp, a company that tracks mortgages packaged into securities, of the $70 billion in commercial mortgage-backed securities outstanding that are coming due next year, $15.5 billion of fixed-rate mortgages and $12.2 billion of adjustable-rate mortgages have been flagged as potentially facing tough hurdles when they try to refinance.

    In the past few years, low rates have reduced the borrowers’ expenses and masked problems the properties may be facing. But those days are ending. “The merry-go-round will stop, and they are not all going to get financing,” said Eric Thompson, a managing director at Kroll Bond Rating Agency.

    Rates on some commercial ARMs could rise to over 5% when refinanced, representing a huge additional expense that could turn some marginally profitable operations into money-losers.

    Consider LXR Luxury Resorts, a 12-property portfolio including Puerto Rico’s El Conquistador and El San Juan hotels owned by Blackstone Group LP. In 2007, Blackstone refinanced the portfolio with $1.3 billion in adjustable-rate debt.

    The rate, which was above 5% when the loan was made, fell to under 1% as rates have dropped. The rate decline helped to offset the portfolio’s lower-than-expected annual operating income, which at $65 million as of the second quarter of 2011 was short of the $225 million assumed when the loan was underwritten, according to Trepp. The servicer has put the mortgage on its “watch list,” indicating concern for possible default, Trepp data show.

    With the loan coming due next year, Blackstone will likely have to make concessions if it wants to hold on to the properties. On more than $800 million in debt for its Boca Resorts Hotel portfolio, for instance, Blackstone in August won a two-year extension after putting in $20 million and agreeing to terms that effectively increased its rate to 4.25% from about 1%.

    Without the low interest rates, some borrowers are simply giving up because they can’t earn enough to justify paying a higher rate or throwing in additional equity. A venture including Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s Whitehall funds had been current on its $203 million mortgage on the Park Central Hotel in Manhattan that matured in November. Unable to refinance, the group is asking the lender to accept a discounted payoff on the loan, according to Trepp, which also showed the mortgage flagged for imminent default. A Goldman Sachs spokeswoman declined to comment.

    To be sure, credit conditions have improved in the past year, which has made it easier for some borrowers to refinance, especially borrowers whose buildings have risen in value. That’s especially true for owners of trophy office buildings and apartment complexes in the top-tier cities. But for properties that remain underwater—including many hotels, shopping centers and properties in second-tier markets—conditions remain difficult.

    David Viklund, a real-estate lawyer at Paul Hastings in New York, says he represented a borrower who had been paying about 2% on a $100 million adjustable mortgage on a Houston hotel.

    To win fresh funding, the borrower had to add millions of dollars in equity, get a creditor to provide a principal guarantee and settle for a new interest rate of about 3.25%. “Even though (rates are) so cheap right now, if borrowers can find financing they are not going to find it anywhere close to what they had,” Mr. Viklund said.

    Analysts and industry executives say it’s difficult to predict how many of the maturing commercial property loans will wind up in default because they can’t secure a new mortgage. But the delinquency rate that has risen from 0.3% to 9.5% in the three years through November will likely rise further, according to Trepp and other analysts.

    Bookmark and Share
    contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

    Study Finds 38% of Homes Purchased in 2011 Bought with Cash

    Despite record low mortgage rates, 2011 has seen a surprisingly high level of cash home purchases, according to the real estate research firm Hanley Wood Market Intelligence.

    Jonathan Dienhart and Ken Lee, two analysts with the company, say between tight lending standards and a desperate search for yield by investors, cash purchases of homes – particularly for distressed properties – became even more common in 2011 than last year.

    Dienhart and Lee analyzed data collected through Hanley Wood’s Housing IntelligencePro, and shared their findings in a blog post.

    The two discovered that 38 percent of homes purchased in 2011 were bought with all cash. That’s up from 34 percent in 2010, and double the 19 percent rate in 2006.

    According to Dienhart and Lee, this trend is likely to continue in the near term. They note that cash-paying investors are responsible for an increasing share of home purchases nowadays as prior homeowners abandon the ownership market and head back to rentals.

    Bookmark and Share
    contact mepixelstats trackingpixel

    Should you buy a home in 2012?

    CNN Money video:

    Prices will stabilze in 2012.  Interest rates will stay below 5%.

    Bookmark and Share
    contact mepixelstats trackingpixel
    Easy AdSense by Unreal

    Videos, Slideshows and Podcasts by Cincopa Wordpress Plugin