Mortgage rateshave remained stubbornly high: hovering at more than 6%, well above the sub-3% rates during the pandemic. That makes homeownership increasingly unaffordable for many Americans, as home prices have risen more than 50% since 2020.During the pandemic, home buyers got accustomed to sub-3% mortgage rates, which made purchasing a house feel more achievable. But in the past couple of years, buyers have had no such luck.Recommended VideoIn late 2023, mortgage rates peaked at 8%. They’ve let up some, today’s 30-year fixed mortgage rate is 6.19%, according to Mortgage News Daily, but economists and real-estate groups have warned they don’t see that figure budging much in the near future. And to make matters worse, some have said the mortgage rate it would take to make homes feel affordable again isn’t achievable. This summer, Zillow economic analyst Anushna Prakash reported mortgage rates would need to drop to 4.43% for a typical home to be affordable to an average buyer. But “that kind of a rate decline is currently unrealistic,” Prakash wrote. Meanwhile, not even a 0% interest rate would make a typical home affordable in New York, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, San Diego, or San Jose, she added. Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices also said in an early July report mortgage rates are one of the main deterrents for both home buyers and sellers.“Many homeowners are reluctant [to] put their homes on the market and give up the low mortgage rates they already have,” according to Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices. “To them, high price gains won’t mitigate their ability to pay more for another home at significantly higher interest rates.”This issue is also referred to as golden handcuffs—or the locked-in mortgage rate effect. The idea is that current homeowners have no incentive to put their homes on the market, even if they want to move, because they’d forgo a much lower mortgage rate they had locked in years ago. This causes a litany of other problems in the housing market, namely inventory.The homebuilder unsold completed inventory recently hit a 16-year high, according to ResiClub, and data from real estate intelligence platform Parcl Labs shows the number of active listings on the market this summer rose to 3.06 million, a 4.9% increase from the same time last year. Meanwhile, more sellers delisting their properties after sitting on the market for longer than expected.“Homes are sitting on the market nearly three weeks longer than last year,” Realtor.com Senior Economist Jake Krimmel recently toldFortune. “That’s a sign of sellers still anchored to pandemic-era prices even though the market is telling them otherwise.” That doesn’t mean there’s an influx of housing in the U.S.; in fact, we’re still short millions of units. It just means there aren’t enough people who can actually afford to buy a home.The factors influencing housing affordabilityAlthough inventory levels are increasing, home prices and mortgage rates continue to be a roadblock for potential home buyers. Mortgage rates have remained “stubbornly high,” Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices said, deterring new buyers from the market.According to an October Realtor.com report, the typical home spent 62 days on the market in July, roughly as long as it took to sell before the pandemic.Mortgage rates are certainly a factor among buyers when deciding to make an offer, and home prices are also up more than 50% since the onset of the pandemic, according to the U.S. Case-Shiller Home Price Index.All the while, wages haven’t grown at the same pace as home appreciation, making buying a house feel even more unaffordable. And if nothing changes like mortgage rates, inventory, or wage growth, it’s likely the housing affordability crisis in the U.S. will persist, Alexandra Gupta, a real-estate broker with The Corcoran Group, toldFortune.“Some first-time buyers are turning to long-term renting or even co-living models because the idea of owning a home has become so out of reach. Others are relying more on family support to get into the market,” Gupta said. “We’re seeing a reshaping of the housing ladder.”The small glimmer of hope, though, is home price growth appears to be slowing, according to the Case-Shiller indices.“With affordability still stretched and inventory constrained, national home prices are holding steady, but barely,” Nicholas Godec, head of fixed-income tradables and commodities at S&P Dow Jones Indices, said in a statement.A version of this story originally published on Fortune.com on July 31, 2025.Fortune Brainstorm AIreturns to San Francisco Dec. 8–9 to convene the smartest people we know—technologists, entrepreneurs, Fortune Global 500 executives, investors, policymakers, and the brilliant minds in between—to explore and interrogate the most pressing questions about AI at another pivotal moment. Register here.
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani swept to victory Tuesday evening on a platform of affordability, anchored by a plan to freeze rents across nearly 2 million rent-stabilized apartments. Recommended VideoBut economists, universally, hate rent control. In a 2012 poll of top economists, just 2% agreed that rent-control laws have had “a positive impact” on the supply and quality of affordable housing. The Nobel laureate Richard Thaler even quipped in the survey that the next question should be: “Does the sun revolve around the Earth?”Why do economists revile a plan that seems to promote fairness and equity in a housing market that is clearly broken? Seductive simplicityTo most voters, freezing rents looks like common sense: If prices are out of reach, stop them from rising. But to economists, that’s like treating a fever by breaking the thermometer: It suppresses the symptom without curing the disease, the persistent shortage of housing.“Freezing rents doesn’t fix scarcity,” said David Sims, a Brigham Young University economist whose research on Massachusetts rent control remains a touchstone. “It just reshuffles who bears the cost.”Sims’s work examined the rent-control regime that once governed Cambridge, Mass., where tenants could stay indefinitely at below-market rents. The policy was meant to keep housing affordable, but it led to what he calls misallocation. “People who could do better by moving tend to stay,” he toldFortune. “Older households hang on to large units they no longer need, while young families can’t find space. Over time, you end up with the wrong people in the wrong apartments.”When Massachusetts voters repealed rent control in 1994, property values in Cambridge rose 45%—not only for the deregulated apartments, but for entire neighborhoods. It turned out that years of capped rents had discouraged investment and dragged down surrounding property values, meaning that when controls were finally removed, landlords were empowered to upgrade and renovate their apartments. Neighborhoods that had been frozen along with the rents suddenly seemed to revitalize. That dynamic is already visible in New York. According to the city’s Housing and Vacancy Survey, roughly 26,000 rent-stabilized apartments are sitting empty, many uninhabitable because renovation costs far exceed what landlords can legally recover. The state’s 2019 Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act caps recoverable renovation expenses at $50,000 spread over 15 years. Rehabilitating a century-old tenement can cost twice that, leaving owners little incentive to do anything but lock the door.Short-term relief, long-term painRent control’s immediate benefits, for current residents, are undeniable. It offers stability to tenants living paycheck-to-paycheck and reduces the risk of displacement. But over the long term, economists argue it functions the same way as throwing sand in the gears of the housing market. Landlords defer maintenance they can’t recoup, new construction slows, and the available housing stock quietly erodes.A 2018 Stanford study led by Rebecca Diamond, one of today’s leading experts in housing markets, found that when San Francisco expanded rent control in the 1990s, the supply of rental housing fell 15% over the next decade. Many landlords converted apartments to condos or owner-occupied housing to escape regulation. The policy helped existing tenants, but ultimately raised market rents citywide and accelerated gentrification, causing the opposite of what policymakers intended.“It’s not about pitying landlords,” Sims said. “It’s about understanding incentives. You can’t expect people to invest in something if they’ll never break even—just like you can’t expect tenants to volunteer to pay more rent.”For economists, the deeper problem with rent freezes is conceptual: They imply that affordability can simply be decreed against the logic of supply and demand. “It creates this belief that the problem can be solved by fiat,” Sims said. “But rents are high because people want to live in New York. The only lasting fix is to make it easier to build more housing that people actually want.”He offers a visceral analogy of market pressures: Black Friday. People don’t wait in line for stores anymore on Black Friday, Sims said, but there was a time when, for a $1,000 TV at $200, there’d be a line around the block at 4 a.m., and only a few lucky people would get the TV.“But housing isn’t like a $200 TV,” Sims observed. “Everyone kind of needs a place to live, but if housing is priced like the $200 TV, then there’s a bunch of people in that line who don’t get it.”That’s the thing about rent control, economists say: It benefits insiders at the expense of outsiders. Over time, it can deepen inequality by keeping younger, lower-income, or newly arrived residents locked out of regulated neighborhoods that effectively become closed clubs.Band-Aid policy in a broken marketSupporters of Mamdani’s plan counter that New York’s crisis is so severe, temporary freezes are a moral necessity. With median rents above $4,000, they argue, the city cannot wait for zoning reforms and construction projects that take years to materialize. But even sympathetic economists warn that without parallel measures to boost supply, a freeze simply defers the reckoning.“If you don’t pair a rent freeze with a credible plan to add housing,” Sims said, “you’re not solving the problem. You’re just pushing off accountability without really solving the underlying problem.”
Barbara Corcoran is renowned for her heart-over-head investment decisions—and for bucking conventional finance wisdom, including proudly not saving a “dime” of her substantial wealth. But she must be doing something right, considering she’s worth about $100 million, and she revealed some keys to her success in real estate.Recommended VideoCorcoran appeared on theBiggerPockets Real Estate Podcastwith her son Tom Higgins to describe two methods she says make up her “golden rule” of real estate investing: putting down 20% on an investment property and having tenants of that property paying for the mortgage.This is the method Corcoran herself used when she borrowed $1,000 from her then-boyfriend to launch her real estate career. After failing at 22 jobs, she said goodbye to her waitressing gig and started a “tiny” real estate office in New York. She ended up selling the Corcoran Group to real estate company NRT for $66 million in 2001, launching her into real estate and business investment stardom. She’s been on the main cast of investors onShark Tanksince its 2009 inception, making deals with more than 100 businesses.The golden rule of real estate investingCorcoran’s method to real estate investing is tried and true.“That has always been my golden rule,” she said. “Buy a property with 20% down. [That] has always been my formula because they used to do with 10%, but it’s not possible anymore. I repeated that formula again and again and again, and then making sure the tenant has paid my mortgage. It’s pretty easy that way.”Putting down 10% instead of 20% can leave a buyer with too high of a monthly payment, a risky move since housing prices and mortgage rates are still elevated. A 20% down payment betters the chance she’ll break even more quickly on a property—and make gains sooner. While that golden rule has worked for Corcoran, other real estate investors warn a one-size-fits-all rule doesn’t always match market conditions.“Each investment protocol is entirely unique and different,” Alex Blackwood, CEO and cofounder of real estate investment platform Mogul Club, toldFortune. “For instance, maybe an investor’s credit score is better so they can take out more with less monthly costs, or maybe interest rates are lower so an investor can increase leverage and still break even.”Breaking even in real estateEven with a strong track record in real estate investing, Corcoran still never expects to make money on her purchases during the first year or two of ownership, she said on the podcast. But breaking even early on—having a tenant cover the mortgage and other monthly costs the owner has—is a good indicator that the investment property will do well. “If I break even, I’m smiling all the way to the bank,” she said. “And then by the second year, third year, New York is a magical place. The value always goes up, and then I start getting a lot of cash. Then I refinance, pull a lot of cash out, refinance, pull cash out. Real estate is magical if done right.”Breaking even in year one helps investors begin profiting in year two, Blackwood agrees. Even though investors may take a short-term hit on a longer-term investment, profitability comes when they can raise the rent, he adds.The “breaking even” golden rule also ties directly to one of real estate’s “underlying principles,” the first of which is leverage, Ian Formigle, former chief investment officer at commercial real estate investing platform CrowdStreet (now a partner at Green Light Development), toldFortune.“Borrowing money to acquire real estate can dramatically amplify the returns to investors, but it can also amplify the risk,” he said. By adhering to Corcoran’s golden rule and getting tenants to cover costs, “you mitigate the leverage risk by generating monthly income through the property. You can also create an opportunity to generate wealth through asset appreciation because well-located real estate can attract more attention and investment over time.”Still, successful real estate investing takes time. During the podcast, Corcoran described a property she bought using her 20% down method, but waited 20 years to sell. She paid $1 million for the property, and sold it for $3.2 million two decades later. Even though this process takes time, Corcoran warns against taking money out of investment properties too soon. “You cripple your business if you start taking money out,” she said. “You want to see how long you can go without touching a dime. That’s what I did.” To make money when she was first getting her start in real estate investing, Corcoran ran her brokerage firm. “I made good money from that,” she added. “But [as for] my buildings, I never looked to it for money until they matured a little bit, and then I started getting a lot of cash out.”A version of this story appeared on Fortune.com on December 5, 2023.More on real estate investing:Buying an investment property: What you should know to get startedNearly 70% of Americans think the economy is on the ‘wrong track’and even more think it’s a bad time to buy a home, Fannie Mae survey showsMillennials and Gen Zers are clamoring to break into the housing market. But this real estate expert says ‘not everyone should be an owner’Did your workplace make our list of the 100 Best Companies to Work For? Explore this year's list.
The American dream of homeownership, long a symbol of stability, achievement, and upward mobility, is facing unprecedented challenges as the median age of the average first-time homebuyer in the United States has soared to 40 years old, according to newly released data from the National Association of Realtors (NAR).Recommended VideoA year ago, the median age was 38 years old, and that’s up from 36 in 2022, 33 in 2020 and 28 in 1991.“It’s kind of a shocking number,” said Jessica Lautz, deputy chief economist and vice president of research at NAR. “And it’s really been in recent years that we’ve seen this steep climb.”This age milestone marks an era where the affordability crisis is fundamentally reshaping the housing landscape and delaying access to the benefits of homeownership for millions of Americans.As ResiClub editor Lance Lambert contextualized it in a statement toFortune, this means the first-time homebuyer in 2025 is “just as close in time to the age when they can begin early Social Security withdrawals (age 62) as they are to their high school graduation (age 18).”The NAR’s 2025 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers, which surveyed recent home transactions between July 2024 and June 2025, also revealed that first-time buyers now comprise just 21% of all home purchases—a historic low.“The historically low share of first-time buyers underscores the real-world consequences of a housing market starved for affordable inventory,” Lautz said.This steep decline—a contraction of 50% since 2007—has significant ripple effects: not only does it delay or deny wealth accumulation for families, but it also means lost opportunities. NAR estimates a 10-year delay in homeownership could mean losing about $150,000 in equity on a typical starter home over a lifetime.New Barriers for Younger BuyersToday’s first-time homebuyers face arduous financial hurdles. The typical down payment is now 10%, matching the highest level recorded since 1989. Most rely on their personal savings (59%), but a significant contingent is tapping financial assets like 401(k)s and investment accounts (26%), while over one in five are depending on gifts or loans from family or friends (22%). This underscores how entry into homeownership has become less accessible for those without substantial family support or generational wealth.In stark contrast, repeat buyers, whose median age is 62, are better positioned—often wielding equity from previous sales for larger down payments, and 30% can buy homes outright with cash. The result is a bifurcated market, where older, established homeowners find mobility and security, while younger would-be buyers wait longer and risk missing out on key wealth-building years.AsFortunehas reported, this looks like boomers beating millennials in the competition for housing. If you’re 40 years old, you have to compete with someone your parents’ or aunts and uncles’ age for that elusive starter home, in other words.Societal Shifts and Multigenerational TrendsThe NAR profile also shows that only 24% of buyers have children under the age of 18 at home, yet another all-time low. Meanwhile, the share of Americans buying multigenerational homes, where owners care for aging parents and children moving back after college, has dropped to 14% from 17% in 2024.The crisis has brought housing policy to the forefront of the national conversation. Shannon McGahn, NAR executive vice president and chief advocacy officer, stressed the urgent need to address the underlying causes of the affordability crunch, namely the inadequate supply of homes.She called for policies to unlock existing inventory, revitalize underused properties, streamline zoning and permitting barriers, and modernize construction methods to boost affordable, rapid development. Without such action, the dream of homeownership—and the social mobility it promises—may continue to slip further from reach for ordinary Americans.“For generations, access to homeownership has been the primary way Americans build wealth and the cornerstone of the American Dream,” McGahn said.
A risky mortgage instrument that helped spark the Global Financial Crisis is on the rise, but three things are different this time around.Recommended VideoAdjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs), once the villain of the subprime meltdown, are surging in popularity as homebuyers look for savings in a high-rate era. The share of ARMs reached nearly 13% of all mortgage applications this fall, per the Mortgage Bankers Association, the highest level since 2008.For buyers today, the lure is clear: ARMs offer starting rates about a full percentage point lower than fixed-rate loans, making the difference between buying a home or staying sidelined. The typical 5/1 ARM has an interest rate in the mid-5% range, compared with the 30-year fixed rate’s 6.3% and above. On a $400,000 loan, that initial discount translates into $200 or more in monthly savings, enough to tip the scales for first-time buyers or those seeking a larger property. But every ARM, by definition, is a wager: After the initial fixed period—often five, seven, or 10 years—the interest rate resets, adjusting with the broader market. Today, that means buyers are betting the Federal Reserve will cut rates before their loan recalculates. If the Fed delivers on anticipated rate drops in December, customers could see payments shrink further or at least avoid big jumps when the adjustment arrives.Back in the mid-2000s, adjustable-rate loans contributed to a financial calamity. Easy credit, teaser introductory rates, and lack of oversight meant millions of Americans took out loans with initially low payments, only to see costs soar when interest rates reset. ARMs then accounted for as much as 35% of mortgage originations, fueling both a housing bubble and the crash that followed. Fast-forward to 2025, and some are justifiably anxious at the product’s resurgence.Borrowers aren’t just gambling with their own fortunes, though. This time, banks and regulators have changed the rules. Today’s ARMs come with strict documentation standards, borrower protections, and built-in caps designed to prevent the shock resets that hammered millions of families in the last crisis. Lenders scrutinize income, debt, and credit quality, and loans are calibrated to ensure that, even if rates go up, buyers won’t be caught entirely off guard. Pre-crisis, some ARMs changed rates almost overnight, but most modern loans fix the initial rate for several years and limit increases through legal ceilings.Risks this time aroundStill, the instrument carries risk—especially if the Federal Reserve changes course. If rates rise unexpectedly, those low initial payments can balloon, exerting pressure on household budgets just as the broader economy absorbs the impact.Unlike the pre-crisis era, buyers are appearing to use ARMs as financial tools for specific strategies, rather than gambling on ever-increasing home values. The trend centers on affordability: With 30-year fixed rates still elevated (averaging near 6.3%), ARMs offer an initial fixed period at rates nearly a full percentage point lower, sometimes saving hundreds per month. And the current vogue appears to reflect an educated guess—or a gamble, depending on your position—that interest rates, and therefore mortgage rates, will continue to decline in the near future.Michael Pearson, senior VP of business development at A&D Mortgage, told Realtor.com earlier this month that “the common wisdom is that interest rates will continue to dip lower, slowly over the next couple of years. So although ARMs offer only short-term fixed interest rates, there may be more opportunities to lock into long-term lower rates in the coming years.” For many, this lower payment is seen as a bridge until rates drop, jobs relocate, or life changes; borrowers are actively planning to refinance, move, or pay off loans before the adjustable period kicks in.In high-cost markets, the pressure to choose ARMs is strong. With fixed mortgage rates remaining stubbornly high after years of Fed rate hikes, buyers are willing to roll the dice on interest rates. Some see ARMs as the only path to homeownership, wagering that central bankers will cut rates as inflation cools off. The harsh reality is that prospective homeowners don’t have much of a choice. A recent Redfin analysis found that America hasn’t been this stuck in terms of housing mobility for at least 30 years, with just roughly 28 out of every 1,000 homes changing hands between January and September. “It’s not healthy for the economy that people are staying put,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin. The so-called home sales turnover rate through the first nine months of this year is down about 30% from the average rate over the same time periods between 2012 and 2022. Ultimately, the surge in ARM loans is both a sign of tight economic times and renewed risk-taking. While regulatory guardrails may prevent the kind of crash seen in 2008, the outcome for individual borrowers still depends on what the Fed does—and whether buyers truly understand the gamble they’re taking. For now, a controversial loan product is back in the spotlight, and the housing market is holding its breath for the next move from the central bank.For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.
President Donald Trump played down the significance of his proposed 50-year mortgage plan in a recent interview, calling it “not even a big deal… it might help a little bit,” during a segment on Fox News with Laura Ingraham. The idea, which aims to extend mortgage terms for Americans, has triggered a wave of criticism across the political spectrum, as Ingraham noted, with some labeling it a financial trap for homebuyers and a windfall for banks.Recommended VideoIn the interview aired onThe Ingraham Angle, the Fox host pressed Trump on the impact of his housing proposals, including the much-discussed 50-year mortgage concept. Housing costs, Ingraham noted, are pushing the average age of first-time buyers to 40—“sad for the country,” she remarked. Trump defended the policy by saying he “inherited” the predicament and characterized the shift from traditional 30-year to potential 50-year mortgages as minor: “It’s not even a big deal … all it means is you pay less per month, you pay it over a longer period of time. It’s not, like, a big factor. It might help a little bit,” Trump insisted.Trump’s housing director, Bill Pulte, was much more positive on the idea’s impact. “Thanks to President Trump, we are indeed working on The 50-year Mortgage – a complete game changer,” the Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte said Saturday in a statement released on social media.Trump further argued that the more pressing issue was the spike in interest rates, blaming President Biden and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell—whom he referred to as “Too Late”—for sluggish responsiveness. Trump assured viewers that interest rates would come down, but defended the overall strength of the economy under his stewardship: “Even with interest rates up, the economy is the strongest it’s ever been,” he asserted.Ingraham raised the issue of people saying they have significant anxiety about the economy in the electorate, and Trump pushed back. “I don’t know that they are saying that. We’ve got the greatest economy that we’ve ever had.”Ingraham and critics push backThe plan didn’t escape harsh scrutiny, including from Ingraham herself. She pointed out that the backlash wasn’t coming just from Democrats but also from within Trump’s own base, who characterize extended mortgages as giveaways to banks and mortgage lenders. She said Trump’s base was “enraged” and asked him about a “significant MAGA backlash, calling it a giveaway to the banks and simply prolonging the time it would take for Americans to own a home outright. Is that really a good idea?” Ingraham asked.On social media and in public statements, several Republican figures lashed out at the proposal. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) compared the idea to having no real ownership at all, asking, “How is ‘here, enjoy this 50 year mortgage’ different from ‘you will own nothing and you will like it?’” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) worried the plan would “ultimately reward the banks, mortgage lenders and homebuilders while people pay far more in interest over time and die before they ever pay off their home. In debt forever, in debt for life!”Conservative media voices echoed these concerns. Glenn Beck described the plan as “almost like… ‘you will own nothing and be happy.'”Bloomberg Opinion’s Allison Schrager, on the other hand, wrote on Tuesday that it’s a good idea, with the market clearly expressing a need for something like the 50-year mortgage to exist. It’s “not a terrible idea,” she wrote, adding that while people who sell their homes before their mortgage matures will get less value, “that may be a worthwhile tradeoff for someone who needs or wants a lower monthly payment.” Still, she added she’s concerned it will be difficult to price and she still has some deep concerns about the idea.
A quaint, 37-home neighborhood an hour from Miami is attracting moneyed residents, including actor Mark Wahlberg, despite not having a private golf club or coastline—instead its major selling point is privacy and a well-trained security staff of former military and police.Recommended VideoStone Creek Ranch, located in Delray Beach, Fla., is one of the hottest new neighborhoods for the ultra rich, but it didn’t always start out that way. The development was first created in the early 2000s a stone’s throw away from the marshy land of the Arthur R. Marshal Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge.Senada Adžem, the executive director of luxury sales at Douglas Elliman, said before she started selling homes in the development, prices averaged around $6 million.Adžem broke the mold when she put a house up for sale in the neighborhood for $20 million in 2018. It took her two years to sell it for the first time, but it then sold several times after that. Just last month the same property, now remodeled, sold to Wahlberg for $37 million.The neighborhood’s privacy and security was part of the reason for that sale, as well as the $43 million sale of two properties to Rockstar Energy Drink founder Russell Weiner, who recently changed his legal name to Russ Savage.Most of the houses have 2.5 acre lots, about the size of two football fields, and sit on the edge of an artificial lake, giving each home its own bubble of privacy. There is no golf club so people aren’t coming in and out, said Adžem. Plus, the neighborhood isn’t on the beach, so outsiders can’t peep residents’ backyards from their boats.In addition, the neighborhood includes guarded entrances and 24/7 security made up of armed ex-military and police, which saves residents money.“The clients who can be on the ocean and can afford to pay 100 million-plus for a property will actually have to hire security personnel just for themselves, because, as you know, Florida beaches are public beaches,” said Adžem.Daniel PetroniDaniel PetroniIn a development with such large lots and few houses, it’s possible to build impressive manors. Wahlberg’s new home at 9200 Rockybrook Way, fully remodeled by developer Aldo Stark, spans 18,206 square feet. It sports seven bedrooms and 10 full baths, as well as myriad amenities such as two powder rooms, a home theater, cigar lounge, wine cellar, gym, sauna, guesthouse, and a 170,000 resort-style pool. Stark also included custom agate and onyx pieces that came with the fully furnished home. It also came with a fully stocked fridge for good measure, said Adžem.“This home is a really great value for $37 million—you get a lot of house, you get a lot of property, and of course, you get all of these other things,” Adžem said. “A house like this on the ocean would cost $137 million.”
For Ziad El Chaar, CEO of luxury developer DarGlobal, the future of the luxury industry isn’t measured purely in financial returns—it’s about emotional capital. While ROI is a return on investment, he said at the Fortune Global Forum in Riyadh on Monday, “In the luxury segment, we always say we’re giving you a lot of ROE: A return on ego.”Recommended VideoThat “return on ego,” Chaar explained, is what drives buyers toward exclusivity and identity-defining purchases. Whether it’s a limited-edition watch, a supercar, or what he calls the “limited edition of real estate”—co-branded luxury developments that partner with prestige brands including Aston Martin, for example—today’s affluent consumers are chasing rarity and recognition as much as yield. “We first identify demand before we build,” he said. In the Gulf, this demand has manifested as aspirational and rare goods, which DarGlobal’s co-branded product aims to deliver.More broadly, the global luxury market has evolved rapidly since 2020, rebounding from the pandemic to reach an estimated $327.52 billion in 2024 and projected to reach $480.54 billion by 2033, according to Straits Research. But aside from luxury goods, consumers are more often seeking out luxury experiences, a 2025 study by McKinsey found. The desire for a more luxury lifestyle connects directly to the success of high-end real estate development in the Middle East. While Europe remains an anchor, the center of gravity has shifted east—and increasingly, south. Gateway cities in the Middle East, Chaar argued, are now commanding global attention. “In the Gulf, we have almost the perfect formula,” he said. “Infrastructure, governance, lifestyle, safety, and speed. This region is ready to be treated as one ecosystem of gateway cities—from Riyadh to Jeddah to Dubai to Abu Dhabi to Doha.”Dubai already ranks among the world’s leading wealth hubs, attracting nearly 10,000 new millionaires in 2025 alone. Saudi Arabia is experiencing its own boom and is projected to attract 2,400 high-net-worth individuals in 2025, an 800% increase from 2024. The Kingdom’s real estate market is also flourishing, generating $132.3 billion in 2024 and is predicted to reach $201.4 billion by 2030. This growth has been bolstered by Vision 2030 reforms that will allow freehold ownership for foreigners starting in 2026. DarGlobal, which has invested 20 billion riyals (~$5.3 billion USD) to find foreign buyers, has already sold to investors from 40 nationalities in Riyadh and Jeddah projects—before the law even takes effect.Chaar’s company has positioned itself at the heart of this transformation. Its Saudi portfolio includes the Trump Tower and Trump Plaza in Jeddah and the Mouawad-designed Neptune villas in Riyadh, blending global brand recognition with local ambition. He believes these developments do more than house the wealthy—they anchor cities culturally and economically. “It’s very important when we think about these communities, you’re not going to go and build a remote community and build walls around it. You have to put it in a place where it serves as an anchor, because a luxury community in a city serves as an anchor for the city, as the image of the city,” he said, pointing to the development of Diriyah Gate in Riyadh. The development project, he explained, serves the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. “At the same time, it’s inclusive. It also has a lot of developments around it for the people who are going to work in that project. And it has the entertainment aspect, the retail aspect and the cultural aspect,” Chaar added.As the global luxury market tilts toward experience, identity, and geographic diversification, Chaar sees the Gulf as its next epicenter. The GCC’s economy is slightly larger than that of Italy (around $3.5 trillion), but he notes the region has an edge and extremely high potential in terms of its dynamism, infrastructure development, lifestyle, and stability. “Just like Italy has at least 10 destination cities, we deserve in the Gulf to be looked at as one region with at least 10 top destinations,” he said.
The White House says it is considering backing a 50-year mortgage to help alleviate the home affordability crisis in the country. But the announcement drew immediate criticism from policymakers, social media and economists, who said a 50-year mortgage would do little to resolve other core problems in the housing market, such as a lack of supply and high interest rates.Recommended VideoBill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said on X over the weekend that a 50-year mortgage would be “a complete game changer” for homebuyers. FHFA is the part of the federal government that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy and insure the vast majority of mortgages in the country.The 30-year mortgage is a uniquely American financial product and the default way to buy a home since the New Deal. Politicians and policymakers at the time wanted to create a standardized mortgage that borrowers could afford and pay off during their working years, when the average lifespan for an American was 66 years old.Lower paymentExtending the life of a mortgage to 50 years does decrease a borrower’s monthly payment.The average selling price of a home in the U.S. was $415,200 in September, according to National Association of Realtors. Assuming a standard 10% down payment and an average interest rate of 6.17%, the monthly payment on a 30-year mortgage would be $2,288 while the payment on a 50-year mortgage would be $2,022. That’s presuming a bank would not require a higher interest rate on a 50-year mortgage, due to the longer duration of the loan.But significantly higher interestBecause even more of the monthly payment on a 50-year mortgage would go toward interest on the loan, it would take 30 years before a borrower would accumulate $100,000 in equity, not including home price appreciation and the down payment. That’s compared to 12-13 years to accumulate $100,000 in equity when paying off a 30-year mortgage, excluding the down payment.A borrower would pay, roughly, an additional $389,000 in interest over the life of a 50-year mortgage compared to a 30-year mortgage, according to an AP analysis.Other analysts came to a similar conclusion.“Extending a mortgage from 30 years to 50 years could double the (dollar) amount of interest paid by the homebuyer on a median priced home over the life of the loan and significantly slow equity accumulation,” wrote John Lovallo with UBS Securities.Broader housing issuesA 50-year mortgage does nothing to solve one critical issue when it comes to housing affordability — the lack of supply of homes. States like California and cities like New York have recently passed legislation or made regulatory changes to allow builders to build homes faster with less regulatory red tape.There’s also the raw cost of homebuilding in the country. Products such as steel, lumber, concrete, copper and plastics that go into home construction are now subject to tariffs under President Trump. Further, many construction jobs were being done by undocumented workers, particularly in the Southwest, where deportations are impacting the ability for homebuilders to find enough labor to build homes.“Many of the big things that would address supply right now are going in the wrong direction,” said Mike Konczal, senior director of policy and research at the Economic Security Project.”Pulte said on X that the introduction of a 50-year mortgage was just a “potential weapon,” among other solutions the White House has considered to combat high housing prices.Americans don’t live long enoughThe average age of a first-time homebuyer has been creeping up for years and is now roughly 40 years of age. A 50-year mortgage would be difficult to underwrite for a bank for a 40-year-old first-time homebuyer, who would be 90 years old by the time that home is paid off. The average life expectancy of an American is now roughly 79 years, meaning there’s 11 years of life expectancy not covered in a 50-year loan.“It’s typically not a goal of policymakers to pass on mortgage debt to a borrowers’ children,” Konczal said.Others have tried longer loansOther parts of the financial system have extended loan terms, to mixed results. The seven-year auto loan has become increasingly common as car prices have risen and Americans keep their cars longer. Despite longer loan terms, auto loan delinquencies have been rising, and the average price of a new car is now $49,740 compared to a price of $38,948 for a new vehicle five years ago.Student loans were originally designed to be paid off in 10 years, and now there are multiple payment options that extend repayment out to 20 years.Economists pointed out that a 50-year mortgage may do the opposite of helping with home affordability by causing home price inflation by introducing more potential buyers into a market struggling with supply.Trump downplays ideaAfter significant criticism, President Trump seemed less enthused about the 50-year mortgage. When asked by Laura Ingraham of Fox News about the idea, President Trump said it “might help a little bit” but seemed to brush it off.Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cannot insure a mortgage that is longer than 30 years, so any 50-year mortgage would be considered a “non-qualifying mortgage” and would be more difficult to sell to investors. Congress would have to amend U.S. financial laws in multiple places to allow for 50-year mortgages, and there seems to be little appetite for Congress to take this on immediately.
Escape From New Yorkisn’t just the title of a 1981 pulp classic starring Kurt Russell. It’s what Westchester County and Florida realtors told the world (includingFortune) about what would happen if Gotham elected a socialist mayor. But it’s time for a sequel with a different title. Recommended VideoIn the aftermath of much well-heeled panic about a potential mass exodus of New York millionaires and billionaires following the election of Zohran Mamdani, the contrary is already happening, and Manhattan luxury apartment buyers are voting with their wallets.Signed contracts for Manhattan homes costing $4 million or more rose to 176 in November, a 25% increase from October’s 141 deals, according to fresh data from brokerage Douglas Elliman and appraiser Miller Samuel. New signed contracts of more than $4 million increased at more than twice the rate of the overall market, the report noted.Olshan Realty similarly noted an uptick in Manhattan luxury buyers. In its most recent market report, the firm said the 17 contracts signed in the last week of November for Manhattan homes over $4 million bested its 10-year Thanksgiving week average. Compared with October’s luxury sales totaling 115, November’s sales increased more than 31% to 151 properties, according to the firm.The Big Apple’s real estate boom bucks the narrative from just a few months ago, when some of New York’s elite were preparing to pack their bags should democratic socialist Mamdani become the next mayor. Mamdani has advocated for increased eviction protections and rent freezes, as well as for a 2% income tax surcharge for those in the city earning more than $1 million a year. Mamdani’s shock primary win in June coincided with some real estate agents in Westchester, the suburb just north of the city, reporting an influx of interest in the area, with Zach and Heather Harrison of the Harrison Team at Compass, telling Realtor.com they saw “a spike in Manhattan residents reaching out about suburban properties.”Other real-estate leaders, however, argued that the data says differently.“There is no Mamdani effect,” Donna Olshan, president and founder of Olshan Realty, told Bloomberg. “The idea that people would flee New York was overblown. The numbers just aren’t bearing that out.”Why New York is still boomingJonathan Miller, president and CEO of Miller Samuel, toldFortunethe trend of wealthy buyers scooping up luxury New York real estate has been on display all year, contrary to the recent narrative of elites fleeing the city.“Throughout 2025 on a year-over-year basis, overall sales have risen, prices have risen, sales have risen faster than inventory, rents have risen, rental activity has risen, and especially in October and November,” Miller said. “I’m looking at this anecdotal argument, and the plural of anecdotal is not data.”High earners have plenty of reasons to come to or stay in New York, according to Miller. Wall Street saw is largest bonuses since 1987 in 2024, following a strong market, a trend that is expected to continue this year, as another banner year for Wall Street is expected to raise the payouts for investment bankers, traders, and wealth-management professionals by up to 25%, according to a November report from compensation consultancy Johnson Associates. These aren’t the first panicked premonitions of a dispersal of New York residents to the suburbs. In the early days of the pandemic, many feared New York would become vacant as the wealthy fled to suburban vacation homes. While many wealthy New Yorkers indeed left the city, the five boroughs nonetheless gained about 10,000 millionaires between 2020 and 2021, according to state data. Manhattan even gained 17,500 residents in 2022, mostly migrants from other boroughs. New York City’s population had been growing gradually for decades up to the pandemic, as the Census showed a recent peak of 8.8 million in 2020, with more recent data showing the city’s population at 8.5 million. The city had lost nearly a million people between 1970 and 1980, after which it grew consistently before the COVID shock.NYC Department of City Planning Population DivisionThe city hit a recent trough of 8.36 million in 2022, but recorded two consecutive years of relatively sluggish growth since then. The NYC Department of City Planning argued in May 2025 that the last two years of growth suggest losses during the pandemic “were a short-lived shock.”While Miller said he doesn’t know how Mamdani’s future policies will impact the city, he noted there’s no evidence to suggest a mass millionaire migration. “This whole thing is a classic misinformation scenario, where no one’s looking at actual data,” he said.
Landlords could no longer rely on rent-pricing software to quietly track each other’s moves and push rents higher using confidential data, under a settlement between RealPage Inc. and federal prosecutors to end what critics said was illegal “algorithmic collusion.”Recommended VideoThe deal announced Monday by the Department of Justice follows a yearlong federal antitrust lawsuit, launched during the Biden administration, against the Texas-based software company. RealPage would not have to pay any damages or admit any wrongdoing. The settlement must still be approved by a judge.RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees nationwide price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage’s clients charge the highest possible rent.“RealPage was replacing competition with coordination, and renters paid the price,” said DOJ antitrust chief Gail Slater, who emphasized that the settlement avoided a costly, time-consuming trial.Under the terms of the proposed settlement, RealPage can no longer use that real-time data to determine price recommendations. Instead, the only nonpublic data that can be used to train the software’s algorithm must be at least one year old.“What does this mean for you and your family?” Slater said in a video statement. “It means more real competition in local housing markets. It means rents set by the market, not by a secret algorithm.”RealPage attorney Stephen Weissman said the company is pleased the DOJ worked with them to settle the matter.“There has been a great deal of misinformation about how RealPage’s software works and the value it provides for both housing providers and renters,” Weissman said in a statement. “We believe that RealPage’s historical use of aggregated and anonymized nonpublic data, which include rents that are typically lower than advertised rents, has led to lower rents, less vacancies, and more procompetitive effects.”Over the past few months, more than two dozen property management companies have reached various settlements over their use of RealPage, including Greystar, the nation’s largest landlord, which agreed to pay $50 million to settle a class action lawsuit, and $7 million to settle a separate lawsuit filed by nine states.The governors of California and New York signed laws last month to crack down on rent-setting software, and a growing list of cities, including Philadelphia and Seattle, have passed ordinances against the practice.Ten states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington — had joined the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit. Those states were not part of Monday’s settlement.
The sweeping economic interventions launched during the Covid-19 pandemic may have made American homes less attainable for millions—a reality the housing market will need years, if not decades, to correct, warns top real-estate executive Sean Dobson. The Amherst Group CEO, whose subsidiary Main Street Renewal is one of the country’s largest institutional landlords, told ResiClub‘s Lance Lambert that he believes the aftershocks of loose lending in the run-up to the Great Financial Crisis, and massive stimulus and abrupt policy pivots in the years since, have fundamentally altered the homeownership landscape for an entire generation.Recommended VideoDobson, in conversation at the residential real-estate conference ResiDay, reflected on the question of what the U.S. is going to do for the family out there that wants to buy a home. “We think the unfortunate part … really the cost of economic policy response to COVID is that we’ve probably made housing unaffordable for a whole generation of Americans.”Dobson estimated that it will probably take 10 or 15 years of steady income growth to get affordability back to something approaching fairness, referencing postwar to pre-2006 norms. He placed the blame squarely on a combination of pandemic-era monetary policy, describing economic policy as “reckless” as well as surging asset prices and stagnant wage growth.“Affordability has probably never been as bad as it is today, the way that we measure it,” Dobson said—worse, even, than the feverish markets of 2006. “You’ve got to be very, very careful.”On the sidelines of the conference, Dobson toldFortunethat “rental is going to have to become a part of the solution,” not just because he’s invested in the success of his firm but for the health of the country. “What are our goals?” Dobson asked hypothetically. “Is our goal to get everyone long real estate? Or is our goal to get everybody to live where their kids can go [to a good school] and be successful?” He said the housing industry is facing a big, obvious problem. “In reality, the problem is that homeownership is too difficult to reach, and there aren’t enough homes – across all types and price points – to meet consumer needs.” A representative for Amherst said this is “the least affordable period in modern history” for housing, noting that the PITI (Principal, Interest, Taxes and Insurance) on an FHA-insurance mortgage with a 97% loan-to-value ratio currently consumes about 42.9% of median income. That is slightly higher than 2006 averages of 41.5%, and well above the longer-term 25%-35% range.The Price of Economic FirefightingWhat was so reckless about U.S. economic policy, according to Dobson? A brief refresher on the last decade-plus and the era of quantitative easing is required.The onset of Covid-19 triggered trillions in government spending and ultralow interest rates as the Federal Reserve returned to the playbook that was improvised in the crisis of 2008. While meant to stave off recession and mass unemployment, this “easy money” era sent home prices and rents skyrocketing.Dobson told Lambert that this set of government and Fed policies, though well-intended, created new winners and losers in the housing market. “There’s a tax on the U.S. economy that’s almost 200 basis points because of the shoot-up that occurred. And the Fed needs to get rid of that tax,” he said, pointing to persistently high mortgage rates and nominal rates that are “probably 1 [percent] higher than they’re supposed to be given the rate of inflation that we have.”Amherst’s own analytics show just how far out of reach the average home has become. Right now, “you’re so far away from fair value,” he said, that “you can only reach affordability one of three ways: by changing the price of the home, the price of the money, or the income of the family.” An Amherst Group representative provided internal estimates projecting that, for housing affordability in the U.S. to get back in line with 2019 levels, the price of the home would need to go down 35.3%, interest rates to go down 4.6%, or income to go up by about half (55%). None of these is plausible on their own, Dobson told Lambert, and only incremental progress is likely as incomes, prices, and rates gradually realign over many years.Credit constraints are another culprit: while post-crisis regulations have shored up mortgage lending standards, they have also squeezed out borrowers with lower credit scores—historically, a large swath of would-be first-time buyers. “Subprime mortgages were serving millions of Americans to get them to buy homes … when Dodd-Frank was passed, there was a maximum credit risk allowed on the table. That only serves the top 25% of the consumer base,” Dobson explained. As a result, lending criteria systematically exclude half the market, leaving many Americans as permanent renters despite wanting homeownership.The reason these were called subprime wasn’t because they were junk, he added, they were simply mortgages for people with below-average credit scores. He asked the crowd if they knew what it took to go from a 745 FICO score to a 645 FICO score: “Two missed payments. You can go from prime to subprime in two months.” After that, it takes five years to get back to prime status, he added. “This whole system of how we decide who gets credit and who gets to decide, and then what we do when the mortgage defaults, is something built in the ’40s.”Institutional Owners and the Rental ShiftDobson also addressed the growing role of institutional landlords like Amherst. Despite public criticism that firms like his crowd out homeowners, he maintains they instead fill a void left by tighter credit and lower homebuilding. Amherst’s residents often have modest incomes and below-prime credit but aspire to the benefits of suburban homes—yards, schools, and community—even if they rent, not own. “We got involved simply because … the nation is not going to finance [our customers] to live in the home.”In conversation withFortune, Dobson argued that Amherst’s rise fills a vacuum and his residents are not served by the current mortgage industry. He said many Amherst residents have credit scores around 650 and a small percentage — fewer than 10% — have inconsistent payment histories: “If that was a mortgage pool, it would be a disaster.” Dobson said the model is a needed adaptation to post-pandemic American realities: it finances and upgrades homes at scale and offers housing stability when the government and traditional lenders have retreated.As for solutions, Dobson told Lambert he was skeptical of quick fixes from Washington. He advocated for expanding credit access—potentially through innovative financing or careful relaxation of lending standards—but notes that such ideas can be “the fastest way to end a meeting with a politician.”In conversation withFortune, Dobson looked out on the future for the economy, his residents and the pursuit of a good life. On the subject of artificial intelligence, he said he thinks its impact on jobs will be most acute for frontline and service professionals, which make up a large chunk of Amherst’s residents. Dobson toldFortunethat his average new resident makes slightly over $100,000 (Amherst said the median annual income of new residents is $108,000). And if these residents are working a job “pushing paper and part of the workflow process,” then they could be in trouble, he said.When asked about the recent election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York, framed byThe New York Timesas “the revenge of the struggling yuppie,” making about $120,000 and struggling to afford the city, Dobson declined to comment, except to say that many people seem to feel like they’ve done what they were told “and then they didn’t get what they were promised.”
High home prices and elevated mortgage rateshave made it increasingly difficult for Gen Z and millennials to buy homes. The median age of first-time U.S. home buyers has significantly jumped during the past decade. Because incomes have not kept pace with housing costs, many younger Americans are locked out of homeownership.It’s become increasingly difficult in recent years for young home buyers to break into the housing market. Between comparatively high mortgage rates and skyrocketing home prices, the weight of buying a home feels insurmountable for Gen Z and millennials. Recommended VideoAnd it shows in the data: In 2025, the share of first-time home buyers plummeted to a record low of 21%, while the typical age of first-time buyers climbed to an all-time high of 40 years, according to a National Association of Realtors report released Tuesday.“The historically low share of first-time buyers underscores the real-world consequences of a housing market starved for affordable inventory,” Jessica Lautz, NAR deputy chief economist and vice president of research, said in a statement. “The share of first-time buyers in the market has contracted by 50% since 2007—right before the Great Recession.”According to a previous NAR report, the share of “older” baby boomer (1946-1954) home buyers was 22%, while the share of “younger” millennials (1990-1998) and Gen Zers (1999-2011) were just 14% and 5%, respectively. And as Jim Reid, head of global macro research at Deutsche Bank pointed out in a note this summer, 46% of homes purchased in 2024 were by those aged 60 and over.Younger buyers struggling to break into the housing marketHistorically, younger buyers have made up a much larger piece of the pie. The median age of a first-time home buyer was 28 years old in 1991. That jumped to 38 years old in 2024, according to NAR. And “rising home prices and high mortgage rates have pushed” the median age of home buyers to a record-high of 56 years old in 2024, up from 46 in 2021,” wrote Apollo Academy Chief Economist Torsten Sløk, citing NAR data.That’s not a great omen for the American dream, which has long been regarded as owning a home. It’s typically the largest asset a person will buy in their lifetime and home equity can serve as a nice nest egg for future home purchases or cashing out after a sale. “Over the long run, property is an asset that ultimately gets redistributed from one generation to the next,” Reid wrote. But many members of the younger generations don’t have that opportunity. “Right now, that handoff is being stalled by high interest rates and elevated home prices,” Reid added. “At some point, either—or both—will have to adjust, or real wages for younger people will need to rise sharply.”That’s another crux of the problem: Wages haven’t kept up with home prices. According to a 2024 report from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, rents and house prices have been rising faster than incomes across most regions of the U.S.As of February, Americans need to make about $141,000 to afford a median-priced home, according to a National Association of Home Builders report, but the average salary for a person in the U.S. is about half of that. The income needed to buy a home in the U.S. “remains significantly higher than before the [COVID-19] pandemic, underscoring the ongoing challenge of affordability even as market conditions gradually rebalance,” Realtor.com Chief Economist Danielle Hale said in a statement.While housing market conditions are grim for Gen Z and millennials, they’ll eventually break into the housing market, Reid suggested. “Eventually, the younger generationwillown the homes currently held by the older generation,” he wrote. “We just don’t yet know what the price will be.”A version of this story originally published on Fortune.com on July 23, 2025.Fortune Brainstorm AIreturns to San Francisco Dec. 8–9 to convene the smartest people we know—technologists, entrepreneurs, Fortune Global 500 executives, investors, policymakers, and the brilliant minds in between—to explore and interrogate the most pressing questions about AI at another pivotal moment. Register here.
After the spring selling season flopped, the housing market is finally heating up in the colder autumn months as sellers slash prices more aggressively.Recommended VideoWhile the typical individual discount remains $10,000, sellers are increasingly offering multiple reductions as tepid demand leaves homes on the market for longer, according to Zillow. As a result, the cumulative price cut in October hit $25,000, matching the largest discounts Zillow has ever recorded.The data comes just in time for Black Friday. But instead of looking for holiday-shopping deals on toys, sweaters, and electronics, consumers in some cities could get 9% off a home’s typical value.“Most homeowners have seen their home values soar over the past several years, which gives them the flexibility for a price cut or two while still walking away with a profit,” Zillow Senior Economist Kara Ng said in a statement released on Monday. “These discounts are bringing more listings in line with buyers’ budgets, and helping fuel the most active fall housing market in three years. Patient buyers are reaping the rewards as the market continues to rebalance.”The most expensive housing markets have the largest median discounts by dollar value: San Jose ($70,900), Los Angeles ($61,000), San Francisco ($59,001), New York ($50,000) and San Diego ($50,000).But when looking at discounts as a share of a home’s value, cities in other regions actually have better deals. For example, the typical markdown in Pittsburgh is $20,000—a fraction of the discount in the bigger markets—but it represents 9% of that metro area’s home value, according to Zillow.New Orleans also boasts a 9% discount, while Austin’s is 8.4%, Houston’s is 8.2%, and San Antonio’s is 7.9%.ZillowDesperate sellers, buyer’s marketThe steeper discounting comes as the housing market has been frozen for much of the past three years after rate hikes from the Federal Reserve in 2022 and 2023 sent borrowing costs higher, discouraging homeowners from giving up their existing ultra-low mortgage rates.But the dearth of new supply kept home prices high, shutting out many would-be homebuyers who were also balking at elevated mortgage rates.With demand weak, the housing market has been shifting away from sellers and toward buyers. The pendulum has swung so far the other way that delistings soared this year as sellers became fed up with offers coming in below asking prices and took their homes off the market.By one measure, this is the strongest buyer’s market on record. In October, sellers outnumbered buyers by 36.8%, the largest such gap in Redfin data going back to 2013. The mismatch amounts to 528,769 people.The number of buyers fell 1.7% to the second-lowest level ever because of high housing costs and economic uncertainty, Redfin said last week. The tepid demand sent the number of sellers down 0.5%, marking the fifth straight decline and hitting the lowest level since February.Matt Purdy, a Redfin Premier real estate agent in the Denver area, said some homeowners need to sell due to a new job or a divorce. While sellers want top dollar, buyers are focused on getting a low monthly payment, and there’s a shortage of house hunters.“Oftentimes the buyer ends up winning the negotiation because they have options—there are a lot of sellers who are desperate to make a deal happen,” he said in a statement last week.
Homebuyers may experience a reprieve in 2026 as price normalization and an increase in home sales over the next year will take some pressure off the market—but don’t expect homebuying to be affordable in the short run for Gen Z and young families.Recommended VideoThe “Great Housing Reset” will start next year, with income growth outpacing home-price growth for a prolonged period for the first time since the Great Recession era, according to a Redfin report released this week. The residential real estate brokerage sees mortgage rates in the low 6% range, down from the 2025 average of 6.6%; a median home sales price increase of just 1%, down from 2% this year; and monthly housing payments growth that will lag behind wage growth, which will remain steady at 4%.These trends toward increased affordability will likely bring back some house hunters to the market, but many Gen Zers and young families will opt for nontraditional living situations, according to the report. More adult children will be living with their parents, as households continue to shift further away from a nuclear family structure, Redfin predicted.“Picture a garage that’s converted into a second primary suite for adult children moving back in with their parents,” the report’s authors wrote. “Redfin agents in places like Los Angeles and Nashville say more homeowners are planning to tailor their homes to share with extended family.”Gen Z and millennial homeownership rates plateaued last year, with no improvement expected. Just over one-quarter of Gen Zers owned their home in 2024, while the rate for millennial owners was 54.9% in the same year.Meanwhile, about 6% of Americans who struggled to afford housing as of mid-2025 moved back in with their parents, while another 6% moved in with roommates. Both trends are expected to increase in 2026, according to the report.Obstacles to home affordability Despite factors that could increase affordability for prospective homebuyers, C. Scott Schwefel, a real estate attorney at Shipman, Shaiken & Schwefel, toldFortunethat income growth and home-price growth are just a few keys to sustainable homeownership. An improved income-to-price ratio is welcome, but unless tax bills stabilize, many households may not experience a net relief, Schwefel said.“Prospective buyers need to recognize that affordability is not just price versus income…it’s price, mortgage rate, and the annual bill for living in a place—and that bill includes property taxes,” he added.In November, voters—especially young ones—showed lowering housing costs is their priority, the report said. But they also face high sale prices and mortgage rates, inflated insurance premiums, and potential hikes in utility costs because of a data center construction boom that’s driving up energy bills. The report’s authors expect there to be a bipartisan push to help remedy the housing affordability crisis.Still, an affordable housing market for first-time homebuyers and young families still may be far away.“The U.S. housing market should be considered moving from frozen to thawing,” Sergio Altomare, CEO of Hearthfire Holdings, a real estate private equity and development company, toldFortune. “Prices aren’t surging, but they’re no longer falling,” he added. “We are beginning to unlock some activity that’s been trapped for a couple of years.”
In a candid interview, top real estate agent and founder of SYKES Properties, Erin Sykes, got real about the state of the Florida real estate market. “Living and working in Florida is like being in a toxic relationship,” she said at the ResiDay conference in an interview with ResiClub editor Meghan Malas.Recommended VideoNow, Sykes, whose firm showcases multimillion-dollar deals in both Florida and the Northeast, said she’s watching two Americas diverge in real time. In the Northeast, she’s seeing bidding wars have returned in commuter suburbs like Monmouth County, N.J., and mid-Long Island, where buyers still fight for an acre and an elite school district. In Florida, by contrast, she described a market in withdrawal, nursing a hangover after a flurry of activity. “Just a couple years ago, we were being love-bombed and told how great we were,” she said, citing Florida’s burgeoning status as “Wall Street South,” a new finance hub. Now, things are “flat” or even heading downward.Home prices in Florida have fallen 5.4% year-over-year, dragged down by a glut of aging condos facing six-figure special assessments and post-Surfside safety mandates. Single-family homes, meanwhile, remain relatively resilient, she noted. She characterized the Sunshine State’s housing scene as a cycle of boom, bust, and burnout. She’s always fueled by the belief that somehow, the next round will be different.“Now we’re being told, ‘Oh, you’re too expensive,’ and kind of being discarded,” Sykes said. “You know, the conversation changes by the day, really.”Noting that Florida has always been a boom-or-bust state, she said she sees signs of moderation rather than collapse. “Rather than being the boom up here and the bust way down here like we saw in 2008 and 2009, the waves are becoming flatter,” she said. While there may be a pullback in prices, “really, a 5% pullback is nothing when your house has appreciated 25%.”For Florida, Sykes argued, even a flat market signals stability after years of breakneck appreciation—especially in Palm Beach, where home values have jumped as much as 200%in the past few years.The challenge of dual market personalitiesSykes described jarring regional differences. In Florida as an agent, you’re “just trying to really push and pull and drag deals together, you’re getting discounts of 5%, 10%, 20% off list price,” but then in the Northeast you find yourself going into a bidding war. “It’s like having a multiple personality disorder.”That volatility, she noted, reflects a broader split between regions that overheated during the pandemic and those returning to normal. The migration wave that sent high earners south may have turbocharged Florida’s boom but also exposed its fragility. Now, Sykes said, agents and homeowners alike are navigating two competing realities: the Northeast’s cautious recovery and the Southeast’s cooling after years of mania.She also outlined a bifurcation within the Florida housing market: while single-family homes remain robust thanks to demand for space among incoming families, condos face mounting challenges. That’s difficult because they are “really what has been driving down the Florida market,” and they are facing new challenges from special assessments, strengthened structural regulations, and fallout from incidents like the Surfside collapse. Pre-selling of new-construction condos continues apace, she said, with West Palm Beach alone seeing many significant developments underway.Sykes described a bifurcation between single-family homes and condos in Florida, since its exploding population is full of people who left Manhattan or Chicago and “wanted their own space.” She said single-family homes are doing well, and then “We’re seeing condos bifurcated, and then within that bifurcation of condos, a secondary bifurcation.”“Florida,” she concluded, “you have to always take with a grain of salt.”
A confidant of Bill Pulte, the Trump administration’s top housing regulator, provided confidential mortgage pricing data from Fannie Mae to a principal competitor, alarming senior officials of the government-backed lending giant who warned it could expose the company to claims that it was colluding with a rival to fix mortgage rates.Recommended VideoEmails reviewed by The Associated Press show that Fannie Mae executives were unnerved about what one called the “very problematic” disclosure of data by Lauren Smith, the company’s head of marketing, who was acting on Pulte’s behalf.“Lauren, the information that was provided to Freddie Mac in this email is a problem,” Malloy Evans, senior vice president of Fannie Mae’s single-family mortgage division, wrote in an Oct. 11 email. “That is confidential, competitive information.”He also copied Fannie Mae’s CEO, Priscilla Almodovar, on the email, which bore the subject line: “As Per Director Pulte’s Ask.” Evans asked Fannie Mae’s top attorney “to weigh in on what, if any, steps we need to take legally to protect ourselves now.”While Smith still holds her position, the senior Fannie Mae officials who called her conduct into question were all forced out of their jobs late last month, along with internal ethics watchdogs who were investigating Pulte and his allies.Housing industry rattled by dismissalsThe dismissals rattled the housing industry and drew condemnation from Democrats. It also gave Pulte’s critics evidence to support claims that he has leveraged the nonpublic information available to him to further his own political aims.“This is another example of Bill Pulte weaponizing his role to do Donald Trump’s bidding, instead of working to lower costs amidst a housing crisis,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee. “His behavior raises significant questions, and he needs to be brought in front of Congress to answer them.”The episode marks the latest example of Pulte using what is typically a low-profile position in the federal bureaucracy to enhance his own standing and gain the attention of President Trump. He’s prompted mortgage fraud investigations of prominent Democrats who are some of the president’s best known antagonists, including Sen. Adam Schiff of California, New York Attorney General Letitia James and California Rep. Eric Swalwell.In June, he ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prepare a proposal for the firms to accept cryptocurrency, another industry Trump has boosted, as part of the criteria for buying mortgages from banks. Last week, he persuaded Trump about the allure of a 50-year mortgage as a way to increase home buying and building — a proposal that was widely criticized because it would drastically increase the overall price of a loan.Pulte is also targeting the nation’s largest homebuildersPulte also has focused on large home construction companies, which have drawn Trump’s ire. Pulte requested confidential Fannie Mae data and has publicly signaled that he is considering a crackdown if the companies do not increase construction volume.“I’m looking at the Fannie Mae builder data and with the top three homebuilders we buy EASILY over $20 billion in THEIR LOANS!” he posted to X in early October.In a brief statement, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which Pulte leads, did not address questions from the AP, but said the agency “requires its regulated entities to carry out their operations in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.”Fannie Mae said it takes “compliance with the law very seriously and we have a rigorous program to ensure we follow all laws and regulations.”Pulte and Smith did not respond to requests for comment.Currying favor with the presidentSince his appointment to lead the FHFA, Pulte has sought to ingratiate himself with Trump. The 37-year-old scion of a homebuilding company fortune, Pulte has cultivated a reputation as a hyper-online millennial with a thirst for recognition and a desire to please the president. He and his wife also donated about $1 million to Trump’s campaign, campaign finance disclosures show.When Trump sought to oust Federal Reserve chair Jay Powell, Pulte became a leading attacker, routinely taking to X, formerly Twitter, where he has over 3 million followers, to excoriate the central bank leader.The Wall Street Journal reported this week that some Fannie Mae ethics and oversight officials who were fired last month had been investigating whether Pulte improperly obtained mortgage information for James, who was charged last month with bank fraud after Pulte sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department. She said the charges, which she denies, are politically motivated.Pulte’s power over the mortgage lending industry is unusual. Not long after his Senate confirmation, he appointed himself chairman of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which hold trillions of dollars in assets. The companies serve as a crucial backstop for the home lending industry by buying up mortgages from individual lenders, which are packaged together and sold to investors.The three competing roles present the potential for a conflict of interest that is detailed in emails reviewed by AP. Like many matters of public policy in Trump’s Washington, it appears to have begun with a social media post.In October, Trump criticized the homebuilding industry, which he likened to the oil-market-dominating cartel OPEC.“They’re sitting on 2 million empty lots, A RECORD,” the president posted to his social media platform, Truth Social. “I’m asking Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to get Big Homebuilders going.”“On it,” Pulte posted in response on X.Sensitive data was gatheredPulte turned to Smith, who in her brief tenure at Fannie Mae had become a trusted Pulte ally whose work portfolio transcended the boundaries dividing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the FHFA, according to two people who spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution.Soon, a team at Fannie Mae was overseeing an effort to pull together a tranche of mortgage data, according to emails reviewed by the AP. Smith played a central role and shared the confidential lender-level pricing information with Freddie Mac, which set off alarms at both companies, according to the emails. A spokesman for Freddie Mac declined comment.In the Oct. 11 message to Smith, Evans, the Fannie Mae mortgage executive, also added others to the email chain because they “were involved with this week’s efforts to compile this information” and he wanted to “make sure you do not exacerbate this issue.”Danielle McCoy, Fannie Mae’s general counsel, weighed in, adding that the information Smith provided to Freddie Mac should “never be shared” and “could put the company at risk.”Others who were part of the email chain included Almodovar, the CEO; chief operating officer Peter Akwaboah; Devang Doshi, a senior vice president for capital markets; and John Roscoe, a Pulte loyalist and former Trump White House aide, who served as Fannie Mae’s executive vice president of public relations and operations.Days later, Almodovar, McCoy and Evans — who did not respond to requests for comment — were out of a job. Meanwhile, Roscoe was promoted to co-president of the company, while Akwaboah was named acting CEO.Pulte also got something he wanted.A day after the terse email exchange, Trump posted a graphic to his Truth Social network that featured Fannie Mae’s logo, a list of large homebuilders and the headline “We Give Them Billions.”Pulte quickly reposted it.
The number of U.S. homes that typically change hands as people relocate for work, retire or trade-up for more living space hasn’t been this low in nearly 30 years.Recommended VideoAbout 28 out of every 1,000 homes changed hands between January and September, the lowest U.S. home turnover rate going back to at least the 1990s, according to an analysis by Redfin.The home turnover rate represents the number of homes sold, divided by the total number of existing sellable properties. While sales data show whether more or fewer homes are selling in a given period, the home turnover rate helps illustrate how homeowners are staying put longer.“It’s not healthy for the economy that people are staying put,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin.Consider, the home sales turnover rate through the first nine months of this year is down about 30% from the average rate over the same time periods between 2012 and 2022.Traditionally, opportunities such as a new job or the need for more space when starting a family motivate homeowners to sell and relocate. The fact that fewer homes are changing hands suggests they aren’t seeing as many opportunities for employment mobility, or perhaps can’t afford to sell and buy at today’s prices and mortgage rates.“If people are stuck, it’s reflective of how the economy is stuck,” Fairweather said. “We’re in a low-hire, low-fire labor market and I think that this goes hand in hand with that.”U.S. employers added just 22,000 jobs in August, according to the Labor Department, down from 79,000 in July and well below the 80,000 that economists had expected.Government hiring data is on hold during the shutdown, so the Labor Department’s tally of hiring in September was never released, but earlier this month a survey by payroll company ADP showed that the private sector lost 32,000 jobsin September.Meanwhile, several large companies, including Microsoft, General Motors, Amazon and Target, have announced job cuts.The slowing job market has many Americans increasingly concerned. That’s not a good recipe for home sales.Another factor keeping a lid on home sales: Many homeowners who bought or refinanced to rock-bottom mortgage rates in 2020 and 2021 have little incentive to sell and buy a home at current home loan rates.The U.S. housing market has been in a slump dating back to 2022, the year mortgage rates began climbing from historic lows that fueled a homebuying frenzy at the start of this decade.Sales of previously occupied U.S. homes sank last year to their lowest level in nearly 30 years. Sales have been sluggish this year, although they accelerated last month to their fastest pace since February as mortgage rates eased. The average rate on a 30-year mortgage fell this week to its lowest level in more than a year.While lower rates boost home shoppers’ purchasing power, borrowing costs remain too high for many Americans to afford to buy a home following years of skyrocketing prices. The median sales price of a previously occupied U.S. home has risen 53% over the past six years.
The American Dream of buying a home is still alive, but the path to get there looks very different from decades past. Recommended VideoA Coldwell Banker report shared withFortuneshows a staggering 84% of Gen Z say they’re delaying major life milestones like getting married, having children, changing careers, and getting a pet, just to afford to buy a home.Harris Poll surveyed more than 3,000 U.S. adults on behalf of residential and commercial real estate firm Coldwell Banker, and found nearly all Gen Z (97%) and millennials (93%) want to buy a home someday, but the path to homeownership is increasingly difficult due to high home prices, mortgage rates, and other housing costs. “There’s no single fix” to making housing more affordable, Jason Waugh, president of Coldwell Banker Affiliates, toldFortune. Rather, it would take “declining mortgage rates, growing inventory, and moderating price growth.”“Beyond that, state and local programs offering down payment assistance and tax incentives can significantly ease the financial burden for first time buyers,” he added. “Many may qualify for support they’re not yet aware of.”Other recent data confirms just how difficult it’s been for younger generations to break into the housing market: In 2025, the share of first-time home buyers plummeted to a record low of 21%, while the typical age of first-time buyers climbed to an all-time high of 40 years, according to a National Association of Realtors report released last week.“The historically low share of first-time buyers underscores the real-world consequences of a housing market starved for affordable inventory,” Jessica Lautz, NAR deputy chief economist and vice president of research, said in a statement. “The share of first-time buyers in the market has contracted by 50% since 2007—right before the Great Recession.”The Coldwell Banker report also shows 53% of aspiring first-time homeowners don’t expect to buy their first home until they’re at least 40, suggesting milestones like starting families could be pushed back even further.The housing affordability crisisOne of the most frustrating aspects of today’s housing market is hopeful homebuyers can remember the sub-3% mortgage rates of the pandemic era. Now, home rates continue to hover over 6%, and home prices have skyrocketed about 50% in just the past five years, according to the Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index.Meanwhile, Americans need to make about $141,000 to afford a median-priced home, according to a National Association of Home Builders report, but the average salary for a person in the U.S. is about half of that. “The income needed to buy a home in the U.S. “remains significantly higher than before the [COVID-19] pandemic, underscoring the ongoing challenge of affordability even as market conditions gradually rebalance,” Realtor.com Chief Economist Danielle Hale previously said in a statement.Gen Z is trying Although the path to homeownership “may be more complex for Gen Z,” Waugh said, they’re also a generation that’s resourceful and determined. Many Gen Zers are taking on side hustles for supplemental income streams, he said, and they’re also considering buying less ideal homes like something smaller of a fixer upper. Some are also moving to more affordable areas, cobuying with family or friends, or moving in with parents to save up to buy a home. Waugh gave an example of a 20-year-old client who chose to forgo college, began working at 17, and spent three years saving while living with his parents to save enough money to buy a house of his own.“This openness to multigenerational living and creative financial strategies suggests that—rather than being unattainable—the American Dream is being redefined by Gen Z to align with evolving economic realities,” Waugh said.
A proposal floated by the Trump administration to create a 50-year mortgage product to improve housing affordability could offer significant immediate savings to homebuyers, but at the steep cost of a doubled interest payment burden over the life of the loan, according to a recent analysis by John Lovallo of UBS Securities.Recommended VideoCaveating that many basic questions remain unanswered, a back-of-the-envelope calculation shows a clear trade-off between immediate monthly affordability and long-term debt accumulation. Based on Lovallo’s estimates, the extended loan term could lower the monthly payment on a median-priced home by roughly $119.While the short-term financial relief is meaningful for consumers struggling with current housing costs, the long-term fiscal penalty is severe. According to the UBS analysis, extending the loan duration from three decades to five decades could double the dollar amount of interest paid by the homebuyer on that median-priced home over the life of the loan. Furthermore, this significantly extended repayment schedule would substantially slow the rate of equity accumulation for the homeowner.This is a problem since the extraordinary length of this proposal poses another demographic complication. UBS points out the average first-time buyer just hit 40 years old. This age profile means many initial borrowers could die before their mortgage matures.“It’s typically not a goal of policymakers to pass on mortgage debt to a borrowers’ children,” Mike Konczal, senior director of policy and research at the Economic Security Project, told the Associated Press. The AP came to a similar calculation as Lovallo, finding the average borrower would pay an additional $389,000 in interest over the life of a 50-year mortgage compared to a 30-year.LendingTree conducted a similar analysis, with some eye-popping calculations. For instance, it found a $500,000 loan at 6.1% would rack up $1.1 million in interest. In case of home prices falling, it added, just imagine being underwater on a mortgage for such a long duration. While it may sound like relief, the outlet said in a statement toFortune, “it could trap borrowers in half a century of debt and delay wealth-building for an entire generation.”How the math breaks downUBS analysts on Lovallo’s team, including Spencer Kaufman and Matthew Johnson, based this calculation on a median-priced home of about $420,000, assuming a 12% down payment of $50,400, leaving a loan amount of $369,600. For comparison, the analysis posits a standard 30-year mortgage would carry a 6.33% interest rate, resulting in a monthly payment of $2,295.However, the 50-year product is estimated to carry a rate 50 basis points higher, at 6.83%. Despite this higher rate, extending the term to 600 months (50 years) would reduce the monthly payment to $2,176. This calculation suggests an increase to the average consumer’s buying power of almost $23,000, allowing them to afford a home priced up to $442,995 while keeping the monthly payment at the 30-year benchmark of $2,295.The viability and structure of the 50-year mortgage face several complicating factors. With Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac currently under conservatorship, they could potentially purchase these longer-term mortgages from lenders and then package them into securities to be sold to investors, assuming sufficient demand exists. The UBS analysts speculated amending the Dodd-Frank Act to allow 50-year mortgages to be classified as qualifying loans may be difficult, which would result in the longer-maturity loans carrying higher interest rates than the 30-year version.Infrastructure Investment?In concluding its initial thoughts on the proposal, UBS reiterated its finding from the end of a three-year study in early October: The housing market is so inefficient and frozen the one clear solution is direct government investment in housing infrastructure. The answer lies in, of all things, manufactured wall panels.In October, Lovallo’s team noted several damning facts: Housing affordability is close to the worst it’s been since the mid-1980s, per the NAR Affordability Index, while Federal Reserve research indicates construction is the “only major industry to have registered negative average productivity growth since 1987.” Finally, Lovallo’s team estimated a structural shortage of homes in the U.S. housing market of 7 million units.UBS suggested boosting the penetration of manufactured wall panels would be a meaningful strategy, generating up to a 30% reduction in framing days alongside a 20% reduction in waste. Construction costs would increase by $783 per unit, the UBS study found, suggesting reluctance on the private sector’s part.These calculations may be a moot point, as President Donald Trump seemed to downplay the idea, if not back away from it, in a Tuesday interview withFox News. He said it was “not a big deal” and it “might help a little bit,” as interviewer Laura Ingraham pressed him on an uproar among his base of voters about the proposal. ResiClub editor Lance Lambert noted the seeming unpopularity of the idea among his 11 takeaways in an analysis of the proposal.[This report has been updated to include mention of LendingTree’s analysis.]
President Donald Trump’s housing chief has strongly criticized Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, labeling him a “maniac” and “deranged,” while blaming persistent high interest rates for widespread financial hardship among Americans. This fiery characterization comes as economic anxiety continues to grip the country, with housing costs climbing to levels not seen in decades.Recommended VideoThe remarks came from Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks, calling into ResiDay, a residential real-estate conference hosted by ResiClub, the news and research outlet cofounded by formerFortuneeditor Lance Lambert.Pulte, whose family is one of the biggest names in corporate homebuilding, did not mince words about the Fed chair.“He’s really a maniac,” Pulte said when asked about his view on the impact of high interest rates on the mortgage market. “We’ve really got to get a good new Federal Reserve chair. I’m very confident that the president will pick somebody great. You know, I think Powell has just totally let it go to his head.”Pain in the mortgage marketPulte argued “it’s sad” and Powell is “not looking at the data” despite his reputation as a “straight shooter.” The data shows, according to Pulte, “inflation is way lower” and high mortgage rates are “really hurting a lot of people.” He added the climate in Washington, D.C. is something of a bubble.“When I’m there, it’s like this little vacuum, and you get caught in it,” he said. “And I think some of these guys, they go to D.C., and they just, they lose their minds.”The FHFA director argued Trump has a clear vision: “Maybe it’s because he goes out of town often,” but “these other people, like Powell, they’ve lost their mind.”He circled around by stressing high interest rates “are really, really hurting people.” The remarks underscore a growing frustration among Trump-aligned Republicans who argue the central bank’s aggressive rate hikes—and the slow recent pace of its rate cuts—have stifled growth and made homeownership less attainable .Since mid-2022 and the highest rate of inflation in 40 years, the Fed implemented sharp increases in the benchmark interest rate, which rippled through the housing sector, before relenting in mid-2025, cutting rates twice to date. Much of the Fed’s thinking was affected by what Powell called a “low-hire, low-fire” job market, in which layoffs are low, but so is hiring, especially for recent college graduates and minorities.The longest government shutdown in history, grinding on as Pulte was speaking at ResiDay, has actually deprived the market and the central bank of fresh data on the state of the economy, forcing many to turn to alternate measures. But to Pulte’s point, mortgage rates have remained stubbornly high, still over 6%, a contrast to the sub-3% rate enjoyed by the vast majority of mortgage holders in the national housing market.“Many homeowners are reluctant [to] put their homes on the market and give up the low mortgage rates they already have,” Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices said in late October about this so-called “lock-in effect.” Warren Buffett’s portfolio company said that: “To them, high price gains won’t mitigate their ability to pay more for another home at significantly higher interest rates.”And there is widespread evidence of pain in the housing market. Recent data show home affordability at its lowest point in decades. Earlier this week, the National Association of Realtors found the average age of the first-time homebuyer had crossed 40 years old for the first time.Tensions between Trump and Powell are not new. Trump himself sparred repeatedly with Powell during both his current presidential term and during his prior stint in office, repeatedly calling for lower rates and nicknaming the Fed chair as “too late.” Pulte said Powell’s looks are deceiving: “He looks like this calm, silent guy, but he’s deranged.”Changes for Fannie and Freddie?Pulte also talked vaguely about his plans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, quasi-utilities that have been under government conservatorship since the Great Financial Crisis of 2008. Saying “we hold all the cards,” Pulte said he thinks Fannie and Freddie “will probably take ownership in different companies by virtue of companies offering them equity in exchange for Fannie and Freddie doing smart business constructs with them,” in a similar way to the government’s unprecedented investment into Intel.“We have a great dealmaker as president,” Pulte argued, citing Intel specifically as a change from the past when “politicians stupidly gave money to Intel and didn’t get anything in return.”At least we’re saying, ‘Yeah, we’re going to get something,'” Pulte added. He said the FHFA was similarly looking at taking equity stakes in companies that are willing to give it to us “because of how much power Fannie and Freddie have over the whole ecosystem,” adding that “what’s in the best interest of Fannie and Freddie is in the best interest of Americans, and it doesn’t matter if it’s not politically popular, it doesn’t matter if donors are going to be upset.”If it’s in the best interest in American people, we’re going to do it,” Pulte said.
The store that kinda just appears one night in your local mall like an apparition only has a few months to make a year’s worth of revenue. But thanks to its ~1,500 pop-up locations and 50,000 seasonal workers, Spirit Halloween remains the king of spooky spending.The early aughts mall icon Spencer Gifts bought Spirit in 1999, and when current Spencer’s CEO Steven Silverstein started in 2003, the Halloween retailer had just 130 stores around the US. Moody’s Ratings recently estimated that Spencer’s and Spirit made about $1.9 billion in 2023—with with Spirit bringing in more than Spencer’s.The key to success, which has long been immortalized in memes, has been Spirit’s commitment to scooping up short-term leases, especially after bankrupt big-box stores leave:The company has always chased nontraditional, monthslong leases, for which commercial landlords usually charge higher fees. But the growing number of big-box vacancies in the last decade has given Spirit more leverage.Most retailers sign leases at the beginning of the year, so by midsummer, when Spirit is hunting for empty buildings, there isn’t much competition for whatever’s available.Looking ahead…the company will open 30 pop-up Christmas locations after all the scary innuendo costumes are packed up.—MMThis report was originally published byMorning Brew.
After years of living on the street and crashing on friends’ couches, Quantavia Smith was given the keys to a studio apartment in Los Angeles that came with an important perk — easy access to public transit.Recommended VideoThe 38-year-old feels like she went from a life where “no one cares” to one where she has a safe place to begin rebuilding her life. And the metro station the apartment complex was literally built upon is a lifeline as she searches for work without a car.“It is more a sense of relief, a sense of independence,” said Smith, who moved in July. She receives some government assistance and pays 30% of her income for rent — just $19 a month for an efficiency with a full-market value of $2,000.“Having your own space, you feel like you can do anything.”Metro areas from Los Angeles to Boston have taken the lead in tying new housing developments to their proximity to public transit, often teaming up with developers to streamline the permitting process and passing policies that promote developments that include a greater number of units.City officials argue building housing near public transit helps energize neglected neighborhoods and provide affordable housing, while ensuring a steady stream of riders for transit systems and cutting greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the number of cars on the road.“Transit-oriented development should be one of, if not the biggest solution that we’re looking at for housing development,” said Yonah Freemark, research director at the Urban Institute’s Land Use Lab, who has written extensively on the topic.“It takes advantage of all of this money we’ve spent on transportation infrastructure. If you build the projects and don’t build anything around the areas near them, then it’s kind of like money thrown down the drain,” Freemark said.Transit housing projects from DC to LAThe Santa Monica and Vermont Apartments where Smith lives is part of an ambitious plan by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to build 10,000 housing units near transit sites by 2031 — offering developers land discounts in exchange for affordable housing development and other community benefits.In Washington D.C., the transit authority has completed eight projects since 2022 that provided nearly 1,500 apartments and a million square feet of office space. About half were in partnership with Amazon, which committed $3.6 billion in low-cost loans and grants for affordable housing projects in Washington, as well as Nashville, Tennessee, and the Puget Sound area in Washington state. Almost all are within a half-mile of public transit.“Big cities face the greatest challenges when it comes to traffic congestion and high housing costs,” Freemark said. “Building new homes near transit helps address both problems by encouraging people to take transit while increasing housing supply.”Among projects Boston has built, the Pok Oi Residents in Chinatown is a 10-minute walk to the subway and a half-dozen bus stops. That’s a draw for Bernie Hernandez, who moved his family there from a Connecticut suburb after his daughter got into a Boston university.“The big difference is commuting. You don’t need a car,” said Hernandez, who said he can walk to the grocery story and pharmacy. His 17-year-old daughter takes the subway to school. Now, his car mostly sits idle, saving him money on gas and time spent in traffic.“You get to go to different places very quickly. Everything is convenient,” Hernandez said.States take aim at zoning regulationsStates from Massachusetts to California are passing laws targeting restrictive zoning regulations that for decades prohibited building multifamily developments and contributed to housing shortages.Last month, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a state law allowing taller apartment buildings on land owned by transit agencies and near bus, train and subway lines.“Building more homes in our most sustainable locations is the key to tackling the affordability crisis and locking in California’s success for many years to come,” said State Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat who authored the bill.California joins Colorado, which requires cities to allow an average of 40 housing units per acre within a quarter-mile of transit, and Utah, which mandates about 50 units per acre. In Washington, the governor signed a bill this year allowing taller housing developments in mixed-use commercial zones near transit.“We want to ensure that there are mixed-income, walkable, vibrant homes all around those transit investments and that people have the option of using cars less to improve the environmental health of our communities,” said Democratic Rep. Julia Reed, who authored the Washington bill.“It’s about giving people the opportunity to drive less and live more.”Housing takes center stage in MassachusettsMassachusetts Democratic Gov. Maura Healey has made housing a priority.Among her most potent tools is a 2021 law that requires 177 towns or communities nearby to create zoning districts allowing multi-family housing. The state provided nearly $8 million to more than 150 communities to help create these zones, while threatening to cut funding for those that don’t. More than 6,000 housing units are in development as a result.“You put housing nearby public transit” Healey said. “It’s great for people. They can literally get up, leave their home, walk to a commuter rail and get to work.”Among the first to comply was Lexington, which has approved 10 projects, including a $115 million complex with 187 housing units and retail space.Walking past earth-moving equipment and dump trucks at the construction site earlier this year, project manager Quinlan Locke said: “This is a landscape yard. It’s commercial. It’s meant for trucking.”But, he added, in “two years from now, it’s going to be meant for people who live here, work here and play here. This is going to become someone’s home.”Opposition to zoning changesSome advocates argue the lofty goals of transit housing are falling short due to fierce local resistance and lack of funding and support at the federal and state levels.Higher mortgage interest rates, more government red tape, rising construction costs and lack of investment at transit stations also have contributed to a troubling trend — nine times more housing units built far from public transit versus near it in the past two decades, according to a 2023 Urban Institute study.In Massachusetts, 19 communities still haven’t created new zones. Some unsuccessfully sued the state to halt the law, while residents rejected new zones in others. Lexington eventually shrank its zone from 227 acres to 90 acres after residents complained.“If we allow the state to come in and dictate how we zone, what else are they going to come in and dictate?” said Anthony Renzoni, a selectman from the town of Holden, which sued the state and is drawing up a new zoning map after residents rejected the first one.New housing, a new lifeIn Los Angeles, the six-story complex where Smith lives in East Hollywood is home to 300 new residents since opening in February. It’s revitalizing the area around the metro site, with a Filipino grocery, medical clinic and farmers market opening early next year.Half the 187 units are reserved for formerly homeless residents like Smith, who had been living in a rundown motel paid for with a voucher and before that on the street. She’s been assigned a case worker and is getting help with basic life skills, budgeting and finding work.Equally important: Smith, who can’t afford a car, doesn’t need one.“I’m very very fortunate to be somewhere where the transit takes me where I want to go,” she said. “Where I want to go is not that far.”
Investors including billionaire Jorge Perez have plans to build luxury condo towers on a lot they bought for $180 million on Fisher Island in South Florida. Miami-Dade County officials, suddenly panicked about the effect on the local economy, are trying to stop them. Recommended VideoThe parcel is the last sliver of land available for high-end residential development on the posh island, which was recently named the most expensive ZIP code in the US. But it also houses a 700,000-barrel fuel depot that’s crucial for Miami’s port, the world’s largest hub for passenger cruises and a bustling cargo facility. The developers plan to replace the fuel terminal with condos. “This is an existential crisis,” Miami-Dade County Commissioner Raquel Regalado said at a meeting last month, citing the port’s importance as an economic juggernaut.County officials, under fire for failing to head off a real estate deal involving critical infrastructure, are rushing to find a solution and in some cases calling for legal action to force a sale of the land to the government. But the developers are plowing ahead even as mediation talks are ongoing: They shared plans with Bloomberg News to build two 13-story “ultra-luxury” condo towers.“It’s the last masterpiece to complete the island,” said Jon Paul Perez, Related Group’s chief executive officer. He’s the oldest son of Jorge Perez, whose long career developing residential projects in Miami earned him the moniker of “condo king.” Next door to the new site on Fisher Island, Related Group is completing a condo building in which it sold two penthouse units for $150 million. The deal for the new lot closed last month. A joint venture between Related Group, HRP Group, Raycliff Capital and GFO Investments bought the land from a fuel-terminal operator at a record price for Fisher Island, capping over a year of working with local authorities on the proposed development. The land will require environmental cleanup. Penthouses in the planned towers are expected to be priced at around $100 million, said Bippy Siegal, CEO of Raycliff Capital. On a square-foot basis, the condos — which will all be corner units with ocean views — will probably start at about $5,000 per square foot and “handshakes have already been done” for sales, Siegal said. Jon Paul Perez said he estimates the project will have a total sell-out value of about $2 billion. The land sale came with a two-year leaseback agreement with the fuel-depot operators. Developers expect to break ground in 2027 and complete the luxury towers about three years after that, adding residential units to an island that has been home to celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey and tennis star Caroline Wozniacki. Before the backlash from Miami-Dade County, the developers spent 18 months in talks with the island’s famously finicky community association and its country club – a process they called a “heavy lift.” While they said about 30% of residents opposed the project, citing worries about traffic and crowding in the exclusive enclave, many were eager to get rid of the fuel depot. One person’s eyesore is another person’s lifeline, however. In September, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. CEO Jason Liberty pleaded with county commissioners to keep the fuel facility intact, calling it “the backbone” of port operations. Flanked by other cruise industry leaders, he warned that no major ports in the US operate without their own fuel bunkering. A formal mediation process began Oct. 20. PortMiami’s director, Hydi Webb, said the property serves an “essential public purpose.” The port is reviewing options for building a new fueling site and “continues to actively pursue a path for potential acquisition of the Fisher Island site,” she said. The developers said they were “committed to constructive, good-faith dialogue with PortMiami and Miami-Dade County to advance our shared goal of strategic, sustainable economic growth for the port, the county, and our planned residential development.” Fuel AlternativesCounty commissioners were caught off guard when they were called into a special meeting in September to first discuss the issue. They have been seeking answers from Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava and her staff, as well as from port leaders, who acknowledged that the issue should have been raised when the property went on the market. In an Oct. 9 meeting, Cava said officials were studying different alternatives but warned that there weren’t any viable options to replace the facility without hurting cargo and cruise operations. The port itself is also located on an island, and the county estimated it would need six to 10 contiguous acres (2.4 to 4 hectares) to build a new fueling hub. That kind of space doesn’t exist on the port’s island or the densely populated surrounding areas. Cava told commissioners that the developers had offered to build and fund a new $200 million fueling facility on the port, although there’s a lack of space. She said that previously they’d offered to lease the Fisher Island facility back to the county at a rate that would have added up to a tally of $1 billion over 30 years.Miami competes for ship traffic with Port Everglades in Fort Lauderdale, along with cruise and cargo ports in Cape Canaveral, Tampa and Jacksonville. Officials and cruise-line professionals warned that Miami would be at a sizable disadvantage if it loses on-site fuel bunkering. Commissioner Eileen Higgins, who will compete in a runoff to be the next mayor of Miami, said she was in favor of moving forward with eminent domain procedures, which allow the government to pay a market-rate price for property that’s of critical public interest. The county is “negotiating with the worst possible scenario,” now that the developers’ land deal closed, Higgins said. “We do not need luxury buildings to ruin this economic vitality that is PortMiami.”
The Trump administration is moving forward with a plan to introduce a 50-year fixed-rate mortgage, a reform officials believe could make homeownership more feasible for millions of Americans amid soaring prices and mounting affordability concerns.Recommended Video“Thanks to President Trump, we are indeed working on The 50-year Mortgage – a complete game changer,” Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte said Saturday in a statement released on social media.His announcement came after Trump shared a graphic online comparing his proposal to the 30-year mortgage policies championed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the New Deal.With 30-year fixed rates remaining stuck above 6% for more than three years, high homeownership costs have kept many would-be homebuyers out of the market. According to Redfin data, the median U.S. household is currently spending approximately 39% of its monthly income on mortgage repayments—well above long-term affordability benchmarks.Meanwhile, the “lock-in effect” has prevented many prospective sellers from putting their homes on the market because they don’t want to give up the ultra-low rates they secured before borrowing costs jumped in 2022. The result has been housing market gridlock that’s putting ownership out of reach for younger Americans and worsening overall affordability.As buyers seek alternatives amid elevated rates and unprecedented home values, adjustable-rate mortgages are in more demand and now account for 10% or more of mortgage applications, the highest since 2021, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.Pulte has blamed Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, who hiked interest rates to curb inflation but has since resumed easing cautiously, saying on X.com that he is keeping rates “artificially high.”He also said the administration is “laser focused on ensuring the American Dream for YOUNG PEOPLE and that can only happen on the economic level of homebuying. A 50 Year Mortgage is simply a potential weapon in a WIDE arsenal of solutions that we are developing right now. STAY TUNED!”How a 50-year mortgage would work—or notAt its core, the proposed 50-year loan product targets lower monthly payments by extending the standard amortization period. For instance, Fannie Mae’s calculator estimates that, for a $400,000 home at a 6.575% interest rate with 20% down, the monthly principal and interest would be $2,788 on a 30-year fixed, $2,640 for 40 years, and $2,572 for 50 years. But critics warn the risks are significant. Extending mortgages to 50 years would increase total interest paid and slow the buildup of home equity, potentially trapping borrowers in debt for a lifetime. Economist Tyler Cowen, of the influential blog Marginal Revolution, put the idea into GPT-5 and came back with the takeaway that a government‑backed 50‑year mortgage would “likely lower monthly payments but raise house prices, slow equity build‑up (and raise default risk in downturns), and increase interest‑rate risk in the financial system.”In the short run, this would see sellers and incumbent owners capturing much of the benefit while first‑time buyers face higher entry prices.The situation now is far from optimal, though. The average age of the first-time homebuyer keeps being pushed higher amid the turbulent housing market of the last several years. Recently, the National Association of Realtors found that it was 40 years old in 2025, the highest ever.As ResiClub’s Lance Lambert noted in a statement toFortune, that means the typical first-time homebuyer is just as close to collecting Social Security as they are to graduating from high school.Pulte floats Fannie, Freddie buying stocksThe 50-year mortgage proposal came amid a flurry of posts from Pulte, a member of one of America’s most prominent homebuilding families, who was fresh off a Friday appearance at ResiDay, a residential real estate conference hosted by ResiClub.Pulte said, without disclosing details, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would seek to take equity stakes in private-sector companies in a manner similar to the unprecedented deal with Intel months earlier.“We hold all the cards,” Pulte told ResiClub about Fannie and Freddie, which have been under government conservatorship since the Great Financial Crisis of 2008. “[We] will probably take ownership in different companies by virtue of companies offering them equity in exchange for Fannie and Freddie doing smart business constructs with them,” he said, likening it to Intel.
