HOME          ARTICLES          APPLY

Are There More Mortgage Rule Changes Coming?

Matt Chan • Jul 04, 2017

Recently, the Bank of Canada released its semi-annual Financial Systems Review  (PDF document), which identifies some of the major risks that the Bank foresees on the economic horizon.

Unsurprisingly, the Bank pinpoints increased levels of Canadian household debt and rapidly increasing prices in Toronto and Vancouver as vulnerabilities to the financial system. The good news is that, despite these vulnerabilities increasing over the past six months, the Bank of Canada is confident that the financial system remains resilient, and that overall, national economic conditions continue to improve. This positive outlook, combined with strong economic growth, are playing a role in the not-so-subtle hint that the Bank may increase interest rates sooner rather than later.

So what does this policy review indicate for future federal interventions in the mortgage market? The short answer is a lot.

It is no coincidence that the aforementioned vulnerabilities mirror the rationale used by the federal government for the mortgage insurance and eligibility changes in October. The Bank of Canada, the Department of Finance and CMHC are all aligned and focused on curbing elevated levels of household debt and ensuring the stability of the housing sector. This report could be viewed as representative of the problems and policies that the finance department is considering.

It is no surprise then that the Bank of Canada is pleased with the impact that the October changes have had on the debt-to-income ratios of insured mortgages (chart 3). But, the changes have also had an impact on increasing the market share of new mortgages that are uninsured. Clearly, this was an intended impact of the federal government’s changes and now the Bank of Canada is identifying the uninsured space as the next place to consider in terms of whether action is needed.

The Bank’s concerns will likely find a supportive audience at the Ministry of Finance and at CMHC. The data showing the increasing debt-to-income ratios for the uninsured sector (table 1) could trigger an investigation into additional regulation in the uninsured space by the Ministry of Finance or OSFI.

The first measure that is likely being considered is related to Home Equity Lines of Credit (HELOCs). This is clear for two reasons. First, because the Bank of Canada believes that the greater use of HELOCs could also be contributing to increasing household indebtedness. According to the Bank, HELOCs have increased at rates above income growth since early 2016, and have accounted for approximately 10 per cent of total outstanding household credit in recent quarters. Second, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada recently released a report raising concerns that HELOCs may be putting some Canadians at risk of over borrowing. The timing of this report and the Financial Systems Review may not be coincidental.

It seems OSFI may be considering making changes to its B-20 underwriting guidelines ; the Bank of Canada’s report suggests that OSFI will begin a public consultation shortly.

The critical policy question that the Department of Finance could be considering is whether to extend the stress test for insured mortgages to uninsured mortgages as well. This could create a more even playing field for lenders who originate a greater percentage of insured mortgages and could possibly have an impact in cooling the markets of Toronto and Vancouver. However, it could also negatively impact the rest of the Canadian housing market, which is not suffering from the same vulnerabilities of Toronto and Vancouver and could become unnecessary if the Bank of Canada raises interest rates.

Finally, there was a small policy section in the review that few may have paid much attention to but is important and provides some very helpful insights into the future of Canada’s private mortgage securitization market. The Bank of Canada recognizes that the recent changes have negatively impacted mortgage lenders that rely on portfolio insurance and that the increased growth in uninsured mortgages have created an opportunity for private residential mortgage-backed securities. The Bank of Canada goes even further and suggests that “properly structured private securitization would benefit the financial system by helping lenders fund loans.” (page 13).

It is surprising that this issue hasn’t received more attention because the Bank of Canada is tacitly endorsing a significant policy shift away from CMHC-backed mortgage securities to a private sector mortgage securitization market. This confirms that the creation of this market is an intended impact from the federal government’s changes to portfolio insurance and aligns with CMHC President Evan Siddall’s testimony to the finance committee on the changes to portfolio insurance.

Until the Bank of Canada is convinced that the housing sector no longer poses the greatest liability to the Canadian economy, Canadians will continue to see the federal government scrutinize mortgage activity in Canada with an eye to reduce the increasing levels of household debt in the country..

Let’s hope the government shifts their focus to unsecured household debt instead of further secured debt restrictions. However, if the Bank of Canada’s review is representative of the Ministry of Finance’s considerations, watch out for changes to HELOCs, through B-20 changes, the stress test being applied to uninsured mortgages and continued growth in the developing private sector mortgage securitization market.

 

This article originally appeared on Canadian Mortgage Trends, a publication of Mortgage Professionals Canada on June 20th 2017. It was written by the manager of government and policy for Mortgage Professionals Canada, Samuel Duncan. 

CONTACT

Share

RECENT POSTS

By Matthew Chan 01 May, 2024
If you have a variable rate mortgage and recent economic news has you thinking about locking into a fixed rate, here’s what you can expect will happen. You can expect to pay a higher interest rate over the remainder of your term, while you could end up paying a significantly higher mortgage penalty should you need to break your mortgage before the end of your term. Now, each lender has a slightly different way that they handle the process of switching from a variable rate to a fixed rate. Still, it’s safe to say that regardless of which lender you’re with, you’ll end up paying more money in interest and potentially way more money down the line in mortgage penalties should you have to break your mortgage. Interest rates on fixed rate mortgages Fixed rate mortgages come with a higher interest rate than variable rate mortgages. If you’re a variable rate mortgage holder, this is one of the reasons you went variable in the first place; to secure the lower rate. The perception is that fixed rates are somewhat “safe” while variable rates are “uncertain.” And while it’s true that because the variable rate is tied to prime, it can increase (or decrease) within your term, there are controls in place to ensure that rates don’t take a roller coaster ride. The Bank of Canada has eight prescheduled rate announcements per year, where they rarely move more than 0.25% per announcement, making it impossible for your variable rate to double overnight. Penalties on fixed rate mortgages Each lender has a different way of calculating the cost to break a mortgage. However, generally speaking, breaking a variable rate mortgage will cost roughly three months of interest or approximately 0.5% of the total mortgage balance. While breaking a fixed rate mortgage could cost upwards of 4% of the total mortgage balance should you need to break it early and you’re required to pay an interest rate differential penalty. For example, on a $500k mortgage balance, the cost to break your variable rate would be roughly $2500, while the cost to break your fixed rate mortgage could be as high as $20,000, eight times more depending on the lender and how they calculate their interest rate differential penalty. The flexibility of a variable rate mortgage vs the cost of breaking a fixed rate mortgage is likely another reason you went with a variable rate in the first place. Breaking your mortgage contract Did you know that almost 60% of Canadians will break their current mortgage at an average of 38 months? And while you might have the best intention of staying with your existing mortgage for the remainder of your term, sometimes life happens, you need to make a change. Here’s is a list of potential reasons you might need to break your mortgage before the end of the term. Certainly worth reviewing before committing to a fixed rate mortgage. Sale of your property because of a job relocation. Purchase of a new home. Access equity from your home. Refinance your home to pay off consumer debt. Refinance your home to fund a new business. Because you got married, you combine assets and want to live together in a new property. Because you got divorced, you need to split up your assets and access the equity in your property Because you or someone close to you got sick Because you lost your job or because you got a new one You want to remove someone from the title. You want to pay off your mortgage before the maturity date. Essentially, locking your variable rate mortgage into a fixed rate is choosing to voluntarily pay more interest to the lender while giving up some of the flexibility should you need to break your mortgage. If you’d like to discuss this in greater detail, please connect anytime. It would be a pleasure to walk you through all your mortgage options and provide you with professional mortgage advice.
By Matthew Chan 24 Apr, 2024
Credit. The ability of a customer to obtain goods or services before payment, based on the trust that you will make payments in the future. When you borrow money to buy a property, you’ll be required to prove that you have a good history of managing your credit. That is, making good on all your payments. But what exactly is a “good history of managing credit”? What are lenders looking at when they assess your credit report? If you’re new to managing your credit, an easy way to remember the minimum credit requirements for mortgage financing is the 2/2/2 rule. Two active trade lines established over a minimum period of two years, with a minimum limit of two thousand dollars, is what lenders are looking for. A trade line could be a credit card, an instalment loan, a car loan, or a line of credit; basically, anytime a lender extends credit to you. Your repayment history is kept on your credit report and generates a credit score. For a tradeline to be considered active, you must have used it for at least one month and then once every three months. To build a good credit history, both of your tradelines need to be used for at least two years. This history gives the lender confidence that you’ve established good credit habits over a decent length of time. Two thousand dollars is the bare minimum limit required on your trade lines. So if you have a credit card with a $1000 limit and a line of credit with a $2500 limit, you would be okay as your limit would be $3500. If you’re managing your credit well, chances are you will be offered a limit increase. It’s a good idea to take it. Mortgage Lenders want to know that you can handle borrowing money. Now, don’t confuse the limit with the balance. You don’t have to carry a balance on your trade lines for them to be considered active. To build credit, it’s best to use your tradelines but pay them off in full every month in the case of credit cards and make all your loan payments on time. A great way to use your credit is to pay your bills via direct withdrawal from your credit card, then set up a regular transfer from your bank account to pay off the credit card in full every month. Automation becomes your best friend. Just make sure you keep on top of your banking to ensure everything works as it should. Now, you might be thinking, what about my credit score, isn’t that important when talking about building a credit profile to secure a mortgage? Well, your credit score is important, but if you have two tradelines, reporting for two years, with a minimum limit of two thousand dollars, without missing any payments, your credit score will take care of itself, and you should have no worries. With that said, it never hurts to take a look at your credit every once and a while to ensure no errors are reported on your credit bureau. So, if you’re thinking about buying a property in the next couple of years and want to make sure that you have good enough credit to qualify, let’s talk. Connect anytime; it would be a pleasure to work with you and help you to understand better how your credit impacts mortgage qualification.
By Mortgage Plan 19 Apr, 2024
Sherry Cooper has done a great analysis of the upcoming Federal Budget. You can see it here: Sherry Cooper Federal Budget 2024 One of the key themes of the budget is to tax the wealthy namely through increase taxes on capital gains. Currently, 50% of capital gains are taxed. Under new proposal, 50% capital gains tax will still apply for the first $250,000 but will rise to 66.6% on income above $250,000. Implications to real estate investors: - the tax is targeted to the wealthiest Canadians BUT there will be impact to the middle class real estate investors and can lead to higher taxes for middle class Canadians. - disincentive for Canadians to buy investment properties - disincentive for Canadians to buy under a corporation as corporations and trusts are taxed for entire capital gains at 66% rather than just the gains over $250,000 for individuals. With these changes, it is important to work with a team of professionals (mortgage broker, realtor, financial advisor and accountant) that can properly advise and help you navigate the intricacies of buying and selling investment properties. Be sure to consult with a great team of knowledgeable professionals when looking to buy and sell real estate. The other changes: - increase amortization to 30 years for new builds Likely minimal effect on affordability as it likely will increase demand - increase in RRSP withdrawal limit to $60,000 from $35,000 In my career, I rarely see a first time buyer with over $25,000 in RRSPs so likely a very minimal impact on actual first time buyers Reach out to me if you have any comments or questions.
Share by: