Housing Wealth Effects and Mortgage Borrowing. The Effect of Subjective Unanticipated Changes in Home Values on Home Equity. Extraction in Denmark

Author(s):  
Soren Leth-Petersen ◽  
Henrik Yde Andersen
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-465
Author(s):  
Lingxiao Li ◽  
◽  
Bing Zhu ◽  

This paper investigates two types of housing wealth effects: conventional housing wealth and collateral. We incorporate home equity extraction (HEE) and the influence of mortgage liberalization into the model in Campbell and Mankiw (1989). Based on U.S. data during the 1977Q1–2019Q4, our empirical results suggest that consumption is remarkably influenced by the use of HEE, rather than home equity. Furthermore, the rapid expansion of mortgage securitization significantly amplifies the collateral effect. Conditional on the use of HEE and the share of non-bank mortgage holdings, housing wealth has an average marginal propensity to consume (MPC) of 0.84 cents and a maximum MPC of 6.06 cents. In 2007, when market-based mortgage pools and issuers of asset-backed securities held more than 60% of home mortgages, the HEE shock explained for over 50% of the forecasting variance of consumption growth. The results provide evidence that with a focus on collateral value, lenders allow more equity withdrawal, which leads to higher consumption.


Author(s):  
Henrik Yde Andersen ◽  
Søren Leth-Petersen

Abstract We examine whether unanticipated changes in home values drive spending and mortgage-based equity extraction. To do this, we use longitudinal survey data with subjective information about current and expected future home values to calculate unanticipated home value changes. We link this information at the individual level to high quality administrative records containing information about mortgage borrowing as well as savings in various financial instruments. We find that the marginal propensity to increase mortgage debt is 3%–5% of unanticipated home value gains. We find no adjustment to other components of the portfolio, and we find that mortgage extraction leads to an increase in spending. The effect is driven by young households with high loan-to-value ratios, which is consistent with the effect being driven by collateral constraints. Further, we find that the effect is driven by home owners who actively take out a new mortgage. The price effect is magnified among fixed rate mortgage (FRM) borrowers who have an incentive to refinance their loans to lock in a lower market rate. These results point to the importance of the mortgage market in transforming price increases into spending and suggest that monetary policy can play an important role in transforming housing wealth gains into spending by affecting interest rates on mortgage loans.


Author(s):  
Adam M Guren ◽  
Alisdair McKay ◽  
Emi Nakamura ◽  
Jón Steinsson

Abstract We provide new time-varying estimates of the housing wealth effect back to the 1980s. We use three identification strategies: ordinary least squares with a rich set of controls, the Saiz housing supply elasticity instrument, and a new instrument that exploits systematic differences in city-level exposure to regional house price cycles. All three identification strategies indicate that housing wealth elasticities were if anything slightly smaller in the 2000s than in earlier time periods. This implies that the important role housing played in the boom and bust of the 2000s was due to larger price movements rather than an increase in the sensitivity of consumption to house prices. Full-sample estimates based on our new instrument are smaller than recent estimates, though they remain economically important. We find no significant evidence of a boom–bust asymmetry in the housing wealth elasticity. We show that these empirical results are consistent with the behaviour of the housing wealth elasticity in a standard life-cycle model with borrowing constraints, uninsurable income risk, illiquid housing, and long-term mortgages. In our model, the housing wealth elasticity is relatively insensitive to changes in the distribution of loan-to-value (LTV) for two reasons: first, low-leverage homeowners account for a substantial and stable part of the aggregate housing wealth elasticity; second, a rightward shift in the LTV distribution increases not only the number of highly sensitive constrained agents but also the number of underwater agents whose consumption is insensitive to house prices.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam M. Guren ◽  
Alisdair McKay ◽  
Emi Nakamura ◽  
Jon Steinsson

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (11) ◽  
pp. 3415-3446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Aladangady

Rising home values also raise the cost of living, offsetting their impact on consumption. However, additional home equity collateral can loosen borrowing constraints, increasing spending for households that value their current endowment of housing highly. I use geographically linked microdata to exploit regional heterogeneity in housing markets and identify the causal effect of house price fluctuations on consumer spending. A $1 increase in home values leads to a $0.047 increase in spending for homeowners, but a negligible response for renters. Results reflect large responses among credit constrained households, suggesting looser borrowing constraints are a primary driver of the MPC out of housing wealth. (JEL D12, D14, E21, R31)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document