A. "It is always better to buy a house; paying rent is like
pouring money down the drain." For years, such advice has encouraged people to
borrow heavily to get on the property ladder as soon as possible. But is it
still sound advice? House prices are currently at record levels in relation to
rents in many parts of the world and it now often makes more financial
sense—especially for first-time buyers—to rent instead.
B. "If I
don't buy now, I'll never get on the property ladder" is a common cry from
first-time buyers. If house prices continue to outpace wages, that is true. But
it now looks unlikely. When prices get out of line with what first-timers can
afford, as they are today, they always eventually fall in real terms. The myth
that buying is always better than renting grew out of the high inflation era of
the 1970s and 1950s. First-time buyers then always ended up better off than
renters, because inflation eroded the real value of mortgages even while it
pushed up rents. Mortgage-interest tax relief was also worth more when
inflation, and hence nominal interest rates, was high. With inflation now tamed,
home ownership is far less attractive.
C. Homebuyers tend to
underestimate their costs. Once maintenance costs, insurance and property taxes
are added to mortgage payments, total annual outgoings now easily exceed the
cost of renting an equivalent property, even after taking account of tax breaks.
Ah, but capital gains will more than make up for that, it is popularly argued.
Over the past seven years, average house prices in America have risen by 65%,
those in Britain, Spain, Australia and Ireland have more than doubled. But it is
unrealistic to expect such gains to continue. Making the (optimistic) assumption
that house prices instead rise in line with inflation, and including buying and
selling costs, then over a period of seven years,—the average time American
owners stay in one house—our calculations show that you would generally be
better off renting.
D. Be warned, if you make such a bold claim
at a dinner party, you will immediately be set upon. Paying rent is throwing
money away, it will be argued. Much better to spend the money on a mortgage, and
by so doing build up equity. The snag is that the typical first-time buyer keeps
a house for less than five years, and during that time most mortgage payments go
on interest, not on repaying the loan. And if prices fall, it could wipe out
your equity.
E. In any case, a renter can accumulate wealth by
putting the money saved each year from the lower cost of renting into shares.
These have, historically, yielded a higher return than housing. Putting all your
money into a house also breaks the basic rule of prudent investing: diversify.
And yes, it is true that a mortgage leverages the gains on your initial deposit
on a house, but it also amplifies your losses if house prices fall.
F. The divergence between rents and house prices is, of course, evidence
of a housing bubble. Someday prices will fall relative to rents and wages. After
they do, it will make sense to buy a home. Until they do, the smart money is on
renting.
G. "I want to have a place to call home" is a popular
retort. Renting provides less long-term security and you cannot paint all the
walls orange if you want to. Home ownership is an excellent personal goal, but
it may not always make financial sense. The pride of "owning" your own home may
quickly fade if you are saddled with a mortgage that costs much more than
renting. Also, renting does have some advantages. Renters find it easier to move
for job or family reasons.
{{B}}Order:{{/B}}