Enter search phrases between quote marks.
Example: "trust deed"

Entries    Comments      

Boomers retire, and California trembles

By Bradley Markano • Jul 1st, 2010 • Category: Charts, Journal Articles, July 2010 Journal, Lead Article

Pages: 1 2

The Baby Boomer generation will soon begin retiring en masse, bringing about a radical change in California real estate transactions. This article explores the repercussions of that great demographic shift.

Data courtesy of the US Census Bureau

Boomers retire, and California trembles

The Baby Boomer generation will soon begin retiring en masse, bringing about a radical change in California real estate transactions. This article explores the repercussions of that great demographic shift.

The two charts above track, respectively, homeownership by age in the western census region and California’s population of citizens aged 65 and over. In combination, these two charts tell us about the future direction of real estate ownership and sales transactions among the rapidly growing population of California’s senior citizens.

Retirees move real estate

At about the age of 65, the California work force begins to capitalize on the benefits of social security, Medicare and years of saving, and the vast majority stop working full time. The decision to retire is often swiftly followed by a series of lifestyle changes, as the retiree takes advantage of his newly increased liberty and accumulated financial power.

One of the most significant of these changes is very frequently the sale of the retiree’s current home and the corresponding move to a new, more compact and centralized residence in a location with a better year-round climate or one that is closer to the family. As California’s population continues to age, the population of senior citizens will grow dramatically, and will exert increasing influence over both the housing market and every other aspect of the California economy.

Senior citizens, specifically retirees, are one of first tuesday’s 26 Factors Affecting Real Estate in California. Citizens aged 60-69 are more likely to own property than any other age group, as displayed on the first of the above charts.

The accumulated equity in their homes, combined with their savings from a lifetime’s employment, allows them to exert a disproportionately strong influence upon the housing market statewide. When these citizens begin, as they will, to change their spending and living habits in retirement, they create new opportunities for multiple listing service (MLS) brokers and agents who market single family residences (SFRs).

The number of people in California aged 65 and older is displayed on the second of the above charts. This rapidly growing segment of the population is traditionally made up of the retired and soon-to-be retired.

Over the past twenty years, retirees have exerted minimal influence in real estate transactions, as the age group of citizens over 65 was comparatively small. The generations born between 1915 and 1935 – during the Great Depression and World War II – did not have the numbers necessary to remold the housing market in their own image. That is about to change dramatically, as the above population chart demonstrates.

As the massive Baby Boomer generation, defined by the US Census Bureau as the generation born between 1946 and 1964, begins to retire en masse (a process which will start in 2011), every aspect of the state’s economy will be changed. The Boomers, the largest single age group in California, have spent the last 30 years accumulating their wealth (primarily in the form of stock – not cash) and generally living in large, suburban SFRs.

Although the Great Recession wiped out some of these savings, and put a few of these SFRs on the market (or in foreclosure) before their time, the majority of the Boomers are still on the brink of retirement. When they do retire, in a massive geriatric shift, “dis-saving” will be a collective act. They will liquidate their funds, sell their current homes and embark, unfettered, on the next stage of their lives.

Now that home prices are beginning to bottom out, retirees will likely regain most of their pre-recession confidence… and perhaps some of their spending habits

The impending wave of retirees has been briefly delayed by the recent economic collapse. Many seniors held the majority of their wealth in the form of paper – stocks – and saw much of it erased overnight in the stock market crash of 2008, turning their 401Ks into 101Ks.

However, boomer retirements were merely postponed, not canceled. Now that the stock market has rebounded slightly, and home prices are beginning to bottom out, retirees will likely regain most of their pre-recession confidence, and perhaps some of their spending habits as well.

Following 2013, property prices will start to rise, but the rate will not likely exceed the rate of inflation.  This positive movement will ameliorate the fears of most retirees who seek to relocate. The shadow inventory of retirees will thus manifest itself, sooner rather than later, and will be a key factor in clearing out the current rigor mortis of the housing industry. They want to sell and relocate, and most will buy; more than 70% will probably acquire a more modest (if not necessarily less expensive) residence.

History repeats itself for Boomer generation

The impending increase in suburban SFR home sales among senior citizens will keep housing prices depressed, limiting the gain Boomers will take on a sale. By now, this is a story that their generation knows all too well.

Thanks to their overwhelming numbers, the boomers went to school in temporary grade school and high school buildings; they all hit the job market within too short a period of time and salaries dropped accordingly (when Reagan fired all the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) tower traffic personnel, he was able to replace them with equally good and well-educated talent within only a few days).

The boomers began renting apartments simultaneously in the early 1980s, driving up rents and leading to massive apartment overbuilding, which took more than a decade for the market to digest. A similar problem of overbuilding hit the home market by the end of the 1980s, for the same reasons, and was accompanied by a boom in housing prices which ended with the 1990 recession. [For more on overconstruction of SFRs and multi-family units, see first tuesday’s Market Chart, CA Single- and Multi-Family Housing Starts.]

In the later 1990s the boomers began in earnest to invest their accumulating wealth in the stock market, generating a stock pricing bubble in the process. The ensuing collapse of their financial empires has wiped out much of this wealth, but the boomers will soon begin to sell off the considerable amount they retain, a process called dis-saving. Such asset reduction will continue for the next 20 years, and will kill any movement in the stock market (current rises in stocks are merely the result of speculation due to historically low interest rates in relation to inflation. Billions of dollars in cash is currently waiting in huge investment funds to be invested when the economy recovers, and current low inflation rates cannot last more than a few more years.).

Historical trends will prove true now, as well, as the Boomers sell their current homes, looking to find new properties and live freer lives. The first Boomers to retire, those on the cusp of the population boom, have somewhat higher average earnings than those Boomers who will follow.  Consequently, the retirees of 2008-2017 will have the most money to spend, and will often have a second or third home to live in or sell.

Those retiring after 2018 will (generally) have somewhat less money, and thus less purchasing power, upon their retirement. Those who retire later will also be put at a greater disadvantage by the competition from other retirees in their generation. The homes they sell will fetch lower prices, the urban condos and retirement-community dwellings will be full before they arrive, and the prices will be rising.

The price reduction of large suburban SFRs caused by Boomer home sales will be further aggravated by a corresponding rise in the values of the replacement homes which are more desirable to retirees. While we cannot predict with certainty which properties will be involved or just where they will be, historical and current trends give us some hints.

Pages: 1 2

Copyright © 2010 by first tuesday Realty Publications, Inc. Readers are encouraged to reprint or distribute this information with credit given to the first tuesday Journal Online — P.O. Box 20069, Riverside, CA 92516.

Tagged as: , , , , , ,

Bradley Markano holds an English degree from the University of Redlands and handles first tuesday's Market Charts.
Email this author | All posts by Bradley Markano

8 Responses »

  1. This is the first article I have read on your email journal and I am so impressed. Bradley covered it all re: baby boomers and I would love to share his article with others so am writing to ask permission. I definitely will subscribe to your firsttuesday journal online after reading this first article.

  2. Being 69 (going on 70) and living in CA since I was 22, I have a different perspective on factors affecting the economic cycles… based on personal experiences. For 28 years, I worked in the Defense Industry, which has it’s own cycles, largely tied to Presidential Elections, the Cold War, etc. My engineering career was parallelled by the life span of the Berlin Wall… beginning a few years after its erection and ending a few years after it’s destruction. In between was the Space Race, the Vietnam War, Star Wars and eventually Glasnost, followed by military base closures and massive layoffs. So I think CA’s economic cycles have been more driven by political factors than the spending trends of Baby Boomers… great theory though.

  3. Bradley:
    Great article.
    Boomers cashing out their real estate holdings is one issue, but what’s going to happen to state income tax revenues when they cash out their 401K and IRA’s.
    I’m sure they won’t stick around to pay California state taxes on that income.
    Should be some interesting years ahead.
    Frank

  4. Interesting article – thank you. However, I was surprised that it remained completely silent on the implications of Prop 13… I suspect the potential increase in property tax liability triggered by a location change will materially constrain mobility.

    Prop 13 does a great job of keeping people in place and keeping a lid on sales volume (thereby driving up prices), since the difference in tax treatment almost always makes a property more valuable to the current owner than any prospective buyer – especially true for those who have lived in their home for a while (i.e. for those 55+ more so than any other demographic).

    The 55+ crowd may in some cases have access to Prop 60/90 tax relief (allows transfer of base year values either within the same county (Prop 60) or between counties (Prop 90)…), but this is a one-time-only benefit… so anyone 55+ basically has one chance to move without getting slammed with a hefty tax bill. Further, the adoption of Prop 60/90 is at the sole discretion of each county within CA… so if you’re talking about Alameda, Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Clara, or Ventura, you’re set… but if any of the other 51 counties, you’re hosed (as far as I know).

    Perhaps if this demographic is really serious about wanting to relocate, they’ll have enough of a voice to overcome the unfortunately reality that Prop 13 has become a political “third rail”… a large population with disposable income and plenty of free time who feel the cards are stacked against them may be California’s only hope of undoing a hopelessly nonsensical tax policy… or (and perhaps more characteristically), they will simply mobilize for their own benefit and seek to expand the generous relief already provided to them under Prop 60/90… in which case, if they want to relocate to be closer to their children and grandchildren, they’ll probably have to move to Arizona, Florida, Nevada, or Texas anyway.

  5. This article is entirely too optimistic about the status of boomer finances. Most boomers are appallingly unprepared for retirement. They didn’t save enough, their investments have been flat to down in the last decade and they placed too much faith in the appreciation of their homes and 401ks to fund retirement.

    That you can see any silver lining – or return to normalcy – in this situation borders on dellusional. For many boomers, selling their houses isn’t even a possibility. They are too far under water. For those with positive equity, a wave of boomer homes hitting the market will only depress prices further. There is no pent up demand for the soul-less exurban tract homes built in california over last two decades. These areas will be abandoned and reclaimed by the deserts and chaparral. In many places, they already are.

    And where will those boomers who sell their homes go? With the minimal finances they have, they are not going to get high rise condos in LA and San Francisco – as this article implies. They’re moving in with their family or they’re going to where the cost of living is dirt cheap. This means outside of California. In some cases, outside of the US, where drugs and medical care are a quarter of the cost here.

    I suspect in a few years, you will realize that the “return to normalcy”… isn’t a return to the bubble economy of the last two decades. The return to normalcy… is what we’re experiencing right now.

  6. You are so right mister Sterling.
    For an instance, when I read this article, I thought I had understood it all wrong for the past few years.
    Since I am not from the USA, but from the Netherlands, that could have been the case.
    From this article I get the impression all boomers must be terrible rich in the States, the majority of them having 2nd and even 3rd houses.
    But, it seems to me you will have a terrible problem when all these houses go on the market. I am afraid prices will fall even more. Seems most people still don’t understand why house prices are down and will go down for a very long time, and that is because they are too expensive, starters cannot afford those prices, and when starters cannot afford them the whole system gets blocked.
    And as long as people loose their jobs, more and more every day, I don’t think that’s going to change for the better.
    So I don’t know what the writer of this article was trying to achieve, I can only guess, but as far as I am concerned he is still dreaming the dream.

  7. This article is a great “food for thought” type of article. I was born and raised in Los Angles. I am a “late baby boomer” living in Georgia. So from the perspective of baby boomers in other regions of the country, I do not see the type of retirement wealth that the author is suggesting. The housing bust will be going strong in the majority of the south/east for at least another four years and wages here are also stagnant which means we are losing financial ground everyday. A growing civil rights problem is “age discrimination” which kills are chances of actually making up ground for the stock and housing losses we have suffered because we are unable to gain additional employment. If anyone disagrees with my opinion, please let me know. In my opinion, middle class baby boomers are going to look to foreign countries to sustain a decent standard of living in their goldne years.

  8. Excellent Info. Tweeted about it. I抣l bookmark this post too.

Leave a Reply.