It's a complicated issue, and we do complicated issues on is show. Joining me now is a guest with 25 years of experience in housing policy. Jenny Schutz is the vice president of Infrastructure for Housing at Arnold Ventures, where she oversees efforts to identify and enact policies that can successfully expand housing supply and make it easier to build more and different types of housing.She also served as the principal economist for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. She's the author of ...

an economy that is increasingly not working for working Americans in a country that is run by a real estate developer who's populated his cabinet with billionaires. I want to zoom in specifically on the housing crisis in this country because its causes are complex and its consequences are dire. Last week, you'll remember, I told you the story of Jackson Hole, Wyoming, a vast open landscape nestled beneath towering mountains founded and built by working people who were driven by grit, ambition, and an entrep ...

I think that the solution to the housing crisis, the loneliness epidemic, and the cost of living crisis is actually at home with mom. No, I'm serious. I I reckon it's at home with mom.Across Australia, people are moving out. They're working longer hours to be able to afford it, and they're feeling really, really lonely. We keep trying to find new ways of living, but I think the best way isn't new at all.I actually think it's quite ancient. My work as a speaker and facilitator involves making good people gre ...

Core Viewpoint - Senate Democrats have introduced legislation aimed at removing key tax advantages for private equity firms and large corporate landlords, which could significantly alter the economics of institutional housing portfolios [1][2]. Tax Implications - The American Homeownership Act proposes to eliminate depreciation and mortgage interest deductions for private equity firms, hedge funds, and large investment managers involved in housing [2]. - The bill would also prevent these firms from accessing federally backed mortgages and from purchasing foreclosed homes from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and federal agencies, targeting the institutional single-family rental model [2]. Antitrust Measures - The legislation directly addresses Wall Street firms that own approximately 450,000 single-family homes and over 2.2 million apartments across the U.S., with corporate landlords acquiring nearly one in six homes sold in 2025 [3]. - New antitrust constraints would be imposed on housing consolidation, including closing reporting loopholes for large property acquisitions and making corporate ownership of over 30% of a local housing market presumptively illegal [4]. Scope of Affected Firms - Any corporate entity purchasing more than 50 single-family homes for rental would lose access to the targeted tax breaks, complicating scaling strategies for large operators [5]. Housing Crisis Context - Democrats argue that private equity and Wall Street landlords are worsening the housing crisis by acquiring large numbers of homes, leading to significant rent increases and unfair treatment of renters [6]. - The legislation includes provisions to avoid hindering new housing supply, allowing firms that build new multifamily housing to retain tax benefits [6]. Financial Impact - The federal government could save "billions of dollars" by eliminating housing-related tax breaks for Wall Street firms, with these savings redirected to housing construction and homeownership programs [7]. - The proposal indicates a more aggressive federal approach toward private capital in housing, combining tax policy, mortgage access, and antitrust enforcement [7]. Potential Outcomes - If enacted, the bill would represent a significant federal intervention in the private equity-backed housing sector, potentially affecting underwriting models, portfolio concentration strategies, and long-term return assumptions in the residential real estate asset class [8].

Why can't London build homes. London has been given a target of building 88,000 new homes per year to address its housing crisis. But last year, construction started on just under 6,000 homes, 94% below target, a 75% year-on-year decline, and the lowest figure since records began almost 40 years ago.This isn't a left versus right story of greedy developers versus social housing. The crunch is hitting both private developers and social providers, with both sides citing the same problems. The most acute issue ...

Core Viewpoint - Spain has imposed a fine of over $74.8 million on Airbnb for listing properties that lacked the necessary operating licenses, reflecting a strong governmental stance against short-term rentals amid a housing crisis [2][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The Spanish Ministry of Consumer Affairs has declared the penalty against Airbnb as definitive, mandating the removal of unlawful listings from its platform [2]. - Spanish authorities reported that at least 65,122 Airbnb properties were found in violation of laws designed to protect renters and consumers [4]. - In June, Spanish authorities also directed Booking.com to remove over 4,000 listings that did not comply with accommodation laws [6]. Group 2: Market Context - Approximately 321,000 homes in Spain held holiday rental licenses as of November last year, marking a 15% increase compared to 2020 [4]. - The fine imposed on Airbnb amounts to six times the profits earned from the listings during the period between the government's warning and their eventual removal [3]. Group 3: Societal Impact - Spain's Consumer Rights Minister highlighted the ongoing housing crisis, stating that "thousands of families are struggling to get by," which is a reflection of a global issue [5]. - City leaders argue that short-term rentals have negatively impacted local neighborhoods, displacing long-term residents and transforming areas to cater primarily to tourism [7].

Today, the Senate failed to pass two health care proposals. First, a Republican plan, then a Democratic plan, both dead on arrival. Now, if Congress can't agree on a plan, monthly health care premiums will more than double on average for some 22 million Americans as Obamacare subsidies expire at the end of the month.Many of those Americans will simply no longer be able to afford health care. While this is on its face a fight between Democrats and Republicans and the specifics of a plan in Congress right now ...

Core Insights - The concept of "childhood home" is evolving, with more young adults (34 and under) choosing to live at home, increasing by 1.5 million in the last decade [1] - The trend is particularly pronounced in states like California, Texas, and Florida, driven by a housing crisis that makes it difficult for young people to afford rent or home purchases [2] - A significant number of adult children living at home contribute nothing to household expenses, with 61% of them providing $0, while parents are financially supporting their grown children at an average of $1,384 per month [5][6] Housing and Financial Context - The median rent in the U.S. reached $1,743 in November, making living at home a financially attractive option for young adults [3] - Parents who charge their adult children rent can offer a favorable deal compared to market rates, while also focusing on their own financial security for retirement [3] - The financial burden on parents is evident, as they are only saving $609 per month for retirement, which is less than half of what they spend on their adult children [6] Societal Implications - The dynamic of adult children living at home can be mutually beneficial, allowing parents to assist their children in saving money while also addressing their own financial needs [3] - Concerns are rising among parents, with nearly 25% fearing that their children will remain financially dependent on them for an extended period [6] - Young adults face significant challenges, including rising inflation and student debt, which contribute to their decision to live at home [7]

Core Viewpoint - The proposal for a 50-year mortgage by President Trump, likened to FDR's introduction of the 30-year mortgage, faces significant criticism from various stakeholders, including mortgage brokers, economists, and even members of Trump's own party [1][2]. Group 1: Proposal Details - The 50-year mortgage aims to provide lower monthly payments for homebuyers, but experts warn that it could lead to higher overall costs due to extended payment periods and potentially higher interest rates [3]. - While the 50-year term may reduce monthly payments by a few hundred dollars compared to a standard 30-year loan, it could result in tens of thousands more in interest over time and slower equity accumulation [4]. Group 2: Reactions and Criticism - The proposal has been met with backlash from various political figures, including Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who argues that it would ultimately benefit banks and lenders while keeping homeowners in debt for life [5]. - Reports indicate that some White House staffers are attributing the idea to Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, leading to frustration among business leaders and Trump's allies [5].

Housing Market Analysis - Home prices are expected to decrease if local governments increase housing supply [1] - Mortgage rates are projected to decline when the Federal Reserve reduces interest rates [1] Policy Implication - Addressing the housing crisis can be achieved by increasing housing supply and lowering interest rates [1]