Cut foreclosures by slicing real estate fees

Al Lewis

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

President Obama has often said that it would be a shame to waste this economic crisis. Nowhere is that more true than in residential real estate. Federal home-buyer tax credits up to $8,000 designed to increase home sales and reduce foreclosures are having little impact. Sales of existing homes fell a record 17 percent in December, while foreclosure petitions are rising. Instead, let’s use this crisis to try a new approach: permanently slashing the 6 percent real estate brokerage commissions prevalent in most markets.

Unlike commissions paid for buying cars, stocks or insurance, these hidden commissions include two payouts – about 3 percent each to the seller’s broker and the buyer’s broker. But there’s no need for two brokers in real estate transactions. These hidden fees survive only because real estate brokerage is a cartel. Forty years ago, you needed one broker to buy a house – today you need two. In law and medicine, fee splitting is illegal. In real estate, it is required.

Most people would not hire commissioned brokers if they had to pay for them directly – that’s why the brokerage industry wants them hidden. So let’s eliminate hidden fees for the buyer’s broker. We could then drop the homeowner tax credit, since the buyer is saving three grand, and replace it with a $1,000 incentive credit. This cash bonus would go only to home buyers whose purchase prices include a total commission of 3 percent or less (or none at all).

The selling brokers will naturally complain: “We can’t afford to split a 3 percent commission with the buyer’s broker. That’s how much we need to make ourselves. So buyers will have to make their own arrangements if they want assistance.”

And that is exactly the point: Instead of allowing the 3 percent commission to be hidden in the sales price, this tax incentive would encourage home buyers to pay openly for whatever level of assistance they want, if any. Given those other options and the chance to collect $1,000, few buyers would opt to pay a 3 percent out-of-pocket commission – about $15,000 on a median-priced Bay Area home. Faced with the prospect of paying that bill explicitly, most Internet-savvy buyers would probably opt for personal advice just a few times during the home-buying process, and pay by the hour or by the showing.

Even with only $1,000 of tax credit, these buyers will be better off financially than first-time buyers who collect a hefty home buyer credit, but who still pay hidden commissions. And taxpayers are better off, too. Any buyer could still opt to pay the traditional commission at closing – but would have to forgo the incentive credit.

This temporary incentive credit could permanently alter the structure of real estate brokerage, because there would be no going back once the credit expires. As happened when stock commissions were allowed to decline, much lower transaction costs would create more transactions and hence more liquidity. Liquid markets will allow people to sell houses more easily before they go “underwater,” thus reducing foreclosures.

Of course the real estate brokerage industry, which has strongly endorsed home buyer tax credits, will oppose this incentive credit. Fortunately, an equally powerful coalition of builders, bankers, mortgage brokers and consumer advocates will be lined up supporting it.

Much lower transaction costs would not just reduce foreclosures by facilitating transactions, but would also increase people’s net equity in their existing homes. Homeowners would be better off and, at least in real estate, this economic crisis would not be wasted.

Al Lewis is author of “OOBonomics: 12 ‘Outside Of the box’ Ideas to Improve the Economy.”

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/02/ED4C1BP3O5.DTL

This article appeared on page A – 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Thank you for visiting InfoTube.net.  Place a Free Home Listing.  Download Free Legal Forms. Search over 20,000 Listings.  $399 MLS Listings