Home > Mortgages > Could This Mortgage Innovation Help You Buy a Home?

Comments 0 Comments

Would you buy a home for a discounted price if you had to surrender much of the gains when you sold it someday? That’s the premise behind an innovative new housing strategy called “shared equity.”

It sounds a bit like a hybrid between buying and renting. Buyers who couldn’t otherwise be able to afford a home get a big discount — perhaps $100,000 off the market price — in exchange for giving up a large portion of potential equity gains in the future. The entity that sells the home — usually a nonprofit organization — keeps the rest of the profits, using them to fund other affordable purchases. By essentially capping gains, the model keeps prices affordable for entire neighborhoods, suggests a report issued recently by the Urban Institute called “Homeownership for a New Era.”

“Because such programs recycle subsidies over time, they can cost-effectively promote homeownership for low- and moderate-income homebuyers,” the report says. It examined nine ongoing shared-equity experiments occurring across America. All of them are small — the report covers only a few hundred purchasers. Still, it offers a glimpse into a new housing model that’s being considered across the globe.

“Shared equity programs provide homebuyers with a way of bridging the gap between what they are able to afford to pay in a mortgage and the actual market cost to own a property,” the report says. While models differ, “they all share the same goal of providing homeownership options to low- and middle-income communities with mechanisms in place to preserve the affordability of these homes over time.”

To be sure, shared equity is complex and requires a lot of explanation. Sales prices are tricky to set: They must balance median income on one side with median prices on the other. Set too high and they’ll still be unaffordable. Set too low, and they put the nonprofit at risk. Generally, prices are set at between 60-100% of area median income.

The resale price calculation can be even more complex. Some programs cap appreciation at 1.5-3% annually. Resellers are allowed to keep a portion of the change in appraised value, sometimes only 25%.

There are other drawbacks to the programs. Buyers have less incentive to invest in improvements to their properties, since their capital gains are capped. Some programs add formulas to account for that.

Shared equity applicants are often less-than-ideal buyers, though the Urban Institute says they are often older than the median U.S. homebuyer (36 rather than 31), with a median credit score of 720, which is generally considered to be in the “good” range. (You can check your credit scores for free on Credit.com.) And they have saved an average of $6,000 towards a down payment — another indication that this group might be able to buy in a “normal” housing market. The most common barrier tends to be lower income, though they often work in stable industries. (This calculator can show you how much home you can afford.)

Still, because of their non-traditional makeup, the loans often cannot be resold on secondary markets, meaning nonprofits must keep them on their own balance sheets, which slows growth of the programs.

Similar programs being attempted in the United Kingdom and Spain have had some success. In Spain, shared home ownership is being developed in an attempt to match an excess of housing stock built during the housing bubble with would-be buyers who still can’t afford the empty homes. A report in Fortune magazine recently threw a bit of cold water on those countries’ programs however, which banks on buyers slowly working their way from the discount purchase to full equity ownership. Most buyers don’t, one research project found, frustrating both buyer and private seller.

In the U.S. programs studied by the Urban Institute, nonprofits maintained ownership in the homes, making deed and price restrictions on the property much easier to swallow. The Institute concludes the new model, warts and all, is ripe for further study, as it appeals to a segment of would-be buyers that other low- and moderate-income purchase plans don’t — namely strong buyers who simply can’t afford homes in areas where prices far outstrip incomes.

“Shared equity homeownership provides opportunities to low-income homebuyers that market-rate homeownership and other housing assistant programs simply cannot,” it concludes.

More on Mortgages & Homebuying:

Image: monkeybusinessimages

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team