Money in housing, cautious optimism in industry

CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

PETALING JAYA: The property market is expected to remain cautiously optimistic in 2023, with the gradual increase in the Overnight Policy Rate (OPR) since last year likely to affect market activity, particularly on residential demand, says the Valuation and Property Services Department.

The outlook of the workforce in the construction sector and the increase in the price of building materials will also affect supply.

Department director-general Abdul Razak Yusak said internal and external factors, such as economic and financial developments both globally and in the country, would also have an impact on the real estate sector and the sentiment of industry players.

“Looking at the national economy which is projected to grow by 4% to 5% in 2023, supported by continued resilient domestic growth prospects, the property market is expected to remain cautiously optimistic in 2023,” he said.The first quarter of this year alone saw over 89,000 transactions worth RM42.31bil, which was higher than those recorded in pre-pandemic years, he said.

“The seasonal factor in house purchases, which is usually low at the beginning of the year, the increase in OPR and the decline in Consumer Sentiment Index (CSI) are among the factors that contributed to a decline in residential market activity in particular,” he said.

New residential launches, said Abdul Razak, were also indicating a cautious sentiment among developers, with the number recorded at nearly 4,700 units, which was less than those in previous years, while sales performance was moderate at 25.7%.

The decrease in new launches was in line with the decrease in the number of developers’ licences and advertising and sales permits of new housing sales and renewals approved by the Local Government Development Ministry from 5,641 in January and February last year to 2,911 during the same period this year, he added.

Johor recorded the highest number of new launches at 2,077 units or about 45% of the nationwide total with a sales performance of 24.9% while Selangor had the second highest at 791 units or 17% share with a sales performance of 37%.

Abdul Razak said in line with the cautious sentiment among developers, construction activity had slowed down in the first quarter of 2023.

“This is seen as a positive development to balance the unsold supply in the market,” he said, adding that the residential and serviced apartment overhang status continued to be positive.

“The number of overhang units has decreased to 26,872 units worth RM18.31bil in the first quarter of 2023 as a result of market absorption in all states, except Selangor. The volume and value of residential overhang decreased by 3.2% and 0.5% respectively compared with the fourth quarter of 2022,” he said.

Selangor recorded the highest number and value of overhang units, with 4,995 units worth RM4.47bil, followed by Johor at 4,759 units worth RM3.94bil, Kuala Lumpur with 3,423 units worth RM3.13bil, and Penang with 3,138 units worth RM2.48bil.

The purpose-built office (private) and shopping complex segment in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor, said Abdul Razak, should be given attention as there was a surplus of space, which was also expected to be severely affected by the inflow of new supply this year.This is as Kuala Lumpur recorded the highest available private purpose-built office space at 2.53 million square metres involving 290 buildings, followed by Selangor with 1.40 million square metres involving 192 buildings.

For the shopping complex segment, Selangor recorded the highest available retail space nationwide at 0.79 million square metres with 146 buildings followed by Kuala Lumpur at 0.56 million square metres with 97 buildings.

“Developers need to be more thorough and cautious before planning any new development and local authorities need to evaluate in detail before approving each new project,” said Abdul Razak.

Source link

 

Related stories:

Brighter outlook for the housing sector

Property 15 May 2023

Property market activity declined by 5.7% in 1Q

 

Malaysia’s economy back to pre-crisis levels, says Deputy Finance Minister

Economy

 

Demand, credit key to growth now

 

Related posts:

Regaining momentum, property sector to recover despite challenges

 

Is real estate still a viable investment asset?

 

 

 

 

 

Ex-property agent in S’pore fined record S$1.16mil for illegally subletting private homes on Airbnb, HomeAway

 

 

 

 

 

Regulating short-term stays in Penang, such as Airbnb Hosts, homestays

 

 

 

 

House prices down in 2Q, Penang residential market picking up pace

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Working from home trend spurs demand for bigger houses

 

 

 

 

Young buyers flock to property market

Five challenges young Malaysians face with home ownership

For many young Malaysians, the road to owning a home is riddled with speed bumps. — Pexels

PETALING JAYA, Feb 26 — Most would agree that you truly reach adulthood the moment you own your own property.

Just like any other major milestone in life, getting there comes with its own set of challenges that many young Malaysians have to overcome before they can successfully purchase a home.

Here are five hurdles Malaysian millennials might encounter on the path towards home ownership:

1. Worrying about making the wrong choice, when is the ‘right’ time to buy?

 

Purchasing a home can be a major decision that many Malaysian youths feel overwhelmed by. — Pexels pic

Making the decision to buy a piece of property is a huge step that young locals aren’t quite brave enough to take yet.

Social news website SAYS’ 2019 Malaysian Home Survey among 8,568 Malaysians reports that one in five respondents had “(worries) about making the wrong decision”, especially since home ownership requires a hefty financial investment.

2. Unsure about loan application and loan rejections.

Pexels pic Do you have enough saved up for a home in the future? — Pexels pic

A difficult loan approval process is a huge factor that dampens many Malaysians’ prospects of owning a home.

PropertyGuru’s Consumer Sentiment Survey in 2017 states that 33 per cent of Malaysians reported a tough approval process for bank loan applications which presents a major roadblock on the path to home ownership.

3. Starter salaries, not enough money saved for a downpayment.

The average Malaysian needs to plan carefully if they want to own a house with their current salary. — Reuters pic

The thought of dealing with a mortgage on the salary of a fresh graduate is making many millenials think twice about owning a house.

The Employee's Provident Fund statement in 2016 had said that 89 per cent of the working population in Malaysia earn less than RM5,000 monthly, making home ownership especially challenging.

Most millenials wouldn’t believe that they could own a house with that salary.

4. Renting or owning?

  It’s not easy maintaining a modern lifestyle when you’ve got a mortgage weighing on your shoulders. — Unsplash pic

The hefty financial commitment to owning a home means young Malaysians will have to make some lifestyle changes if they want to stay afloat while having a house to their name.

This might mean foregoing luxuries such as weekend brunches and holidays overseas which have become staples for the modern generation.

Hence, a monthly instalment replacing these pleasures is the reason 33% of Malaysians in SAYS’ survey are saying ‘no’ to home ownership.  

5. Lack of awareness on housing deals and promotions.

Housing deals and offers don’t seem to be showing up on the radars of young Malaysians. — Unsplash pic

While initiatives are in place to help young potential homeowners, many do not even know about the resources available to them that can ease the burden of property ownership.

A shocking 65 per cent of Malaysians in SAYS’ survey said that they had no clue about current housing offers and promotions.

This means that many young adults are currently unequipped with knowledge about navigating the property market.

In light of this, property developers EcoWorld have launched HOPE (Home Ownership Programme with EcoWorld), a comprehensive solution that promises to aid young Malaysians in their journey towards owning their dream home.

HOPE aims to make the dream of home ownership a full-fledged reality for millennials with the STAY2OWN (S2O) and HELP2OWN (H2O) programmes.

S2O will allow those wanting to stay in an EcoWorld project to rent their ideal home first with the confidence that they can become homeowners in the future.

A low monthly payment similar to the market rental rate also makes it particularly attractive for first-time homebuyers.

The option to rent first before buying also gives customers ample time to get their finances in order before committing to a new mortgage.

To top it all off, the rental savings will be used to offset part of the purchase price of the home, making it even more affordable for young Malaysians.

The H2O had successfully helped approximately 1,800 young homeowners and upgraders own their choice EcoWorld home last year and you can be one of them too! For more information on owning your dream home, visit EcoWorld’s website (https://ecoworld.my/hope/) or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/EcoWorldGroup/).

By Tan Mei Zi The Malay Mail

* This article is brought to you by EcoWorld. https://ecoworld.my/hope/

A NEW HOPE FOR YOUR DREAM HOME

Related Articles

• Singapore to buy four F-35s, with option for eight more
• FT minister: Stop work order issued on developer after mishap at ex-Pudu jail site
• Embrace ‘disruptive technology’, Azmin tells property developers  

Related posts:

Flat property market seen for Penang

Resilient values: Geh believes that both landed and high-rise units in prime locations will hold their values. Research house sa..


 

Restructuring our household debt

NEW Year always come with new resolutions. Finance is an important aspect of most people’s checklists when it comes to planning new goals.

While it is good to set new financial targets, it is also vital to re-look at our debt portfolio to ascertain if it is at a healthy state.

At a national level, our country also has its financial targets matched against its debt portfolio.

According to the latest Risk Developments and Assessment of Financial Stability 2016 Report by Bank Negara, the country’s household debt was at RM1.086 trillion or 88.4% of gross domestic product (GDP) as at end 2016.

Residential housing loan accounted for 50.3% (RM546.3bil) of total household debts, motor vehicles at 14.6%, personal financing at 14.9%, non-residential loan was 7.4%, securities at 5.7%, followed by credit cards at 3.5% and other items at 3.6%.

Evidently, residential housing loan is the highest among all types of household debt. However, a McKinsey Global Institute Report on “Debt and (Not Much) Deleveraging” in 2015 highlighted that in advanced countries, mortgage or housing loan comprises 74% of total household debt on average.

As a country that aspires to be a developed nation, a housing loan ratio of 50.3% to total household debt would be considered low, compared to 74% for the advanced countries. In other words, we are spending too much on items that depreciate in value immediately – such as car loans, credit card loans and personal loans – compared to assets that appreciate in value in the long run, such as houses.

Advanced economies, which are usually consumer nations, have only 26% debts on non-housing loan as compared to ours at 49.7%.

In order to adopt the household debt ratio of advanced economies, our housing loan of RM546.3bil should be at 74% of total household debt. This means that if we were to keep our housing loan of RM546.3bil constant, our total household debt should be reduced from the current RM1.086 trillion to a more manageable RM738bil. This would require other non-housing loans (car loans, credit card loans and personal loans etc) to reduce from 49.7% of total household debt to only 26%. To achieve this ratio, the non-housing loan debt must collapse from the current RM539.7bil to only RM192bil.

Reducing total household debt from the current RM1.086 trillion to a more manageable RM738bil would also have the added benefit of reducing our total household debt-to-GDP ratio from the high 88.4% to only 60%, making us one of the top countries globally for financial health.

Malaysia’s household debt at present ranked as one of the highest in Asia. Based on the same 2015 McKinsey Report, our household debt-to-income ratio was 146% in 2014 (the ratio of other developing countries was about 42%) compared to the average of 110% in advanced economies.

Adjusting the debt ratio by reducing car loans, personal loans and credit card loans will make our nation stay financially healthy.

Car values depreciate at about 10% to 20% per year based on insurance calculations, accounting standards and actual market prices. Assets financed by personal and credit card loans typically depreciate immediately and aggressively.

The easy access to credit cards and personal loan facilities tend to encourage people to spend excessively, especially when there is no maximum credit limit imposed on credit cards for those earning more than RM36,000 per year.

If we maximised the credit limit given without considering our financial ability, we will need a long time to repay due to the high interest rates, which ranged from 15% to 18% per annum.

Based on a report in The Star recently, Malaysia’s youth are seeing a worrying trend with those aged between 25 and 44 forming the biggest group classified as bankrupt.

The top four reasons for bankruptcy were car loans (26.63%), personal loans (25.48%), housing loans (16.87%) and business loans (10.24%).

It is time for the Government to introduce more drastic cooling-off measures for non-housing loans in order to curb debt that is not backed by assets. This will protect the rakyat from further impoverishment that they are voicing and feeling today.

As we kick start the new year, it is good to relook into our debt portfolio. When we are able to identify where we make up most of our debts, and start to reallocate our financial resources more effectively, we will be heading towards a sound and healthier financial status as a nation.
 

By Alan Tong - Food for thought

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please e-mail feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.


Related posts:

Moving forward with affordable housing

One way to solve housing shortage problem is to build more houses. "If we take a look at countries with commendable housing pol...

Leaving a legacy by buying a house first before a luxury car ... 

 

Can Malaysia's household debt at 87.9% in 2014 be reduced to 54% ? 

 

Invest in the future 

 

8 million more houses needed in Malaysia

Building more homes, the only long term-way to bring house prices down

Cars are more expensive than houses? A house can buy how many cars?

 

Our cars are costing us our homes!

Is having a car still a symbol of freedom? 

 Little by little, a little becomes a lot 

Too good to be true? Think twice 

 

Rising tides of currencies globally cause inflation, money worthless! 

 

What is Blockchain Technology, its uses and applications?

https://youtu.be/E_kCCgsldjU According to Wikipedia, a blockchain , [1] [2] [3] originally block chain , [4] [5] is a continuously gr...

Bitcoin: Utter pipedream

No intrinsic value: Unlike enterprises, bitcoin has no business, no intrinsic value, no cash flows and no balance sheet. — AFP I JUST...

Moving forward with affordable housing

One way to solve housing shortage problem is to build more houses.


"If we take a look at countries with commendable housing policies such as Singapore and Hong Kong, we notice that the government plays a very important role in building and ensuring a sufficient supply of housing for their people."

THE issue of affordable housing has been a hot potato for many countries, especially for a nation with a growing population and urbanisation like ours.

In my previous article, I mentioned that there was a growing shortage of affordable housing in our country according to Bank Negara governor Tan Sri Muhammad Ibrahim. The shortage is expected to reach one million units by 2020.

According to Bank of England governor Mark Carney, one of the most effective ways to address the issue is to build more houses. There are good examples in countries like United Kingdom, Australia and Singapore, which have 2.4, 2.6 and 3.35 persons per household respectively.

In comparison, the average persons per household in our country is 4.06 person, a ratio which Australia had already achieved in 1933! To improve the current ratio, we need to put more effort into building houses to bring prices down.

If we take a look at countries with commendable housing policies such as Singapore and Hong Kong, we notice that the government plays a very important role in building and ensuring a sufficient supply of housing for their people.

For example in Singapore, their Housing and Development Board (HDB) has built over one million flats and houses since 1960, to house 90% of Singaporeans in their properties. In Hong Kong, the government provides affordable housing for lower-income residents, with nearly half of the population residing in some form of public housing nowadays. The rents and prices of public housing are subsidised by the government and are significantly lower than for private housing.

To be on par with Australia (2.6 persons per household), our country needs a total of 8.6 million homes to house our urban population of 22.4 million people. In other words, we need an additional 3.3 million houses on top of our existing 5.3 million residential houses.

However, with our current total national housing production of about 80,000 units a year, it will take us more than 40 years to build 3.3 million houses! With household formation growing at a faster rate than housing production, we will still be faced with a housing shortage 40 years from now.

Therefore, even if the private sector dedicated all its current output to build affordable housing, it will still be a long journey ahead to produce sufficient houses for the nation. It is of course impossible for the private sector to do so as it will be running at a loss due to rising costs of land and construction.

In view of the above, the government has to shoulder the responsibility of building more houses for the rakyat due to the availability of resources owned by the government. Land, for example, is the most crucial element in housing development. As a lot of land resources are owned by government, they must offer these lands to relevant agencies or authorities to develop affordable housing.

I recall when I was one of the founding directors of the Selangor State Development Corp in 1970s, its main objectives was to build public housing for the rakyat.

However, today the corporation has also ventured into high end developments in order to subsidise its affordable housing initiatives. This will somehow distract them from focusing on the affordable housing sector.

Although government has rolled out various initiatives in encouraging affordable houses, it is also important for the authorities to constantly review the original objectives of the relevant housing agencies, such as the various State Economic Development Corporations, Syarikat Perumahan Negara Bhd, and 1 Malaysia People’s Housing Scheme, to ensure they have ample resources especially land and funding to continue their mission in building affordable housing.

A successful housing policy and easy access to affordable housing have a huge impact on the rakyat. It is hoped that our government escalates its effort in building affordable housing, which will enhance the happiness and well-being of the people, and the advancement of our nation.


 Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

By Alan Tong

Leaving a legacy by buying a house first before a luxury car ...

Labels

DURING big festive celebrations such as Hari Raya Aidilfitri, Deepavali and the recently celebrated Chinese New Year, it is common to see families with a few generations gathered together.

Our grandparents, parents, uncles and aunties would talk about the legacies left by our ancestors, and the stories often attract a lot of attention whether from the young or old.

Perhaps, the topic of leaving a legacy is something worth sharing as we embark on a brand new year.

For years, I have been touched by the catchy tagline of a renowned Swiss watch advertisement, “You never actually own a (the watch brand), you merely look after it for the next generation”.

While most of us can relate to the thought, not all of us can indulge in such luxurious watches or be interested in buying one. However, at some point in time, we may be looking at buying a property to pass down to our younger generations.

Whenever the topic of leaving a legacy is brought up, I would recall the lesson that I learnt from my late father. My father embarked on a long journey from China to Malaysia at the age of 16. With years of hard work and frugality at his peak, he managed to own a bus company, the Kuala Selangor Omnibus Co.

Other than his bus transport business, he only invested in his children’s education and real estate. He financed seven of his eight sons to have an overseas university education, and when he passed away, he also left four small plots of land in Klang and a company which had 34 buses.

As I look back now, what my late father invested in unintentionally was very beneficial to me when I came back from my studies as an architect. With the land he handed down and the knowledge he equipped me with, I intuitionally got myself involved in small real estate development, and later founded my property development company, Sunrise, in 1968.

Many people have thought of leaving a legacy. The crucial questions often asked are, when should we start planning for it, and how should we go about it?

For financial planning and investment, I always believe that the earlier we start, the better off we are. The same goes to leaving a legacy.

If you plan to buy a property, it is advisable to start earlier as it is more affordable to buy it now as compared to 10 or 20 years down the line especially with rising costs and inflation in mind. You can start with what you can afford first and focus on long-term investment.

It is proven that property prices appreciate over a period of time, especially when we plan to hand over assets to the next generation that easily involves a 20- to 30-year timeline.

As a developing nation which enjoys high growth rate, Malaysia’s property values will also appreciate in tandem with the economic growth in the long run.

Nowadays, we often hear youngsters comment on the challenges of owning a house due to the rising cost of living. I believe that besides starting with what you can afford, it is also important to plan your financial position wisely and to differentiate between investment and spending.

Investing in properties, commodities, shares, etc. is also a form of savings which can help to grow your wealth and to leave a legacy. On the other hand, money spent on luxury items may depreciate over time from the day you buy them. If we can prioritise investment over expenditure, it is easier and faster to achieve our financial goals.

So, if you haven’t already started to plan, do consider leaving a legacy by buying a house first before a luxury car, branded bags or expensive gadgets, as the latter are considered ‘luxury’, not necessity.

Even if you may not have a spouse or children at this point in time, it’s better to start now than later, as our financial commitments tend to grow bigger as we progress into the next stages of our lives.

Most of us hope our lives matter in some way that can make an impact on our loved ones. The idea of leaving a legacy can take many forms, such as equipping the younger generations with knowledge and values, or leaving them fond memories.

Those are all important to work on and they leave a footprint to those lives you touch. If you are also planning to hand over physical gifts, always remember to start earlier with what you can afford, and focus on long term investment.


By Food for Thought Alan Tong

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:

If it's too good to be true, something's wrong 

 

Cars are more expensive than houses? A house can buy how many cars? 

 

Bankers and lawyers should know better 

 

8 million more houses needed in Malaysia 

 

Can Malaysia's household debt at 87.9% in 2014 be reduced to 54% ? 

 

Our cars are costing us our homes! 

 

A challenging year ahead

 

Rising tides of currencies globally cause inflation, money worthless!

 

Is having a car still a symbol of freedom?

 

Malaysian income: bread and butter, affordability of owing a house

Can Malaysia's household debt at 87.9% in 2014 be reduced to 54% ?

BEING a teenager, my granddaughter started to pick up interest on how the economy works, what are the real assets and liabilities in one’s financial planning. As the topic itself can be slightly “dry”, I made an attempt to discuss it in a way that was easier for her to digest.

“Our national household debt to GDP ratio edged up to 87.9% last year. Is the number alarming?” she asked one day.

“It depends. We have good debts and bad debts in life. For example, 10 years later, our new cars may have depreciated more than 80% and our new clothes would have been worn out. Those are liabilities. On the other hand, houses are assets as they will appreciate in the long run. Debts which are backed by appreciating assets are considered good debts,” I said.

As she nodded in agreement with my simple explanation of good debts and bad debts, her question has piqued my curiosity to look into the details of our household debt.

Overall, is our nation having more good debts or bad debts?

Bank Negara report shows that our household debt was at RM940.4bil or 87.9% of GDP as at end of 2014. Residential housing loans accounted for 45.7% (RM429.7bil) of total debts, hire purchase at 16.6%, personal financing stood at 15.7%, non-residential loans were 7.7%, securities at 6.5%, followed by credit cards and other items at 3.9% respectively.

At first glance, our residential housing loans were the highest among all types of household debts. However, a recent McKinsey Global Institute Report highlighted that in advanced countries, mortgages or housing loans comprise 74% of total household debt on average. As a country that aspires to be a developed nation by 2020, our housing loans that stand at 45.7% is considered low. In other words, we are spending too much on other depreciating items instead of appreciating assets like houses.

If advanced economies, which are usually consumer nations, have only 26% debts on non-housing loans, we shouldn’t have as high as 54% loans on items such as hire-purchase (which are mostly cars), personal loans, credit cards and others.

If we were to follow the household debt ratio of advanced economies, our housing loans of RM429.7bil should be at 74% of total household debts, and other loans should be reduced from 54% to 26%, i.e. from RM510.7bil to RM150.9bil. With such reduction, total household debt would be slashed significantly from RM940.4bil to RM580.6bil (existing housing loans plus reduced non-housing loans), the amount would be at 54.2% of GDP instead of 87.9%.

I am wondering why we can’t have a household debt to GDP ratio of 54.2% as illustrated above. Are we spending too much on depreciating items?

Non-housing loans comprise mainly borrowings for cars, personal loans and credit cards. Car value depreciates about 10% to 20% per year based on insurance calculation and accounting practice. Borrowings for personal loans and credit card are also likely to depreciate over time which can be dubbed as “bad debt”.

Perhaps it is time for the Government to introduce massive cooling off measures for non-housing loans in order to curb bad debt in our household debt.

According to our Deputy Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Minister, our homeownership rate currently stands at 50% and the Government strives to increase the number with more affordable homes. As a comparison, almost 85% of Singaporeans are homeowners.

We can expedite the above vision if more stringent measures are imposed on non-housing loans, it will free up more resources for household financial planning. The rakyat should be encouraged to secure a roof over their heads with effective execution of affordable housing policy by the Government.

It is time to re-look our debt categories and reallocate our resources appropriately. If we are willing to cut back on cars, clothes, shoes and other depreciating items, reducing a household debt to GDP ratio of 54.2% is not only an aspiration, but an achievable reality.

By ALAN TONG Food for Thought

And the more beneficial effect is, more rakyat will have the financial resources to own a house, which is both a shelter and an appreciating asset.

■ FIABCI Asia-Pacific regional secretariat chairman Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

 
Related posts:

Not all debts are bad 

Unfair housing loan agreement 

 MOST if not all house buyers will require financing to buy their dream homes. While there appears to be stiff competition among banks for ... 

Related:

 True Economics: 13/7/2014: Household Debt Mountains

I know, I know... it doesn't matter, really, that households are being tasked with funding Government debt first, their own debt later. All is sustainable.

Not all debts are bad

Rising household indebtedness could be a signal of robust consumption pattern that is the driver of domestic economic growth.

Construction workers at work in Kuala Lumpur. About 46 of household debt is for the purpose of financing purchase of residential properties.

Rising household indebtedness could be a signal of robust consumption pattern that is the driver of domestic economic growth.

FEDERAL government debt, external debt, household debt, non-financial corporate debt – these debts amount to billions of ringgit each and there should be proper context and understanding of the different classifications of debts to be fully informed of the economic issues at stake.

At face value, debt is money owed that has to be repaid in principal and interest. To look at debt from a more constructive point of view, debt is also future consumption brought forward. Furthermore, the benefit derived from consuming at the expense of expected future income should equal or even outweigh its associated costs of financing.

The point is, there are good debts and there are bad debts. Debts raking in billions or outstanding loans growing at an increasing rate could potentially be alarming. However, it would be misleading to label huge debts as unsustainable and destabilising before making sense of the origins and the purposes of the money borrowed.

Debts continue to pile up

A recent research on global debt and leverage by the McKinsey Global Institute in February highlighted that global debt continues to grow post-global financial crisis. These debts – the sum of money owed by governments, households, corporates and financial sectors in the 47 countries under the research – have grown to US$57 trillion since 2007 and a significant portion of the growth came from the public sector.

Overall, the research pointed out that only five developing economies showed signs of deleveraging while most of other countries saw increased debt to GDP ratio during the period.

With hindsight, global growth recovery post-global financial crisis has been rather slow and a handful of governments had pursued expansionary fiscal programmes funded through debts.

Unfortunately, as the global pace of growth is still relatively tentative, high level of government indebtedness would take longer time to deleverage.

Meanwhile, the increase in household and corporate sector debts could signal deeper financial system penetration and also recovery in household and corporate balance sheets for private sector expenditure to grow again.

As of end-2014, Malaysia’s federal government debt amounted to RM583bil (54.5% of GDP); external debt totalled RM744.7bil (69.6% of GDP); household debt increased to RM940.4bil (87.9 % of GDP).

In the past four years, the compounded annual growth rate for government debt was 9.4%; 14.4% for external debt and 12.2% for household debt.

While these numbers seem alarming, the major concern over debts arises when they are unsustainable.

While there are concerns over the sustainability of our fiscal deficit over the long term, the Government has embarked on a fiscal consolidation effort in recent years. Because of this, government debt should be under control in line with its commitment to achieve a balanced budget by 2020.

The Government operates on a few crucial self-imposed budgetary rules and it caps the maximum limit of government debt to GDP ratio at 55%.

On external debt, Bank Negara has adopted the new debt definition in early 2014, keeping in line with the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) new guidelines of widening its definition to better reflect the depth in financial markets and the real economy.

In essence, external debt refers to the debts owed by residents to non-residents, be it denominated in ringgit or foreign currencies.

Therefore, the public and private sector’s offshore borrowings, Malaysian Government Securities held by foreigners are included in the classification of the external debt.

Since the last quarter of 2013, the external debt growth has been on a downward trend, easing to 6.9% in the last quarter of 2014, down from the peak of 15.7% growth recorded in the last quarter of 2013.

Besides, the bulk of the growth in external debt since 2013 was primarily from offshore borrowings as it made up almost half of the total external debt.

Bank Negara, in its recent annual report, guided that private sector offshore borrowings are sound and sustainable, given that 70% of the corporate sector’s offshore loans were sourced from associated companies, parent companies and shareholders.

High household debts a concern

However, Malaysian household sector indebtedness undoubtedly tops the chart in the region.

According to McKinsey’s study, Malaysia’s household debt to income ratio is highest at 146% in 2014, way above the level of the United States (99%) and Indonesia (32%).

When we break down the household debt, 45.7% of it is for the purpose of financing purchase of residential properties. Hire purchase financing (16.6% of total household debt) and personal financing (15.7%) made up the remaining major components.

Even though Malaysia’s household financial asset to total household debt ratio is relatively high at 214% in 2014, the associated risks of high household indebtedness cannot be taken lightly.

The IMF, in its financial sector assessment on Malaysia in April 2014, cautioned that in the event of a sharp fall in housing property prices coupled with a recession in the economy, the burst of the housing asset bubble would have dire consequences on the real economy.

The Government and Bank Negara have in recent years attempted to rein in the growth in housing loans and also put a check on the property market through various macro-prudential tools.

For instance, the last Overnight Policy Rate hike in July 2014 by 25 basis points was primarily to mitigate the financial imbalances within the economy.

In January 2015, the growth of household outstanding loans from the banking institutions has slowed to 9.7%, down from the peak of 13.9% in November 2010.

Although it is a sign of improvement in domestic financial stability, a continued assessment of household loans would be a prudent measure.

Responsible use of leverage

Bad indebtedness is often described as how an overleveraged economy collapses on its own pile of toxic debts when triggered by an overlooked external event – the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States is a classic example.

On the other hand, good debts are those that are used to finance productive and sustainable purposes.

A government manoeuvering an economy out of recession could issue bonds to fund its fiscal stimulus programme while a company could maximise its true potential through the proper use of leverage.

In fact, given a youthful population and a stable work force in Malaysia, rising household indebtedness could be a signal of robust consumption pattern that is the driver of domestic economic growth.

Therefore, regulators and policy makers should not, in their fear of “indebtedness”, stifle the credit lines and the channels to expand present consumption for future capacity of growth.

Unfortunately, with a lack of hindsight, it can be difficult at times to ascertain if a debt is good or bad, A-tier quality or just a default waiting to happen.

In the end, it is not only the viability in repaying the loans but also the realised output and gains from entering a debt contract that should be examined to determine the sustainability in taking up debts.

In short, indebtedness is not necessarily bad. A responsible debtor should have a clear and comprehensive business or personal financial planning and ultimately transparency in dealing with all parties. After all, a good debt is a good customer for the other end.

My point By Mandkaran Mottain

Manokaran Mottain is the chief economist at Alliance Bank Malaysia Bhd.

Related post:

Unfair housing loan agreement

MOST if not all house buyers will require financing to buy their dream homes. While there appears to be stiff competition among banks for ...

How to avoid future complications when buying a house?

Points to consider when buying a house to avoid future complications

CAN you afford a house now?

Assuming you can afford a house, how much can you afford to pay? These are important questions that many people do not research. This oversight can lead many people to bad debt and even bankruptcy.

Your monthly expenditures will be more than just the housing loan. There will also be insurance, electricity, water, telephone bills, contributions to maintenance fund, medical bills, groceries, unexpected household/auto repairs, lunch money and many other obligations.

They must all be accounted for in your budget spreadsheet. For many of us the purchase of a house or property is the largest financial commitment we will ever make. This makes arranging the most suitable housing loan just as important.

Make sure you know the costs of entering into the loan for the purchase of the property. They include conveyancing, application fees, valuation and legal fees, mortgage insurance (if necessary) and sometimes, extra life insurance premiums.

Some lenders will tell you the advantages of whatever housing loans they are trying to squeeze you into, but rarely will they tell you the disadvantages.

According to an article in a business magazine, the banking system is flush with RM180bil liquidity. This explains the increasingly aggressive sales promotions undertaken by financial institutions for the housing industry.

Always look at the total deal, not some dangling carrots in front of you. Compare the entire housing loan cost of different lenders to determine which is best for you.

I would like to discuss some of the lenders' offers that may not be as attractive as they appear. I will start with the special low interest offered for the first year. Such an offer is usually given during a sale campaign and it usually carries a fixed calendar period with a run-out date. Thus, even if a house buyer commenced his application process immediately upon the launch of the campaign, by the time the loan is approved and disbursement commences, the period remaining to enjoy this special low interest rate will certainly be less than one year.

If he were to start the application process a few months after the campaign, it is likely that he will enjoy the special low rate for only a very short period.

Due to our unique system of progressive payments to the developers, the mean average of the amount disbursed by the banks during the “first year low interest offer,” is really lower than the loan amount. Thus, any saving on interests is really much less than it seems. And these have all been figured out already by those marketing experts in the banks.

A more sincere approach would be to offer the special low interest rate to apply during the progressive payment period and to continue to run for one year after the date when the loan is fully disbursed. Only then can such offers bear some element of sincerity. I believe that anything short of that makes the offer a sales marketing gimmick.

There are other clauses that put house buyers in a disadvantaged situation. Some lenders include clauses in the loan agreements that give them the absolute rights to alter both the Base Lending Rates and/or the margin of interests.

Doesn't this in effect nullify their typical attractive offer of “BLR plus X% for following years?”

One cannot make a special low interest offer in the sales campaign and then contractually (through the loan agreement) creates a clause to allow that special offer interest rate to be invalidated. Make sure you know all the costs of early discharge of the loan.

One other clause to look out for is the redemption of the loan. A house buyer may wish to sell the house and wished to fully-settle the loan.

This is where the conditions for full-settlement differ from one financial institution to another. Think long term.

When one takes a loan, one spends a much longer period servicing the loan beyond the first year or even the second and the third year. So do not be taken in by the very attractive offers during the honeymoon year/s of the tenure of your loan. Remember, the remaining of the 25 years is more important. Do not go for short-term gains only to lose out heavily on the long remaining years.

I would advise house buyers to look beyond the first year of so-called low interest when shopping for housing loans. With the stiff competition among the various lenders today, one should seriously shop around and scrutinise each and every offer before commencing the application process. Talk to your bankers, lawyer friends or seek advice from the National House Buyers Association.

One really has to scrutinise the fine print before making a decision as to which financial institution to go to for a loan. It is about time to standardisde the terms and conditions in the loan agreement so that there will be orderliness in the banking industry.

No more “embedded” clauses within the voluminous stakes of papers one has to initial giving the impression that one has truly read and understood them. It is obviously impossible to read and understand those 40 over pages of legal language that comes with appendixes.

BUYERS BEWARE
By CHANG KIM LOONG 
Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of The National House Buyers Association, a non-profit, non-governmental, non-political organisation manned by volunteers. For more information, check www.hba.org.my or e-mail info@hba.org.my