Search This Blog

Wednesday, September 23, 2026

More US Homebuyers Apply For Riskier Mortgages As Interest Rates Top 7%

 by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times,

Higher interest rates pushed prospective homebuyers toward riskier mortgages last week, new industry data show.

The total volume of mortgage applications declined almost 2 percent for the week ending Sept. 18, according to a report released by the Mortgage Bankers Association on Sept. 23. This represented the third consecutive weekly drop.

Applications for a mortgage to purchase a home fell 1 percent and were down 11 percent from the same time a year ago. Refinancing applications also fell to their lowest levels since February 2025, down 3 percent monthly, and were 62 percent lower year over year.

"Applications for both refinance and purchase loans declined further last week, noting that the comparison is to the week that included the Labor Day holiday," Mike Fratantoni, the group's senior vice president and chief economist, said in a news release.

Last week's decline aligned with the sharp increase in interest rates.

Because fixed-rate mortgage costs have accelerated in recent weeks, borrowers sought riskier adjustable-rate mortgages - also known as ARMs - Fratantoni added.

"With fixed rates much higher, more borrowers opted for ARMs, with the ARM share reaching 9.8%, as rates for 5/1 ARMs were more than a percentage point lower than those for fixed rate loans," he said in a statement.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages rose to 7.12 percent, from 6.97 percent - the highest since May 2024.

Mortgage rates have increased by more than 100 basis points since the United States and Israel launched a joint military operation against Iran in late February. The conflict, approaching the seven-month mark, has sent Treasury bond yields surging.

The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield reached 5 percent again midweek, up from 3.96 percent before the war in Iran began. The mortgage market generally tracks government bond yields, resulting in higher borrowing costs for prospective buyers.

ARMs start with a lower fixed rate for three to ten years, then change every six months or annually based on market conditions. This product saves borrowers money upfront but can swing higher or lower based on benchmark rates.

Mortgage rates have ticked up slightly so far this week.

As of Sept. 22, the average 30-year fixed rate was 7.17 percent, according to Mortgage News Daily.

Fueling Interest Rates

Global energy markets and inflation data have been the driving forces behind interest rates and will determine the Federal Reserve's next policy decision, says Jeff DerGurahian, head economist at loanDepot.

"For now, rates appear to be standing at a fork in the road. Softer inflation and lower oil prices could provide relief, while continued energy pressure could keep mortgage rates near or above 7%," DerGurahian said in a note emailed to The Epoch Times.

Crude prices have fallen sharply this week, with U.S. oil down about 10 percent to around $91 per barrel. Brent, the international benchmark, returned above $100 midweek.

As of Sept. 22, the national average for a gallon of diesel has risen to $6.52, according to the American Automobile Association.

Meanwhile, the next major inflation report will be August's personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index, the Fed's go-to inflation measure.

After that, the September consumer price index report will be released in mid-October.

The Cleveland Fed projects annual headline consumer inflation will jump to 3.5 percent, but core inflation, which strips out volatile energy and food prices, will hold steady at 2.4 percent.

Until then, investors are leaning toward another quarter-point rate hike at the October Federal Open Market Committee policy meeting after the Fed followed through last week on the first increase to the benchmark federal funds rate since July 2023.

"Those expectations are not set in stone though," DerGurahian said.

"If oil prices move lower or the September core inflation reading comes in softer than expected, the October hike could be pushed further out. Continued improvement could even cause markets to remove one of the three future hikes currently priced in."

Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh will hold the next two-day meeting on Oct. 27 and 28.

https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/more-us-homebuyers-apply-riskier-mortgages-interest-rates-top-7

KB Home Call Highlights: Built-to-Order Shift Lifts Margins as Backlog Grows for First Time in 4 Years

 

  • Total Revenues: $1.3 billion in Q3 fiscal 2026.
  • Housing Revenues: $1.3 billion, at midpoint of guidance; down 20% from $1.6 billion year-over-year.
  • Net Income: $65 million, compared to $110 million a year earlier.
  • Diluted EPS: $1.05, versus $1.61 in the prior-year quarter.
  • Homes Delivered: 2,732 homes, a 19% year-over-year decrease.
  • Average Selling Price: $473,000, modestly higher than Q2; Q4 guidance implies ~$480,000.
  • Housing Gross Profit Margin: 16.5%, down from 18.2% year-over-year; up sequentially from Q2.
  • Adjusted Housing Gross Profit Margin: 16.8%, versus 18.9% a year ago; improved sequentially from 15.7% in Q2.
  • Home Building Operating Income: $67 million, or 5.2% of revenues, versus $131 million, or 8.1%, a year earlier.
  • SG&A Ratio: 11.3%, at low end of guidance; up from 10% year-over-year.
  • Pre-Tax Income: $81 million, compared to $143 million a year earlier.
  • Effective Tax Rate: 19.6%, versus 23.3% prior year; Q4 expected ~26%, full year ~23%.
  • Backlog Conversion Rate: 60%, compared to 71% a year ago.
  • Built-to-Order Mix: 74% of deliveries, up from 60% in Q2.
  • Unsold Inventory: 26% of production, down from 41% a year ago; finished unsold homes 9%, down from 16%.
  • Cash: $159 million at quarter end.
  • Total Liquidity: $942 million, including $783 million available under unsecured credit facility.
  • Debt-to-Capital Ratio: 35.7%, compared to 33% a year ago.
  • Inventory: $6 billion, up 5% year-over-year.
  • Lots Owned or Controlled: Over 61,000 lots.
  • Share Repurchases: ~890,000 shares (~1.5% of shares outstanding) at average price below book value; up to $50 million planned for Q4.
  • Capital Returned to Shareholders: Over $65 million in Q3, inclusive of dividends.
  • Book Value Per Share: Over $62.
  • Community Count: Q4 ending community count expected between 270 and 275, roughly in line with prior year.
  • Mortgage Capture Rate: 85%, up slightly from Q2.
  • Average Cash Down Payment: 16%, or about $76,000.
  • Average Buyer Household Income: ~$134,000; average FICO score 742.
  • All-Cash Buyers: ~8% of Q3 deliveries.
  • Build Times: 99 days start-to-completion, 19% faster year-over-year; target of 90 days.
  • Release Date: September 22, 2026

For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.

Positive Points

  • KB Home KBH +0.44%
    83
    met or exceeded guidance across all metrics in Q3 2026, with housing revenues of $1.3 billion and diluted EPS of $1.05.
  • The company successfully returned to a predominantly built-to-order model, with BTO homes comprising 74% of deliveries, up from 60% in Q2, driving a sequential improvement in housing gross margin.
  • KB Home (KBH) achieved a year-over-year increase in backlog for the first time in four years, providing a foundation for future deliveries.
  • Unsold inventory remains low, with total unsold inventory at 26% of production (down from 41% a year ago) and finished unsold homes at just 9% (down from 16%).
  • Build times improved to an average of 99 days, down 19% year-over-year, enhancing inventory turns and operational efficiency.
  • The company maintains a strong balance sheet with $942 million in total liquidity and a debt-to-capital ratio of 35.7%, supporting growth and shareholder returns.
  • KB Home (KBH) returned over $65 million to shareholders in Q3 through share repurchases and dividends, and plans up to $50 million more in Q4 repurchases.
  • The company has a solid land pipeline with over 61,000 owned or controlled lots, positioning it for future growth when market conditions improve.

Negative Points

  • Market conditions weakened since the last earnings call, with rising mortgage rates, persistent inflation, and geopolitical uncertainty dampening consumer demand.
  • Net orders declined year-over-year as sales softened sequentially in July and August, with traffic down and buyers becoming more cautious.
  • Q4 guidance was moderated: average selling price is now expected at ~$480,000 (down from ~$500,000) and gross margin is expected to be about one percentage point lower than prior guidance.
  • Housing gross profit margin declined to 16.5% in Q3 from 18.2% a year ago, reflecting pricing pressures and higher costs.
  • Direct costs are expected to rise sequentially in Q4 due to fuel surcharges, general inflation, and tariffs, pressuring margins.
  • Resale inventory has increased to its highest level in a decade, with pricing starting to decline in more markets, adding competitive pressure.
  • SG&A expense ratio increased to 11.3% from 10% a year ago, due to lower operating leverage, though partially offset by cost reductions.
  • Debt-to-capital ratio rose to 35.7% from 33% a year ago, reflecting increased inventory investments and share repurchases.

Q & A Highlights

Q: With KB Home having achieved its goal of returning to a predominantly built-to-order business model, is the long-term gross margin target of 22% still in play?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, confirmed that 22% remains the target. He noted that current market conditions are not conducive to hitting that margin, but the company is sticking to its underwriting discipline, which has led them to walk away from land deals that no longer meet their return criteria.

Q: Given the current market conditions, is the fourth quarter gross margin representative of the mix (built-to-order, Northern/Southern California) we should expect for the first half of 2027?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, stated that Q4 guidance is based on current conditions. He expects the Southern California mix to rotate back in, as the current weakness was partly due to missed openings of high-ASP communities. While not giving 2027 guidance, he expressed pleasure with the shift back to built-to-order and aligning starts with sales.

Q: Can you bridge the gross margin from Q3 to Q4, detailing the puts and takes?
A: William Hollinger, CFO, explained that the sequential decline from 16.8% in Q3 to an anticipated 16.3% in Q4 is due to pricing pressures, higher costs, and product/geographic mix (specifically Southern California). These negative factors are expected to more than offset a positive contribution of about 50 basis points from operating leverage.

Q: With the shift to built-to-order and a backlog of pre-sold homes, are you forced to offer incentives at the closing table when rates rise, to keep buyers in the deal or help them qualify?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, said it does happen, but it's minimal. The primary strategy is to lock in buyers' interest rates early in the process, which is easier with the current ~90-day build time. While some minor adjustments are made in backlog, it is not a significant overall cost.

Q: Can you provide an update on the pipeline for the high-margin Bay Area communities and how long you expect an outsized contribution from them?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, said the company is rebuilding its Northern California business to its former strength. He expects a few more quarters of ramping up as new communities come online, after which the business will find a new equilibrium. He expects a mix benefit to continue into 2027.

Q: With mortgage rates moving higher, how should we think about your willingness to let the absorption pace drift lower to protect gross margin? Is there a floor?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, stated that targets are set community by community based on various factors. While the long-term goal is around four sales per month per community, the company is not looking to force that pace at the expense of margin in the current choppy market. The focus is on managing each asset for the best return profile.

Q: Can you discuss the increase in land spend this quarter and how we should think about it going forward?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, explained that the increase is mostly related to development and fees for land that was previously purchased, rather than new raw land acquisitions. This is part of the normal progression of their land pipeline.

Q: Can you provide more detail on the value engineering efforts and how they will impact future quarters?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, described value engineering as an ongoing process, not a one-time event. Current efforts focus on standardization, such as simplifying floor plans and building envelopes, to reduce costs without taking value away from the customer. This is a continuous focus for the architecture team.

Q: You mentioned seeing additional pricing pressure from the resale market. Are there specific markets where this is having a more outsized impact?
A: Robert McGibney, President and COO, said the impact is very submarket-specific. While markets like Texas and Florida have elevated resale inventory, the competitive pressure varies by community. He noted that sellers are starting to become more realistic with prices, which is a positive sign for the market to find balance.

Q: With leverage back at roughly 30%, how much longer can you continue to return more capital to shareholders than you are bringing in on a free cash basis?
A: Jeffrey Mezger, CEO, stated that capital allocation is a disciplined balance of land investment, growth appetite, and cash flow. He noted that land spend may come down a little in the current environment, which will influence the pace of share repurchases. The company will remain programmatic and opportunistic while maintaining a solid balance sheet.

For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.

https://www.gurufocus.com/news/9092733/kb-home-kbh-q3-2026-earnings-call-highlights-builttoorder-shift-lifts-margins-as-backlog-grows-for-first-time-in-four-years

Saturday, September 19, 2026

Los Angeles Ranks Last Among 100 US Metros For Affordability And New Home Construction

 by Mary Prenon via The Epoch Times,

Des Moines, Iowa, ranked first and Los Angeles ranked last in Realtor.com's inaugural report grading the 100 largest U.S. metros on housing affordability and homebuilding activity.

The results highlighted how local zoning and permitting can affect housing affordability in different areas.

The real estate platform's first Metro Affordability and Homebuilding Report Card, released on Sept. 16, showed that Des Moines received an "A+" grade with a score of 83.4, the highest among the 100 metros analyzed, reflecting its strong residential construction activity and affordability.

The city has a median listing price of $349,903, with the monthly mortgage payment requiring 27.5 percent of a median-income household's income, below the commonly cited threshold of 30 percent.

The calculation assumed a 10 percent down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage with a 6.5 percent interest rate.

At the other end of the list, Los Angeles received an "F" grade with a score of 12, leaving it at the bottom of the 100-metro ranking.

The median listing price in the city stands at $1.129 million, requiring a household earning the median income to spend 84.4 percent of its income on the monthly mortgage payment on a typical home, according to the report.

Meanwhile, the report said that local housing policies can help explain the gap between the highest- and lowest-performing metro areas in new home construction and affordability.

"Beyond land availability, the biggest difference between the 'A' metros and the 'F' metros is local housing policy, especially related to zoning and permitting," Realtor.com senior economist Joel Berner said in the report.

"The 'A's share regulatory flexibility and streamlined approval processes, while the 'F's are locked in restrictive land-use frameworks."

The report noted that Des Moines had a permit-to-population ratio of 1.85, meaning the city was issuing permits for new homes at a rate 85 percent higher than the national average relative to its population.

By contrast, Los Angeles' ratio of 0.47 meant that the city was permitting less than half the national average relative to its population.

"The combination of extreme affordability pressure and limited new supply placed it at the bottom of the class," the report noted.

Along with Los Angeles, New York City, Providence, Rhode Island, Honolulu, and Boston also had failing grades.

For example, Berner said, Boston has four times as many pages of zoning law as Austin, Texas, and 79 percent of its land is zoned, compared with just 15 percent in Austin.

Minimum parking mandates apply to 88 percent of land in Boston, while in Austin, the requirement is 37 percent.

Boston also has less land that allows unrestricted accessory dwelling units, limiting the supply of smaller, more affordable homes.

"The contrast between Austin and Boston makes clear that the rules governing what can be built can be just as consequential as the land available to build on," Berner added.

Those top-ranked metros with less restrictive zoning and permitting also include: Raleigh, North Carolina; Columbia, South Carolina; Houston; and Indianapolis.

Regionally, the South and Midwest performed best for both new construction and affordability, while the Northeast and West lagged.

The report attributes the difference to more available and lower-cost land in the South and Midwest, in addition to more flexible zoning and permitting policies.

"Homebuilding and affordability are inseparable, and if we want to improve affordability in a lasting way, we need to build more homes," Realtor.com chief economist Danielle Hale said in the report. "The metros at the top of these rankings show that buyers benefit most when communities pair homes that are attainable for today's local earners with enough new construction to support tomorrow's demand."

In its Sept. 16 report, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and the Wells Fargo Housing Market Index found that builder confidence in September hit the lowest level since September 2025.

"Buyer traffic has weakened across much of the country, largely because of rising mortgage rates," NAHB Chairman Bill Owens said in the report.

The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate was 6.95 percent for the week ending Sept. 17, up from 6.76 percent the previous week and 6.26 percent a year earlier, according to Freddie Mac.

Owens also said builders continue to face higher material costs, rising energy prices, and ongoing labor shortages.

NAHB chief economist Robert Dietz added that 42 percent of builders rated current lot availability as "poor," and 38 percent as just "fair."

According to Realtor.com, the United States remains short of more than 4 million homes, putting financial strain on first-time homebuyers.

https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/los-angeles-ranks-last-among-100-us-metros-affordability-and-new-home-construction

Friday, September 18, 2026

Most Americans don’t know this $0-down mortgage exists — and 97% of the U.S. qualifies

 The home affordability crisis rages on.

According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University, an unprecedented 43.5 million U.S. households were considered “cost-burdened” in 2024, which means they had to dedicate more than 30% of their monthly income to housing costs, an increase of 6.4 million households since 2019.

Those costs were driven primarily by higher mortgage interest and insurance rates. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median housing costs for homeowners with a mortgage rose from $1,960  to $2,035 in 2024. But there is another barrier for people looking to buy a home — the down payment — and in 2026, that barrier is bigger than ever.

According to recent data from the National Association of Realtors, the median price for a single-family existing home in the U.S. is now $434,800. That means half of all existing homes sold in the U.S. in the second quarter of 2026 cost more than $434,900. In some areas, the median is much higher.

The markets with the biggest yearly price gains aren’t in expensive metros like New York City and San Francisco; they’re in places like Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas ( up 11.0%), Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula, Mississippi (up by 10.3%) and Syracuse, New York, which is up by 9.6%. Fortunately, there is a solution that many prospective homebuyers either don’t know about or don’t know they qualify for: the USDA zero down payment mortgage.

What is the USDA zero down payment mortgage?

The roots of the USDA loan go back to the Great Depression when Congress under Franklin D. Roosevelt was fighting the severe economic consequences battering farmers. The federal government realized that without intervention, the nation’s agricultural backbone would collapse, and rural populations would migrate to already overcrowded cities. The loan program was created to incentivize people to stay in rural areas by providing them with a path to livable housing.

In the decades since, the mandate of the USDA has expanded, as has the availability of the USDA guaranteed loan. The primary benefit of this program is the $0 down payment requirement, allowing buyers to finance the entire purchase price of the property. Credit score criteria are also generally more flexible than you find with conventional mortgages, making it easier for first-time buyers to qualify. 

What most people don’t know, according to Ashley Harris, Director of Homebuyer Education at Neighbors Bank, is that “97% of US land mass falls in an eligible area, and most regions cap household income around $122,800 (higher in some high-cost areas),” so eligibility criteria are more inclusive than many people imagine. You can look up the local income limit here.

The deciding factor isn’t whether the neighborhood looks rural, but rather the area’s population density. The USDA uses a strict, tiered population framework to determine if a town, census-designated place or suburban pocket qualifies.

The first tier is areas with a population under 10,000 residents. The second tier is between 10,001 and 20,000 residents, as long as these areas aren’t part of a larger Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and have a proven lack of affordable mortgage credit for low- to moderate-income families.

The final tier is the most surprising to most mortgage shoppers. If the area has between 20,001 and 35,000 residents, it can still qualify for USDA loans, but only if it was previously designated as rural in the past and lost that status due to growth but still lacks affordable housing options.

Rules of thumb for eligible suburbs

If you think buying in a more sparsely populated suburban area is more suitable for your budget, there are some rules of thumb to help you look in the right places.

Think outside the city limits

The sweet spot for suburban eligibility is usually a 15- to 20- mile radius outside the city limits of a metropolitan area. Commuter towns on the very edge of an MSA boundary are frequently eligible.

Think in census tracts rather than neighborhoods

Because USDA boundaries are drawn using census tracts rather than street grids, the eligibility line can literally cut right through the middle of a single suburban subdivision. A house on one side of the street might be eligible, while the house across the street is not.

Think mid-sized city, not megalopolis

A town of 15,000 people sitting 10 miles outside a massive city like Chicago or Dallas might be disqualified because it is swallowed by the urban MSA. However, that same town sitting 15 miles outside a mid-sized city (for example, one with 100,000 residents) will almost certainly qualify.

The ultimate rule of thumb is to never assume what the USDA eligibility status is based on how an area looks. You can look up any address for free a USDA Property Eligibility Map. If the address falls in a shaded ineligible zone, it cannot be financed with a USDA loan. There are no exceptions or workarounds.

What to know about USDA loans before you apply

USDA loans are an underutilized resource for housing affordability. But before you start shopping for a new home, there are some important things to keep in mind.

USDA loans come with maximum household income limits

In most standard-cost areas across the U.S., the 2026 income limit is capped at $122,800 for households up to four members and $162,100 for households with five to eight members. In areas where the cost of living is higher — for example, counties neighboring high-cost metro areas like Monterey in northern California and exurban areas of New York and New Jersey — the income caps may exceed $150,000 to $200,000 for larger families.

Buyers need to keep in mind the “everyone counts” rule, which calculates eligibility based on the total income of all adult residents. That means adult children with incomes and potential room mates also add to the maximum income calculation.

Properties come with conditions attached

Despite being issued by the Department of Agriculture, you can’t use a standard USDA loan to buy a working farm.

These loans are for primary residences only — no vacation homes, second homes, investment properties or properties for commercial income producing activities are allowed. According to a 2025 analysis by BatchData, “89.6% of single-family rentals are held by ‘mom-and-pop’ landlords,” some of whom are “accidental landlords” as they turned a starter home into a rental or jumped on the Airbnb bandwagon and started renting out a room in their residence.

While you can rent out a USDA-backed property after you have lived in the home as your primary residence for a significant period (typically at least 12 months), renting it out immediately or buying it with the intent to rent is considered mortgage fraud.

You also can’t buy a “fixer-upper” home with a standard USDA loan. Before you’re approved, an appraiser must certify that the property is safe and structurally sound. Issues like a failing roof, electrical or structural issues will require repairs before your loan is approved.

Zero-down mortgage doesn’t mean you won’t owe money at closing

Though the USDA provides an enormous financial benefit to borrowers by allowing them to finance the entire cost of their home, that doesn’t mean you won’t have to pay any money before you take possession of the house.

To keep the program funded, the USDA charges two mandatory “guarantee fees”: the first is an upfront 1% fee based on your total loan amount; the second is a 0.35% annual fee based on the principal balance. For example, a house that costs $350,000 will have a $3,500 up-front fee assessed and will be charged the $1,225 annual fee. This latter fee is divided by 12 and added to your mortgage statement. It also decreases every month as you pay down the principal.

The bottom line

For homebuyers without a large down payment saved up, the USDA loan is a great opportunity to buy a home and start building equity. If you meet the conditions and you find a property within the guidelines, a USDA loan can save you thousands of dollars.

While it does come with some restrictions, the payoff is the ability to bypass the years of saving typically required for a standard down payment. By allowing you to keep your cash for other expenses, this underutilized program provides a vital financial cushion. 

For those willing to cast their house-hunting net just a few miles further from the city center, a USDA loan isn’t just an alternative financing option, it’s a realistic bridge over the affordability gap and a direct path to building long-term wealth.

https://nypost.com/real-estate/what-is-usda-loan-eligibility-requirements/

NYC homelessness reaches 5-year high

 Homelessness on New York City’s streets reached an alarming five-year high amid socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s still-fledgling term, data released Thursday shows.

Nearly 5,000 unsheltered people were estimated to be living on streets, parks, under highways, and in subways and public transit stations across the city during an annual survey conducted in March, according to the Mayor’s Management Report.

That is up 11% compared to fiscal year 2025 — and an astounding 45% surge from fiscal year 2022.

A homeless man panhandles on University Place at Union Square in New York, Thursday, February 19, 2026.Helayne Seidman for the NY Post
A homeless person sleeps under a blanket to keep warm on W35th Street in New York.Christopher Sadowski for NY Post
The worrisome findings from the Homeless Outreach Population Estimate are not only buried near the end of a section on homelessness, but seemingly waved off as a weather-related aberration.

“While the HOPE survey is typically conducted in late January, this year’s effort was postponed until March due to historic winter weather,” the report states.

A homeless person stands on a street in Manhattan.Getty Images

“Ultimately, the average temperature on the day the survey was conducted—March 10—was nearly 60 degrees, the highest ever on the day of the survey and about 20 degrees above recent years.”

The data shows street homelessness has increased during each survey since the 2022 fiscal year, when former mayor Eric Adams was in office.

https://nypost.com/2026/09/18/us-news/nyc-homelessness-reaches-alarming-5-year-high-in-damning-indictment-on-lefty-policies-report/

Thursday, September 17, 2026

USC, UCLA Study: 2028 Olympics Could Uproot 1000s Of 'Unhoused' People

 by College Fix Staff via The College Fix,

Even if they're relocated it 'can still carry serious consequences'...

According to a recent study by researchers at USC and UCLA, Los Angeles' hosting of the 2028 Summer Olympics could result in the "displacement" of thousands of "unhoused" individuals.

As reported by the Daily Trojan, Los Angeles county estimates that security perimeters established by the U.S. Secret Service will lead to approximately 1,600 "unsheltered" people not having access to where they currently reside.

The study from the two southern California universities puts the figure closer to almost four times that number.

Benjamin Henwood, a USC social policy and health professor and director of its Center for Homelessness, Housing and Health Equity Research, said "It's closer to 6,000 people. I don't know how [county officials] came up with their numbers, so they might be looking at something a little different or more specific."

Henwood also is a curator at Home 2028, an "independent research hub" which studies how the homeless will be affected by the Olympics, according to the Trojan.

During the last Summer Olympics held in the city (1984), law enforcement utilized "large-scale and aggressive sweeps" to get the homeless away from "highly visible tourist areas."

From the article:

LA28, the independent nonprofit organization responsible for planning and delivering the Games, is deferring to city officials for managing the relocation. Under an agreement with the city council, LA28 is expected to fund game-related services that go above "normal and customary."

County officials said they intend to offer at least temporary housing for the unhoused population and have applied for nearly $93 million from the state to support the process. A portion of these funds would also be directed toward the county's Pathway Home model, which moves people into interim housing.

Beyond the final headcount, a critical question lies in exactly how these individuals will be cleared from the secured areas.

Henwood said even if the homeless are relocated it "can still carry serious consequences" such as "poor health outcomes."

USC Public Policy and Management professor David Brady, who researches poverty, social policy, racial inequality, and immigration according to his faculty page, said the upcoming Olympics "should not be the only reason the city invests in and provides housing for unhoused residents."

"If we can [provide housing] during COVID, or we [are hoping to] do it during the Olympics, why can't we do it otherwise?" Brady said. "We have the resources to do it otherwise. And so I would argue we should."

Henwood added "We all know that there's a homelessness crisis [...] it's like, well, what is the plan in general?"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/usc-ucla-study-2028-olympics-could-uproot-1000s-unhoused-people

Wednesday, September 16, 2026

The Fed's Mortgage Policy Made Homeownership Cost More

 by Antón Chamberlin via The Daily Economy,

The median household in Miami earns about $62,000 annually; homeowners with a mortgage have monthly housing costs pushing $2,900. Annualized, this equals more than half the median household income. In Los Angeles, the numbers come in at $82,000 and $3,500 for 51 percent. New Yorkers are paying 49 percent, and New Orleanians are paying 47 percent of their annual income on housing.

Different coasts, different housing markets, different incomes, regulations, and supply constraints. And all of these cities illustrate a national reality that seems beyond dispute: housing has become extraordinarily expensive.

Lest these cities appear cherry-picked, let us consider Harvard's 2026 State of the Nation's Housing report. Existing-home sales are at a three-decade low. Meanwhile, median new and existing home prices exceed $400,000. Prices for the latter are now 54 percent higher than in 2020, nearly five times median household income.

Financially, mortgage rates sit above 6 percent. By late 2025, the monthly cost of the median-priced home reached roughly $3,100, requiring an annual income above $120,000 to afford it, compared with about $1,700 and $66,000, respectively, in early 2020.

This bleak picture is obviously the product of many factors. One, however, was the Federal Reserve's intervention in the housing market. During the COVID lockdown era, the Fed entered the mortgage market on a massive scale, helping push borrowing costs to historic lows. But its intervention did more than simply lower mortgage rates. It also affected households differently, creating benefits for those already in the housing market while making entry more difficult for those who were not.

The Fed's mortgage-backed-security (MBS) purchases helped capitalize cheap credit into higher home prices, which enriched current homeowners, all the while increasing the costs of entry for prospective buyers. Then, when the Fed raised rates to fight inflation, those same outsiders faced both higher prices and higher financing costs.

Beginning in March 2020, the Fed purchased trillions of MBSs, with Agency MBS holdings rising 93 percent in about two years, reaching $2.7 trillion by mid-2022. The Fed's immediate objective was seemingly achieved. Mortgage rates fell to historic lows, which the Dallas Fed explicitly laid at the feet of the Fed's MBS purchases.

Economic consequences, however, as Bastiat and Hazlitt showed for decades, extend beyond the short-run and the targeted groups. Cheaper mortgages increased households' purchasing power and contributed to greater housing demand, placing upward pressure on prices in a market where supply could not quickly adjust. Once inflation arrived, the Fed raised rates, causing this double whammy for would-be buyers. This had important distributional consequences.

At its peak, the Fed owned 32 percent of the entire agency MBS market. These purchases resulted in MBS prices rising and their yields falling, causing mortgage spreads to tighten. This tightening pushed mortgage rates down, allowing buyers to finance larger principal balances. Expanded borrowing opened up possibilities for buyers, further fueling housing demand. With the housing supply unable to sufficiently catch up to the new demand, the financial benefits were met with higher prices on the existing housing supply.

These results were not uniform, however. As with other exercises of monetary policy, where money enters matters.

The Cantillon Effect Comes Home

As Nicolás Cachanosky explains, new money does not enter an economy everywhere, and certainly not simultaneously. Fed actions consist of particular injections at particular points, then following particular paths. It is punctiliar by nature, and this results in changing relative prices, which benefit earlier recipients before prices have adjusted to the intervention. In this context, the relevant "early recipients" do not necessarily receive literal new money, but the injection in question occurs in financial markets closely connected to mortgage credit.

Households can be divided into at least two groups: incumbent owners and prospective buyers, both of whom experience the Fed policy differently. Incumbent owners already possess an appreciating asset, with the potential to refinance at the initial lower rate, seeing their home equity rise. Prospective buyers, by contrast, possess no appreciating asset; therefore, they see their desired homes become more expensive. The same appreciation that increases an incumbent homeowner's net worth increases the price of entry for everyone still trying to buy.

Beginning in 2022, the Fed changed direction. But tightening does not just unwind the past. Homeowners who had purchased or refinanced at historically low rates could keep those mortgages, while new buyers faced even higher rates. The Fed noticed this "lock-in" effect. By June 2024, more than 90 percent of its MBS holdings had coupons below 4 percent.

The Fed's policy can be broken down into two segments, then. During the easing period, low rates and rising prices fed equity gains for homeowning incumbents. Then, the tightening led to a lock-in of those owners at the previously lower rates, as outsiders saw higher rates. And, of course, first-time buyers typically possess neither asset: the equity nor the existing low-rate mortgage to offset these higher financing costs.

A Federal Reserve study from 2023 documented this phenomenon. A one-percentage-point increase in mortgage rates reduced the share of low- and moderate-income homebuyers by about 7.5 percent, with low-income buyers falling by 16 percent. These effects were even larger for first-time buyers. There was also little evidence of larger down payments to counteract the rising rates, suggesting that many could not substitute savings for the higher monthly payment. Evidence also suggests that loose monetary policy passing through to mortgage rates negatively affects family formation and fertility rates.

In total, then, we see the following. Lower rates create unequal access to cheap credit, and the subsequent higher rates affected buyers disparately. The Fed changed not only the cost of financing a house, but the composition of participants in the market. Interest rate policy altered who could buy.

America now has expensive housing, huge mortgages, fewer purchases, declining homeownership, and a growing segment of the population crowded out. At the very least, the Fed exacerbated this from 2020-2022. The broader lesson here is that monetary policy does not change interest rates or prices in isolation. Money always enters particular markets, changes particular relative prices, and creates particular winners and losers. In this instance, the Fed inflated the price of a scarce asset (appreciation for current homeowners). Once the subsidy was removed, the wealth redistribution it caused did not reverse. The consequence is our current state - not just housing inflation, but a higher price of entry.

https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/feds-mortgage-policy-made-homeownership-cost-more