Do You "Really" Want to Be a Landlord

This week was pretty unusual for the Efinity Mortgage staff. Seemingly out of nowhere we had several new clients come in requesting financing for investment (rental) properties. As if there was a sign on our door which read "Efinity Mortgage; The Rental King". It's not that we don't finance investment properties but to have several new transactions in a week is highly unusual as the majority (99%) of our business comes from realtors and builders seeking to assist a family in buying a primary residence. All of that said, I do want to share a story of one couple in particular who were kind enough to give me the ok to share their story.

The "Smiths" were existing homeowners and in the process of adding to their family of 5. Mrs. Smith was interested in leaving the workforce and to manage their properties. Noble concept especially since Mrs. Smith was a $200,000 wage earner! You see whether you’re going away on an extended vacation or considering downsizing into a smaller place, the popularity of websites like Airbnb has led many people to believe that there’s a lot of money in home rental. However, before putting your home on the market, it’s important to be aware of some of the factors that go into having a rental property. It may seem like extra money, but it’s the small details that can make it a more complicated process.

An Investment Property and Renting a vacation/second home have very different goals;

Is It A Short Term Solution

Many people plan on putting their home on the market for a short duration of time, but if you’re only planning on renting for 6 months or a year, it may not be as financially lucrative as you think. While tax breaks can go along with rental properties, the money you make off of this kind of investment is taxable so if you’re not in it for a slightly longer haul, you may not see the financial boost you’re looking for.

What Are You Willing To Deal With?

For those who are planning to put a home on the market, they still need some place to live, and this can mean that a certain amount needs to be made each month for the costs of having two homes even out. Before putting any serious considerations into this, ensure that you know it’s financially feasible. It’s entirely possible that you won’t have renters for certain periods of time and you could also run into problems with the renters you find, so you should sit down and put pen to paper to consider the investment potential.

Have You Considered The Maintenance?

Out of sight is often out of mind, but if you have a renter, you’re responsible for anything that goes wrong in the home. From small maintenance duties to sizeable but necessary overhauls, there are many things you’re legally obligated to do as a landlord and you’ll need to be prepared to take on these responsibilities. Since it will be the duty of the owner, in the event you don’t want to do it, you’ll have to hire a contractor who will be able to handle the work for you.

Having a house as a second property may seem like an ideal investment, but this can require you to take on the responsibilities of a landlord and you may even have to deal with problematic rental situations. If you’re searching for an additional property in the near future, contact us for more information. Everyone has different plans and goals and deserve to properly vetted.

Learn the Facts & Myths of Reverse Mortgages

I had a lengthy conversation yesterday with one of my trusted realtors regarding Reverse Mortgages. While this is not been in Efinity Group's typical space, I was shocked at the misinformation that was understood as fact regarding this program. Similar to what we have done in the past I wanted to put something together to get the facts out there for our reading audience. Taking equity from a house is large decision for most seniors. It's not a decision that should be taken lightly. That said, a Reverse Mortgage is designed to allow seniors to improve their lives by freeing up the monthly obligations of a mortgage and whatever restrictive monthly cash flows that may present. Having access to funds to pay off credit cards, home equity loans and increasing cash flow for living expenses are a few benefits to having a reverse mortgage. Here are a list of facts and myths about reverse mortgages to help you make your decision.

Myth #1: It is the bank that owns the senior's home. Fact: When a customer has a reverse mortgage, their name will stay on the title unless a change in the title is made.

Myth #2: The bank has the right to make an elderly person leave their home. Fact: Reverse mortgages are insured and regulated by the Federal government. Any mortgage servicer has no authority to ask a senior to give up their home unless they fail to comply with the loan terms. Similar to any other mortgage, items like property taxes and homeowners insurance need to be paid and current. Texas Senior Lending wants to help customers stay in their homes as long as they can.

Myth #3: The senior’s heirs will eventually have to repay the loan if the customer passes away. Truth: A reverse mortgage is a non-recourse loan that gives the estate a year to sell the home at market value. Once the house is sold, the money from the sale will pay for the loan.

Myth #4: You will be responsible to make payments on reverse mortgage loans. Truth: Payments are due when the last living homeowner of the property permanently leaves the home.

Myth #5: Reverse mortgage proceeds are taxable and affect Social Security or Medicare. Truth: Although proceeds of a mortgage are not taxable and have no effect on your social Security or Medicare, you’re Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid can possibly be affected. We hope some of what was provided above is beneficial.

The Fiscal Cliff

Following numerous requests from our clients, we thought we would put some effort on summarizing the tax related measures which resulted from the eleventh hour Fiscal Cliff agreement. These new laws are detailed in Senate Amendment to H.R. 8 and are collectively called The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. For those unfamiliar with the Fiscal Cliff, hopefully this may provide valuable background information. We now await the political brinkmanship associated with the negotiations to raise the U.S. Debt Ceiling. Two New Taxes for 2013 Two new taxes go into effect starting January 1, 2013: 1. A 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT) applies to individuals, estates and trusts that have unearned investment income above certain threshold amounts. Net Investment Income for the purpose of calculating this tax includes interest, dividends, capital gains, rental and royalty income, non-qualified annuities, income from businesses involved in trading of financial instruments or commodities and pass-through income from a passive business. The NIIT does not apply to municipal bond income. For an individual, the NIIT is equal to 3.8% of the lesser of two amounts: i. An individual’s net investment income or ii. The excess of the individual’s modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) over the threshold amount ($200,000 for individual taxpayers and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly). 2. A 0.9% additional Medicare Tax applies to individual’s wages and self-employment income that exceeds the threshold amount based on the individual’s filing status. Ordinary Income Tax There will be no change in Federal income tax rates for taxpayers earning less than $400,000 ($450,000 for joint filers). Individuals earning above this threshold, will now pay 39.6% on marginal income above $400,000 ($450,000 for joint filers). Capital Gains and Qualified Dividends Tax Effective January 1, 2013, the top tax rate on long term capital gains and qualified dividends reverts back to 20% on gains for taxpayers above the $400,000 ($450,000 joint) income threshold. For taxpayers below these thresholds, the 15% rate remains. This tax rate increase, along with the Medicare tax, will result in a top effective tax rate of 23.8% for long term capital gains and dividends. Similarly, short term capital gains will be taxed at ordinary rates plus the 3.8% NIIT, for an effective top rate of 43.4%. Estate, Gift and Generation Skipping Transfer Tax The credit amount remains at $5 million per individual donor and continues to be inflation-indexed from 2010 (rounded in $10,000 increments). The inflation adjusted credit was $5.12 million in 2012 and is expected to be $5.25 million in 2013. An important component of the new legislation is the reunification of the gift and estate tax credit amount. In other words, the $5.25 million credit is available for use with lifetime gifts or estate transfers at death. The top transfer tax rate on gifts exceeding the credit amount has increased from 35% to 40%. Phase Limitation on Itemized Deductions Before 2010 itemized deductions for taxpayers above a certain income level were partially phased out, thus increasing income taxes as a consequence of reduced deductions. In 2013, if a taxpayer’s Adjusted Gross Income (“AGI”) is above a threshold amount ($250,000 for individual taxpayers, $275,000 for head of households and $300,000 for joint filers), itemized deductions will be reduced by an amount equal to the lesser of 3% of the excess over the threshold or 80% of allowable deductions. Taxpayers apply 80% to the total of their itemized deductions other than the deductions for medical expenses, investment interest, casualty losses and thefts, and gambling losses. As a result of the phase-out of deduction for high income taxpayers, marginal effective tax rates are higher than marginal statutory rates for such taxpayers. Roughly speaking, the 3% reduction of a deduction against income taxed at 43.4% raises the tax rate on marginal income by 1.3 percentage points. Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) The new bill increases the AMT exemption amounts from $33,750 to $50,500 for individual filers and from $45,000 to $78,750 for joint filers, indexed for inflation from 2013. IRAs The Pension Protection Act of 2006 allowed a taxpayer to exclude from income, distributions of up to $100,000 to a qualified tax-exempt organization (i.e., a public charity but not a supporting organization or a donor advised fund) from a traditional IRA. This provision has been extended for 2012 through December 31, 2013. The distribution must be made directly to the public charity and the IRA owner must have attained age 70½. The distribution will be counted for purposes of the required minimum distributions from an IRA but will be ignored for purposes of computing the limitations on charitable deductions in the year of the gift. Notably, the $100,000 exclusion is per taxpayer so married taxpayers (with their own IRAs) may each take advantage of the provision. Moreover, this provision contains a transition rule, which allows a distribution made in January 2013 to qualify as a 2012 distribution and allows an IRA distribution made December 2012 to qualify if subsequently paid to a qualifying charity in January 2013 (and meeting all other requirements). Roth Conversions In 2012, only the distributable amount (i.e. IRA balances or 401(k) s where the owner has either separated from employment or is over 59½) in pre-tax retirement plans could be converted to Roth accounts. The new bill allows any amount in a non-Roth account to be converted to a Roth account in the same plan, whether or not the amount is distributable. The conversion from a pre-tax retirement plan to a Roth plan results in the recognition of taxable income on all the gains and income in the plan. Retroactive Extension of 100% Exclusion of Small Business Capital Gains Generally, non-corporate taxpayers may exclude 50% of the gain from the sale of small business stock acquired at original issue and held for more than five years. For stock acquired after February 17, 2009 but by September 27, 2010, the exclusion was increased to 75 percent. For stock acquired after September 27, 2010 and before January 1, 2011, the excluded amount was increased to 100%. The 2010 Tax Relief Act further extended the 100% exclusion through December 31, 2011. The new legislation retroactively extends the exclusion of 100% of the gain from Qualified Small Business Stock to stock acquired after September 27, 2010 and before January 1, 2014. Qualifying Small Business Stock is from a C-corporation whose gross assets do not exceed $50 million (including the proceeds received from the issuance of the stock) and who meets a specific active business requirement. The amount of gain eligible for the exclusion is limited to the greater of ten times the taxpayer’s basis in the stock or $10 million of gain from stock in that corporation. Other The personal exemption phase-out has been reinstated, which means that high income taxpayers will have to reduce the total of their personal exemptions by 2% for every $2,500 by which their annual gross income exceeds the threshold amount for their filing status ($250,000 for individual filers, $275,000 for head of households and $300,000 for joint filers), indexed for inflation from 2013.

You can lead an Economy to Water, but can you make it Create Jobs?

You can lead an Economy to Water, but can you make it Create Jobs?

So it‟s now official, the U.S. Economy is going through a “soft spot”. According to the U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, speaking last week at an International Monetary Conference in Atlanta:

• "The U.S. economy is recovering from both the worst financial crisis and the most severe housing bust since the Great Depression, and it faces additional headwinds ranging from the effects of the Japanese disaster to global pressures in commodity markets. In this context, monetary policy cannot be a panacea."
• …the economic recovery is “uneven …and frustratingly slow”
• The Fed will keep interest rates bottomed out for “an extended period.”

A few conclusions spring forth from these quotes:

• The Fed will keep Interest Rates low for as long as
possible; longer than most economists currently
believe. Bonds won‟t be under too much interest rate
pressure for a while yet.

• Chairman Ben Bernanke currently feels the launch of a
third round of monetary easing will probably do nothing
to stimulate „real‟ economic demand; principally
meaning create jobs.

• Ben is looking for help from the Government and
Private Sectors in his efforts to inflate the economy.

• The Fed expected QE2 to have more impact on jobs
and GDP. The money benefitted the banking industry
but not industry in general.

It‟s possible to explain away the „soft spot‟ as a result of the Spring 2011 Supply Shocks in Japan and the Middle East; it may even be possible to extrapolate this thinking to justify a return to GDP growth in the Fall.

But one thing remains, until the job market shows signs of sustained improvement, long term confidence in a persistent domestic economic recovery will be questionable.

“Until we see a sustained period of stronger job creation, we cannot consider the recovery to be truly established”, another quote from Ben Bernanke.
Monetary policy cannot be a Panacea
Is The Fed saying that it has done as much as it can through Monetary Easing; the printing and circulating of more money?
QE1 and QE2 achieved their objectives by:

• Saving the U.S. Banking System, and therefore the world‟s banking system.
• Raising the price of Equities
• Reducing Interest Rates and the Dollar

But QE2 or QE3 can‟t sustain economic growth. Quantitative Easing was initially a protective measure; pump liquidity into the economy and provide banks with copious amounts of free capital.

Thereafter, it was intended to be a box of matches that could set the economy ablaze. Well, now all the QE matches have been struck, the economic wildfire still refuses to spread.

Employment is the fuel necessary to get this fire to spontaneously combust.

How to Stimulate Employment?

Jobs are a common byproduct of economic activity; however, productivity increases (together with an amount of outsourcing) has created an economic recovery with fewer new jobs than expected.

So what‟s a government to do about job creation?

QE3?

The Fed obviously thinks: “QE1 and QE2 didn‟t ignite the job market, so why would QE3 do any better?” Additionally, the debt created by quantitative easing requires repayment at some stage (seriously). Repayment will require deficit reduction which will require cut backs in economic activity.

Conclusion: QE3 may ultimately hurt the job market.

Keeping Interest Rates and the Dollar Low?

The Fed may have ended the QE programs, but it will still try to keep interest rates and the dollar low by other means; means too complex to detail here.

Why keep Interest Rates and the Dollar Low?

• Lower interest rates encourage investment (loans cost less) and discourage savers (don‟t put your money in the bank; put it into riskier assets or a business).
• A lower dollar makes domestic goods cheaper and more competitive overseas while making imports more expensive.

Although recent balance of payments data shows U.S. exports have benefitted from a lower dollar, it‟s clear that low interest rates have failed to stimulate lending and economic activity. Why pump more money into the monetary system when it isn‟t finding its way to enough businesses and households. The Government needs to direct the monetary faucet where it can create jobs.
If the printing presses don‟t stop creating money soon, the risk of inflation will increase dramatically. In turn, this may cause interest rates to rise which would defeat the object of the stimulus exercise.

Rising interest rates are synonymous with monetary tightening. Monetary tightening normally means fewer jobs; a downwards spiral no one wants to see at the moment.

Failure to control spending can actually hurt jobs in a similar way to reducing spending.

Note: For all you bond investors, a domestic “rising interest rate environment” may yet be a year or two away if the Fed has their way.

Government & Private Sector Stimulus

Chairman Bernanke‟s comment: “monetary policy cannot be a panacea” begs the question “What else will help monetary policy to create sustainable growth?”

"Policymakers urgently need to put the Federal governments' finances on a sustainable trajectory," Bernanke said in Atlanta. "Establishing a credible plan for reducing future deficits now would not only enhance economic performance in the long run, but could also yield near-term benefits by leading to lower long-term interest rates."

Looks like Ben thinks it's now up to the politicians to help the economy by reducing the federal deficit.

And now the good news – it appears both sides of the political divide agree that the deficit must be reduced. The debate has moved on to:

• How to Reduce the Deficit: Reduce Spending or Increase Taxes?
• How much to Reduce the Deficit by

At a time when investors are looking for a clear direction, let us weigh in with a decisive conclusion:

Let’s wait and see what the Government agrees and what kind of earnings season we have starting early July…


PS: Have you noticed the increasing number of States and Municipalities implementing fiscal tightening activities. Nowhere near enough to make a difference yet, but a step in the right direction and a shining beacon for the route the Federal Government will have to follow soon.