Skip to main content

The situation is worse in high-cost cities, such as Vancouver, where young homeowners are taking on the largest mortgages, the study says.

Darryl Dyck/The Globe and Mail

One in 10 homeowners younger than 40 would be underwater on their mortgages if real estate prices crashed, according to a new study that warns the country's red-hot housing market is disproportionately putting young Canadians at financial risk.

Nearly 260,000 Canadians would see their net worth wiped out if home prices dropped 20 per cent, the study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found. The drop in prices is larger than most bank economists are predicting, but it represents the midpoint in the Bank of Canada's estimates that the country's home prices are overvalued by anywhere from 10 to 30 per cent, the study's author, economist David Macdonald, writes.

Of those homeowners pushed underwater by a major real estate crash – owing more than they have in assets – more than half would be in their 20s and 30s, the age group that has gone the deepest into debt to buy a home.

Story continues below advertisement

Canadians in their 30s carry debt worth an average of four times their incomes. Their debt-to-income ratio is the highest, and has risen the fastest, of any age group, Mr. Macdonald writes. Thanks to the fact that they are highly leveraged, young Canadians would see 20 per cent of their net worth wiped out for every 10-per-cent drop in home prices, so that a 20-per-cent price drop would destroy 40 per cent of their net worth.

A price drop of 30 per cent, meanwhile, would wipe out 61 per cent of the net worth of the youngest homeowners. "The most at-risk families are those who are heavily leveraged, with all their wealth in their house and who arrived late to the real estate party," he notes.

The situation would be "dramatically worse" in high-cost cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary, where young homeowners are taking on the largest mortgages, the study says.

Middle-aged homeowners in their 40s, 50s and 60s would stand to lose the most money. Mr. Macdonald estimates they will lose an average of $70,000 to $80,000, as a result of owning more expensive homes. But that would only represent 23 per cent of their net worth, given that older Canadians tend to have more equity and less debt, and have less of their net worth tied up in real estate than younger homeowners. For those in their 60s and 70s, a 20-per-cent fall in prices would mean a drop of only 10 per cent of their net worth.

Governments must prioritize helping Canadians reduce their high levels of household debt if they hope to protect young families from the devastating effects of falling home prices when mortgage rates eventually begin to rise, Mr. Macdonald writes. "We need to recognize that young families are the most likely group to be plunged underwater by a nasty housing correction," he says. "There is still time to plan for that tidal wave."

Federal programs introduced in the United States after the 2008 housing downturn gave unemployed homeowners the option to stop paying their mortgage for up to 12 months while they looked for a new job. Others programs allowed homeowners who were deeply underwater on their mortgages to walk away from their home with less of a hit to their credit score than a foreclosure.

A program that reduced the principal on the mortgages of struggling homeowners to reflect the new, lower value of their homes could be used to bail out Canadians in the same situation, Mr. Macdonald writes.

Story continues below advertisement

The U.S. Federal Housing Administration's Refinance for Borrowers with Negative Equity program flopped south of the border in the face of resistance from mortgage insurance companies – only 4,600 out of a million eligible homeowners ultimately qualified. Such a program could benefit young homeowners here, but it would likely need buy-in from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. to be successful, Mr. Macdonald says.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter