Banking: Australian Banks’ Moves to Curb Residential Investment Lending Are Credit-Positive – Moody’s

In a  brief note, Moody’s acknowledged that the bank’s recent moves to adjust their residential loan criteria could be positive for their credit ratings, but also underscored a number of potential risks in the Australian housing sector including elevated and rising house prices, declining mortgage affordability, and record levels of household indebtedness. As a result, they believe more will need to be done to tackle the risks in the portfolio.

Moody’s says the recent initiatives are credit positive since they reduce the banks’ exposure to a higher-risk loan segment. At the same time, it is likely that further additional steps will be required because the growing imbalances in the Australian housing market pose a longer-term challenge to the Australian banks’ credit profiles, over and above the immediate concerns relating to investment lending.

Therefore they expect the banks first to curtail their exposure to high LTV loans and investment lending further over the coming months; and second, they will gradually improve the quantity and quality of their capital through a combination of upward revisions to mortgage risk weights and capital increases. This is likely to happen over the next 18 months or so.

Westpac’s Revised LMI Arrangements Are Credit Negative for Australian Mortgage Insurers – Moody’s

Moody’s says that according to media reports, last Monday, Westpac Banking Corporation advised its mortgage brokers that it had revised its mortgage insurance arrangements so that effective that day, 18 May, all new Westpac-originated loans with a loan-to-value ratio (LTV) above 90% would be insured with its captive mortgage insurer, Westpac Lenders Mortgage Insurance Limited and reinsured with Arch Capital Group Ltd.

Westpac’s decision to shift its mortgage insurance policies away from domestic third-party lenders’mortgage insurance (LMI) providers is credit negative forGenworth Financial Mortgage Insurance Pty Ltd and QBE Lenders’ Mortgage Insurance Limited. Westpac accounted for around 14% of Genworth Australia’s gross written premium during 2014, and potentially a meaningful, albeit undisclosed, proportion of QBE LMI’s business. At the same time, existing policies will not be affected and the effect o nthe insurers’ net earned premium should only become material beginning in 2016. LMI customer contractual relationships are long term in nature and any further erosion of the customer base, when and if it occurs, remains contingent on market and individual customer developments.

Westpac’s move follows its earlier disclosures and the Genworth Australia announcement in February 2015that Genworth’s contract for the provision of LMI to Westpac was being terminated. Our understanding from Westpac’s disclosures and media reports is that Westpac’s LMI arrangements with QBE LMI have also been affected. Moody’s says that Westpac’s move is indicative of a longer-run trend towards reduced usage of the domestic mortgage insurance product. Australia’s major banks are not currently deriving regulatory capital benefits from using LMI. Similarly, product innovation, such as the use of self-insured low-deposit mortgage products, will affect the need for third-party LMI. Diminished third-party LMI usage elevates the insurers’ risk of losing pricing power and reducing their customer base, putting downward pressure on the firms’ profitability and volumes.

Loan Types By Lender

Completing the analysis of the residential  APRA Property Exposure data, we look at selected loan type data across the different ADI lender categories.  This analysis is based on relative numbers of transactions, not value.

First we see that the proportion of loans approved outside normal serviceability criteria has drifted lower, though Building Societies, Credit Unions and the Smaller Banks are still most likely to bend the rules to get a loan written. Perhaps they have tighter rules in place to begin with?

APRAOutsideServiceTypeMar2015The proportion of low doc loans written is miniscule and now consistently low. Most low doc borrowers would now be knocking on the door of the non-ADI’s as they do not have the same heavy supervisory oversight and are tending to be more flexible – but there is little public data on this.

APRALowDocTypeMAr2015Turning to interest only loans, the Majors, and Other Banks are most likely to write this type of loan. However, we note the rising proportion of Credit Unions, Building Societies and Foreign Banks who will consider the proposition.

APRAIntOnlyTypeMar2015Finally, looking at the use of the broker channel, Foregin Banks originate the highest proportion this way, with the smaller Banks also in on the third party origination game. Credit Unions and Building Societies are less inclined to use Brokers, though there have been some increase in recent years.

APRAThirdPartyByTypeMar2015

LVR Data By Lender Type

Continuing our analysis of the latest APRA data, we are looking at the LVR mix by type of lender by analysis of the relative ratio of LVR over time, (understanding that some lender categories are relatively small). APRA splits out the ADI data into sub categories, including Major Banks, Other Banks (excludes the Majors), Building Societies, Credit Unions and Foreign Banks. There are some interesting trend variations across these.

In the above 90% LVR category, we see a general drift down, Credit Unions took a dive last year, whilst Building Societies have the highest share of new 90%+ LVR loans, though we see this falling a little now. The Major Banks sit in the middle of the pack. Note that in 2009, Other Banks were writing more than 30% of their loans in this category, today its below 10%.

APRALVRByType90+May2015In the 80-90% LVR range, the Foreign banks, and Other Banks (ie not the big four) showed an uptick, though this may now be reversing. Building Societies and Credit Unions are below the Major Banks.

APRALVRByType90May2015In the 60-80% range, we see the Building Society mix rising in this band, whilst the others have been relatively static.

APRALVRByType80May2015Finally, the loans below 60% LVR. Here the Building Society have drop a few points, as they move into the higher LVR bands, though that may be reversing a little now. Foreign Banks share in this band dropped recently, after a spike in 2009.

APRALVRByType60May2015

Home Loans Up, Mix Changing, APRA

The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) today released Quarterly Authorised Deposit-taking Institution Property Exposures for the March 2015 quarter.

Quarterly ADI Property Exposures contains information on ADIs’ commercial property exposures, residential property exposures and new housing loan approvals. Detailed statistics on residential property exposures and new housing loan approvals are included for ADIs with greater than $1 billion in housing loans.

ADIs’ commercial property exposures were $234.2 billion, an increase of $15.1 billion (6.9 per cent) over the year. Commercial property exposures within Australia were $193.3 billion, equivalent to 82.5 per cent of all commercial property exposures.

ADIs’ total domestic housing loans were $1.3 trillion, an increase of $107.1 billion (9.0 per cent) over the year. There were 5.3 million housing loans outstanding with an average balance of $243,000.

ADIs with greater than $1 billion of residential term loans approved $82.3 billion of new loans, an increase of $8.5 billion (11.5 per cent) over the year. Of these new loan approvals, $51.9 billion (63.0 per cent) were owner-occupied loans and $30.4 billion (37.0 per cent) were investment loans.

Looking in more detail at the data, looking first at the portfolio data, we see the rise on the value of home lending across the ADI’s and the rise in the proportion of investment loans in the mix. High LVR’s fell a little.

APRAPortfolioBalancesADIMarch2015The mix of loan type shows a continuing slow rise in interest-only loans (28.9% of all loans) and offset loans (32.3%), and a slight fall in loans with redraw (77.1% of loans).

APRALoanMixADIMarch2015

Across the portfolio, the average balance on interest-only loans is the highest, at $315,000, whilst reverse mortgages sat at $94,000.

APRAAverageLoanSizeADIMarch2015  Turning to approvals by quarter, we see a steady rise in approval volumes, with 37% by number investment loans. Remember that earlier APRA showed that more than 50% of loans by value were for investment loans, so we again see evidence that investment loans are larger by value.

APRANoLoansApprovedMarch2015Looking at LVR bands, we see a slight fall in loans over 90% LVR (from 14% to 11%)  a slight rise in the 80-90% band, (from 16% to 22%). So the regulators influence is showing though to some extent.

APRANoLoansApprovedLVRMarch2015Finally, we see that third party loans by volume (not value) fell from 45% to 42% this quarter. Interest only loans accounted for 42% of approvals. Low doc and loans outside serviceability were low.

APRANumberofLoansApprovedByTypeMar2015 So overall, we see buoyant loan growth, supported by rises in investment lending and interest only loans. We will be watching the data next quarter as the Regulators tighten the screws. We think the property worm is about to turn.

 

Cold Hand Of The Regulator On Bank’s Investment Lending

Following the disclosures in the recent bank results that many were above the APRA target of 10% portfolio growth, and their statements they would work to fall within the guideline, we have seen a litany of changes from the banks, which marks an important change in tempo for investment home lending. Regulatory pressure is beginning to strangle investment lending growth.  Better late then never.

In the past few days, ANZ has stated it would no longer offer interest rate discounts to new property investor borrowers who did not also have an owner-occupied home loan with the bank; Westpac is cutting discounts to new investment property borrowers according to the AFR; and Bankwest has imposed a loan-to-valuation ratio cap of 80 per cent on investor Mortgages. Changes that took effect on Friday will mean Macquarie customers taking out fixed-rate investor or interest-only loans will pay higher rates than owner occupied borrowers. Recently the Commonwealth Bank, scrapped its $1,000 investment home-loan rebate offer and reduced pricing discounts for investment home loans. In addition more broadly, Bank Of Queensland has changed its underwriting practices. NAB has also changed its instructions brokers, and as of May 13, NAB would only consider pricing below advertised rates for owner-occupiers or personal loans. “Investment loans will not be eligible for any pricing discretions. Advertised rates will apply to investment loans,” the note said. Suncorp plans to pare down discounts for investor property loans while boosting incentives for homeowner lending, in reaction to the regulatory crackdown on housing markets.

Last week we showed that currently discounts are at their peak, so will we see overall discounts cut, or reinvigorated discounts on selected owner-occupied lending? Banks need home loan lending growth to make their business work. We think the focus will be on a drive to accelerate refinancing of existing loans, so expect to see some amazing offers in coming weeks to try and fill the gap.

We know from our surveys there is still significant demand for housing finance out there. We also know that some of the non-ADI players are playing an increasing role in the investment lending sector, and these players are of course not regulated by APRA. Securitisation of Australian home loans was up last quarter, and most were purchased by Australian investors.

Mortgage brokers, who have been enjoying the recent growth ride may suddenly be finding their world just changed.

Whilst its a change in tempo, its not necessarily the end of the mortgage lending boom. It may however be the tipping point on house prices in Sydney and Melbourne, where investment loans have been responsible for much of the rise.

 

 

Release of the Spectrum Review Report

The Minister for Communications and the Parliamentary Secretary announced the release of the Spectrum Review Report, prepared by the Department of Communications.

In May 2014, the Minister for Communications announced a review of the spectrum policy and management framework. Established in 1992, the current framework led the world in how it dealt with the complexities of spectrum management. But today, more than 20 years later, the fast changing nature of technology has dated the framework. It needs to be modernised to reflect changes in technology, markets and consumer preferences that have occurred over the last decade and to better deal with increasing demand for spectrum from all sectors.

The purpose of the review was to examine what policy and regulatory changes are needed to meet current challenges, and ensure the framework will serve Australia well into the future.

Under the Terms of Reference, the review was to consider ways to:

  1. simplify the framework to reduce its complexity and impact on spectrum users and administrators, and eliminate unnecessary and excessive regulatory provisions
  2. improve the flexibility of the framework and its ability to facilitate new and emerging services including advancements that offer greater potential for efficient spectrum use, while continuing to manage interference and providing certainty for incumbents
  3. ensure efficient allocation, ongoing use and management of spectrum, and incentivise its efficient use by all commercial, public and community spectrum users
  4. consider institutional arrangements and ensure an appropriate level of Ministerial oversight of spectrum policy and management, by identifying appropriate roles for the Minister, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, the Department of Communications and others involved in spectrum management
  5. promote consistency across legislation and sectors, including in relation to compliance mechanisms, technical regulation and the planning and licensing of spectrum
  6. develop an appropriate framework to consider public interest spectrum issues
  7.  develop a whole‐of‐government approach to spectrum policy
  8. develop a whole‐of‐economy approach to valuation of spectrum that includes consideration of the broader economic and social benefits.

The Spectrum Review Report highlights the need to simplify the current framework to remove prescriptive regulatory arrangements and to support the use of new and innovative technologies and services across the economy.

The report recommends simplifying processes for new and existing spectrum users and increasing opportunities for market-based arrangements, including spectrum sharing and trading.

The three main recommendations are:

  1. Replace the current legislative arrangements with streamlined legislation that focusses on outcomes rather than process, for a simpler and more flexible framework.
  2. Better integrate the management of public sector and broadcasting spectrum to improve the consistency and integrity of the framework.
  3. Review spectrum pricing to ensure consistent and transparent arrangements to support the efficient use of spectrum and secondary markets.

The report is the outcome of a review conducted by the Department of Communications in conjunction with the Australian Communications and Media Authority, and included extensive stakeholder consultation.

The legislative reforms would:

  1. establish a single licensing system based on the parameters of the licence, including duration and renewal rights
  2. clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Minister and the ACMA > provide for transparent and timely spectrum allocation and reallocation processes and methods, and allow for allocation and reallocation of encumbered spectrum
  3. provide more opportunities for spectrum users to participate in spectrum management, through delegation of functions and user driven dispute resolution
  4. manage broadcasting spectrum in the same way as other spectrum while recognising that the holders of broadcasting licences and the national broadcasters would be provided with certainty of access to spectrum to deliver broadcasting services
  5. streamline device supply schemes
  6. improve compliance and enforcement by introducing proportionate and graduated enforcement mechanisms for breaches of either the law or licence conditions
  7. ensure that the rights of existing licence holders are not diminished in the transition
    to the new framework.

Implementation stages would commence following the passage of legislation. This would again include ongoing consultation with stakeholders and progress over a period of some years.

The Government is currently considering the report and will prepare a response in due course. Stakeholder feedback on the report is welcomed.

The report is available at: www.communications.gov.au/spectrumreview

Securitisation Of Mortgages On The Rise

The ABS released their latest statistics on the asset and liabilities of Australian securitiers to March 2015. We saw a rise in mortgage back securitisation, and a rise in issuance to Australian investors. At 31 March 2015, total assets of Australian securitisers were $140.0b, up $3.5b (2.6%) on 31 December 2014. During the March quarter 2015, the rise in total assets was due to an increase in residential mortgage assets (up $3.1b, 2.8%) and other loans (up $0.9b, 5.9%). This was partially offset by decreases in cash and deposits (down $0.4b, 9.8%). Residential and non-residential mortgage assets, which accounted for 83.1% of total assets, were $116.4b at 31 March 2015, an increase of $3.1b (2.7%) during the quarter. SecuritiserAssetsMar2015At 31 March 2015, total liabilities of Australian securitisers were $140.0b, up $3.5b (2.6%) on 31 December 2014. The rise in total liabilities was due to the increase in long term asset backed securities issued in Australia (up $4.1b, 3.9%) and loans and placements (up $0.7b, 3.5%). This was partially offset by a decrease in short term asset backed securities issued in Australia (down $0.6b, 18.8%) and asset backed securities issued overseas (down $0.3b, 3.2%). At 31 March 2015, asset backed securities issued overseas as a proportion of total liabilities decreased to 6.6%, down 0.4% on the December quarter 2014 proportion of 7.0%. Asset backed securities issued in Australia as a proportion of total liabilities increased to 78.2%, up 0.5% on the December quarter 2014 proportion of 77.7%.

SecuritisersLiabilitiesMarch2015This data relates to all Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) which securitise any type of asset (including mortgages, credit card receivables, lease receivables, short and long term debt securities) and which are not regulated or registered with APRA and therefore are not required to report to APRA under the Financial Statistics (Collection of Data) Act. Coverage is limited to those SPVs which are independently rated by a recognised rating agency. Internal securitisation is excluded from this survey. Internal securitisation, also referred to as self-securitisation, is a process in which an originator sells a pool of assets to a related special purpose vehicle (SPV), and the SPV in turn issues debt securities, which are held entirely by the originator. These securities are eligible for use as collateral in repurchase agreements (repos) with the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA).

Note that revisions have been made to the original series as a result of the receipt of revised survey data. These revisions have impacted the assets and liabilities reported back to and including the September 2013 quarter.

 

 

 

Inequality Is Getting Worse

The latest OECD report on inequality was released today. The richest 10% of the population now earn 9.6 times the income of the poorest 10%; this ratio is up from 7:1 in the 1980s, 8:1 in the 1990s and 9:1 in the 2000s.  Tight fiscal conditions have resulted in social spending cuts, including in areas targeted to the most disadvantaged. In 2012, the bottom 40% owned only 3% of total household wealth in the 18 OECD countries which have comparable data. By contrast, the top 10% controlled half of all total household wealth and the wealthiest 1% held 18%! Wealth is considerably more concentrated than income, exacerbating the overall disadvantage of low-income households.

OECDInequalityMay2015At the launch, Angel Gurría, Secretary-General, OECD said:

For years now we have been underlining the toll that inequality takes on people’s lives. And I am proud of the contribution that the OECD has made in recent decades, putting inequality at the heart of the political and economic debate. Our 2008 report, Growing Unequal? sounded the alarm on the long-term rise in income inequality; and in 2011 Divided We Stand sought to diagnose the root causes that lay behind it.

But now we need to move the conversation forward. This is why today we are launching our new report In It Together: Why Less Inequality Benefits All in which we underline the toll that ever-rising inequality takes on people’s lives and the wider economy. But more than that, this report proposes concrete policy solutions to promote opportunities for more inclusive growth.

Where we stand: Trends in inequalities

Let me first remind you of the scale of the challenge. The latest data from In It Together make for stark reading. The richest 10% of the population now earn 9.6 times the income of the poorest 10%; this ratio is up from 7:1 in the 1980s, 8:1 in the 1990s and 9:1 in the 2000s.

During the early years of the crisis, redistribution via tax and transfer systems was reinforced in many countries. But now it is weakening again; tight fiscal conditions have resulted in social spending cuts, including in areas targeted to the most disadvantaged.

Even in those emerging economies where inequality has fallen, like Chile or Brazil, inequality remains at staggeringly high levels (26.5:1 in Chile and 50:1 in Brazil).

The story behind wealth is even worse. In 2012, the bottom 40% owned only 3% of total household wealth in the 18 OECD countries which have comparable data. By contrast, the top 10% controlled half of all total household wealth and the wealthiest 1% held 18%! Wealth is considerably more concentrated than income, exacerbating the overall disadvantage of low-income households.

The situation is economically unsustainable

In It Together finds compelling evidence that high inequality harms economic growth. The rise in inequality observed between 1985 and 2005 in 19 OECD countries knocked 4.7 percentage points off cumulative growth between 1990 and 2010. And what matters for growth is not just the poorest falling behind. In fact, it is inequality affecting lower-middle and working class families. We need to focus much more on the bottom 40%; it is their losing ground that blocks social mobility and brings down economic growth.

We have reached a tipping point. Inequality can no longer be treated as an afterthought. We need to focus the debate on how the benefits of growth are distributed. Our work on inclusive growth has clearly shown that there doesn’t have to be a trade-off between growth and equality. On the contrary, the opening up of opportunity can spur stronger economic performance and improve living standards across the board!

Policies to promote inclusive growth

In It Together identifies four key policy areas to promote opportunities for more inclusive growth.

First, to increase equality of opportunity and boost our economies it will be absolutely essential to enhance women’s participation in economic life. Overcoming gender inequalities is vital to improving long-term growth prospects and has a profound impact on inequality. If the share of households with a working woman had remained at the levels of the early 1990s, the rise in income inequality would have been almost 1 Gini point higher, on average. And the fact that more women have worked full-time and earned higher wages since 1990 has limited the rise of inequality by an additional Gini point. But we cannot be happy with the slow pace of change.

Governments should be asking themselves whether they can afford to waste the potential of the many women who are excluded from the labour market. To help women make the best use of their talents, we need to make good quality and affordable childcare available and also encourage more fathers to take parental leave. 

Second, labour market policies need to address working conditions as well as wages and their distribution. Before the crisis, employment was at record highs in many OECD countries but inequality was rising. The increase in non-standard work was one of the culprits. In 2013, about a third of total OECD employment was in non-standard work, with about equal shares of temporary jobs, permanent part-time jobs and self-employment. Youth are the most affected group: 40% are in non-standard work and about half of all temporary workers are under 30.

Non-standard jobs are not always bad jobs, but work conditions are often precarious and poor. Low-skilled temporary workers, in particular, have much lower and unstable earnings than permanent workers. This would be less troubling if non-standard jobs were simply stepping stones to better and well-paying careers. But for the young, the part-time or self-employed worker this is often not the case. And among those on temporary contracts in a given year, less than half had full-time permanent contracts three years later.

The challenge is therefore not only the quantity, but also the quality of jobs. Better social dialogue and improved work conditions across the income range are crucial elements of an inclusive employment strategy.

Third, we cannot afford to neglect the education and skills of any part of our societies.  A focus on education in early years is essential to give all children the best start in life. This investment needs to be continued throughout the life cycle to prevent disadvantage, promote better opportunities and educational attainment.

In it Together  provides new evidence that high inequality makes it harder for lower-middle and working class families to invest in education and skills. An increase in inequality of around 6 Gini points reduces the time children from poorer families spend in education by about half a year. And it also lowers the probability of poorer people graduating from university by around four percentage points. This leads to an ever widening gap in education and life-time earnings.

Last but not least, governments should not hesitate to use taxes and transfers to moderate differences in income and wealth. There has been a fear that redistribution damages growth and this has led to a long-term decline in redistribution in many countries.  Our work suggests that well-designed, prudent redistribution need not harm growth. As top earners now have a greater capacity to pay taxes than before, governments should ensure that they pay their fair share of the tax burden.

We do not need new instruments, we simply need to use the ones we have: scaling back tax deductions, eliminating tax exemptions, increasing marginal tax rates, using property taxes and above all, ensuring greater tax compliance. And let’s not forget government transfers. They play an important role in guaranteeing that low-income households do not fall too far behind.

Ladies and gentlemen, ever rising inequality can be avoided. It is for us to re-imagine and create our economies anew, so that each and every citizen regardless of income, wealth, gender, race or origin is empowered to succeed.

Governments around the world need to take decisive action to promote inclusive growth. In that spirit, I urge each and every country to recognise that when it comes to economic prosperity we are not in it alone, we are “In It Together”.

Mortgage Discounts Still Running Hot

Latest data from the DFA household surveys highlights that many prospective borrowers are still able to grab significant discounts on new or refinanced home loans. The chart below shows the weighted average achieved across loans written, compared with the RBA cash rate. Despite the recent falls, discounting is still rampant.

MortgageDiscountRateMay2015However, we also see significant differences between players and across different customer segments and loan types. Not all households are getting the larger cuts. Discounts also varies by LVR and channel of origination, with those using a broker, on average, doing a little better.

MortgageDiscountsMay2015The deep discounting flowed through to some margin compression in the recent results from the banks, and falls in deposit margins, as they continue to attempt to grab a larger share of new business. Households with a mortgage of more than a couple of years duration would do well to check their rate against those currently on offer in the highly competitive market. Even after switching costs, they may do better.

We also updated our strategic demand model, and our trend estimates for mortgage numbers out to 2020. We expect to see investment loan growth containing to run faster than owner occupation loans. Over the medium term we expect the number of owner occupied loans to grow at an average of 2.8%, and investment loans at 7.8% per annum over this period.

DFAScenariosMay2015Behind the model we have made a number of assumptions about population growth, capital demands, house prices and economic variables, as well as the demand data from our surveys. Significantly, much of the demand is coming from those intending to trade down, buying a smaller place, AND a geared investment property. We will update the segment specific demand data in a later post.