A White Christmas 2008 in Valletta - Malta

Rent-Stabilized life in New York

Editta Sherman has celebrated more than half a century's worth of new years in her palatial studio apartment above New York's Carnegie Hall. But it's unlikely the celebrated portrait photographer will be raising her glass there next year...........

The city of New York wants to renovate the space above Carnegie Hall, where Marlon Brando once lived and where Sherman and five other renters, including iconic New York Times' photographer Bill Cunningham, have enjoyed rent-stabilized bliss since Frank Sinatra cut his first demo.
Sherman pays $650 a month for her studio, a drool-inducing space basked in natural light with floor-to-ceiling windows. An enormous skylight hangs over bold, black-and-white tiled floors; a cast-iron circular staircase leads to a loft stuffed with props.......

Read the full article here.

Madoff Scandal Shaking Real Estate Industry

Almost no segment of New York City’s real estate industry was spared in the Madoff scandal, which may be history’s largest Ponzi scheme: commercial brokers large and small, little-known developers and prominent families like the Wilpons and Rechlers all lost money to Bernard L. Madoff, industry executives say..............

“They knew him from golfing in the Hamptons. They knew him from the locker rooms,” Mr. Reisman said. “He was considered a wizard.”

Mr. Reisman said his clients were especially concerned because they counted on Madoff investments to complete some of their real estate projects, pledging their investments as collateral for projects. Those developers fear that when their banks realize that their investments with Mr. Madoff have disappeared, they will demand new collateral from other sources, Mr. Reisman said.
Finding those alternative lenders will be difficult given the financial crisis — and given that many other real estate investors have been hurt by the Madoff case.

Read the full article by Christine Haugney, New York Times, Dec 17 2008

MEPA proposes street categorisation

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA) is in the final stages of proposing several schemes involving the categorisation of streets in urban conservation areas.

The four areas in the Malta Local Plan set to be categorised are: the North West Local Plan, the South Malta Local Plan, the Marsaxlokk Bay Local Plan, and the Central Malta Local Plan. The proposals were presented to several non-governmental organisations on Tuesday for consultation and will be presented to local councils on the week starting December 8.

The Parliamentary Secretary for Public Dialogue, Chris Said said that government worked hard to seriously consult the involved sectors so that the best results could be achieved in realising these schemes.

di-ve.com 02 December 2008 -- 19:50CEST

US Government seizes mortgage giants.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com)

Federal officials on Sunday unveiled an extraordinary takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, putting the government in charge of the twin mortgage giants and the $5 trillion in home loans they back.

The move marks Washington's most dramatic attempt yet to shore up the nation's housing market, which is suffering from record foreclosures and falling prices.

The sweeping plan, announced by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and James Lockhart, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, places the two companies into a "conservatorship" to be overseen by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Under conservatorship, the government would temporarily run Fannie and Freddie until they are on stronger footing.

"A failure [of Fannie and Freddie] would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance," Paulson said at a press conference in Washington. "And a failure would be harmful to economic growth and job creation."
Freddie (FRE, Fortune 500) and Fannie (FNM, Fortune 500), which were created by the U.S. government, have been badly hurt in the last year by the sharp decline in home prices and the rise in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures, racking up about $12 billion in losses.

On Sunday, officials stressed that both Fannie and Freddie will be open for business on Monday morning, although the firms will have undergone a dramatic facelift.

Freddie CEO Richard Syron and Fannie CEO Daniel Mudd will no longer run the agencies, while the FHFA will assume control of the boards. Regulators took care not to foist blame on the two executives, adding that they would remain with the firms to help with the transition.
Syron and Mudd will be replaced by two finance veterans charged with restoring the mortgage titans to health. Herb Allison, the former chairman and CEO of pension provider TIAA-CREF, will head Fannie Mae. Allison formerly served as president of Merrill Lynch.

David Moffett, who served as vice chairman and chief financial officer of U.S. Bancorp until early 2007 and then joined the Carlyle Group private-equity firm as a senior advisor, will take over Freddie Mac.

At the same time, dividends on both common and preferred shares will be eliminated in an effort to conserve about $2 billion annually. All of the firms' lobbying and political activities will be halted immediately and charitable activities reviewed.
In addition, the Treasury Department announced a series of moves targeted at providing relief to both housing and financial markets.

Paulson said Treasury would boost housing by purchasing mortgage-backed securities from Freddie and Fannie, as well as offering to lend money to the companies and the 12 Federal Home Loan Banks. The home loan banks advance funds to more than 8,000 member banks. (Read what Paulson said)

The Treasury, with fellow regulator FHFA, will also buy preferred stock in Fannie and Freddie to provide security to the companies' debt holders and bolster housing finance.
The government said it would initially invest $1 billion in each company's senior preferred stock but will have the right to buy up to $100 billion in each and decide thereafter how much more it will buy. In exchange, the government would get several protections, including a quarterly dividend payment and the right to own 79.9% of each company.

How we got here

Sunday's announcement brought an end months of speculation about the fate of the two firms. Shares of Fannie and Freddie, which have fallen more than 80% as of the end of Friday's session, were hammered this summer among concerns they would need to raise additional funds to cover future losses or need to be taken over by its federal regulator. Investors feared that either step would reduce or wipe out the value of current shareholders' stakes.
In mid-July, the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve announced steps in to make funds available to the firms if necessary and Congress approved the sweeping proposals later that month.

Shortly thereafter, regulators stepped up their review of Fannie and Freddie. Paulson announced in August that he had tapped Wall Street firm Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) to help him examine the firms.

Sources familiar with the matter told Fortune that Morgan Stanley had determined that both Freddie and Fannie faced "meaningful" capital issues before deciding last week that government intervention was necessary. Morgan Stanley has called a firm-wide meeting on Monday morning to explain the deal.

Following an exhaustive review, FHFA's Lockhart said Sunday that the two companies could not continue to operate without taking "significant action."
Fannie and Freddie have become virtually the only source of funding for banks and other home lenders looking to make home loans. Their ability to do so is crucial to the recovery of the battered home market and the broader U.S. economy.

The two firms buy loans, attach a guarantee, then sell securities backed by the loans' income stream. All told, they own or back $5.4 trillion worth of home debt - half the mortgage debt in the country.

Reaction to the news

The Treasury-FHFA plan, which was widely anticipated after financial markets closed on Friday, immediately drew praise from both fellow regulators and lawmakers alike.
President Bush called the move "critical" to the housing market recovery. "Americans should be confident that the actions taken today will strengthen our ability to weather the housing correction and are critical to returning the economy to stronger sustained growth in the future," he said.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who along with Paulson has led efforts to help get the U.S. housing market and the broader economy back on track, endorsed the move by Lockhart and Paulson.
"These necessary steps will help to strengthen the U.S. housing market and promote stability in our financial markets," Bernanke said in a statement.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Banking Committee, said that Paulson had "threaded the needle just right" with the plan, noting that it will likely be met with praise from other lawmakers.

Rating agency Standard & Poor's affirmed its sterling AAA rating on both Fannie Freddie on the news, adding that its outlook for the two firms is stable.

Unanswered questions

The cost of the government intervention remains unclear. Experts argue that it will depend in large part on the structure of the rescue, the direction of home prices and mortgage default rates.
Still it seems almost certain it will run into the billions and will most likely eclipse such other high-profile government bailouts including than the Federal Reserve's $29 billion backing of Bear Stearns assets when it was taken over by J.P. Morgan Chase.
Paulson said that the cost to taxpayers would largely depend on the future financial performance of Fannie and Freddie.

Another unintended yet unavoidable consequence may be the impact to the nation's banks.
Some of the nation's largest financial institutions including JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) and Sovereign Bancorp (SOV, Fortune 500) own a big chunk of the estimated $36 billion in preferred shares of Fannie and Freddie, which are at risk of being wiped out should Fannie and Freddie do end up getting a cash infusion from the Treasury Department.
Top banking regulators, including the Federal Reserve as well as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., said in a joint statement Sunday that a limited number of smaller institutions have significant preferred share holdings in Freddie and Fannie. They added they are prepared to work with these institutions to come up with plan should they need to raise capital.

CNNMoney.com senior writer Tami Luhby and Fortune editor at large Patricia Sellers contributed to this report.

Malta and US sign historic double taxation agreement

During the “historic moment” which took place yesterday when Malta and the US signed a double taxation agreement, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi announced that the Malta-US visa waiver is at an advanced stage.

Finance Minister Tonio Fenech and US Ambassador Molly Bordonaro, in the presence of the Prime Minister, signed the agreement yesterday morning – an agreement which has been long in the making.

Full article from The Malta Independent online here.

Maltese Property Market History @ EMCS Forum

The following speech was given by Mr. Frank Salt today 4th June 2008 at the EMCS Property Forum, Hilton, St. Julian's.


I will start by giving you a brief summary of the history of the Maltese property market.

We shall start in the 1960s. Malta at that time was very dependent on the income generated by the British forces, who were at that time living and working in Malta. When the Maltese Government were told that the British bases were soon to leave, a different way of earning money had to be found.

One of the ideas that came forward was the introduction of a permanent residency scheme, that took advantage of the many British that were leaving the old colonies in Africa. This scheme was very successful, as the climate in Malta was very acceptable and the taxation being offered of sixpence in the pound was very attractive.Those were the days of taking foreign clients out in coaches, and each salesperson selling over 25 properties a month.

Then there came a change in Government...

A strong socialist government led by Mr Mintoff, immediately on getting into power, threw out Nato, and started renegotiating the terms and conditions of the remaining British lease.

The resulting publicity in the foreign press was horrific, and whereas property owned by foreigners in Malta was never touched, the settlers were afraid that they would lose everything and they started to sell their properties.

There were no other foreigners to buy so the onus fell upon the Maltese, who took full advantage of the situation and started buying property, something which very few had done before. Maltese started buying the properties sold by foreigners and this started the local property market.

Examples of prices... Attard £3,500 bungalow, Monte Rosa Gardens £5,250 fully detached villas. Apartments £2,500. San Gwann. This type of market continued very successfully for 30 years with Maltese and a few foreigners a year purchasing the properties that were placed on the market.

Then came a radical change...

Properties were being designed and built for a particular luxury segment of the market. The first of these was Busietta Gardens in Madliena, today known as Madliena Village, and then came Portomaso, followed by Tigne' Point, and now Holiday Inn / Fort Cambridge Development, Pender Place, and Metropolis, plus many, many others in the pipeline. Mistra Village, Jerma Palace, Ta' Monita, The Palms, Manoel Island, Forum Hotel, Le Lapin Ta' Xbiex, White Rocks, Smart City, Qawra Point, Developments in Gozo, Chambray, Ta' Selmun Mellieha, Mgarr Bay Hotel, St Lawrence, Tower Road Sliema, No 1 Dock, Town Square... I could go on and on.

More and more luxury developments were built, are being built and are in the pipeline and planning stage to be built.

We have now created two completely different property markets.

The first is the first and second time buyers market, which is doing well and is healthy. Good quality properties are being built and well marketed and well priced. There are also plenty of properties for sale at the starting price for 1st time purchasers. Our company for example has on our registers for sale 2028 properties in Malta and Gozo between 70,000 and 116,500 Euros - Lm30,000 to Lm50,000; 2929 properties between 116,500 and 151,409 Euros - Lm50,000 to Lm65,000 and 1664 properties between 151,409 and 186,349 Euros - Lm 65,000. and Lm80,000.

Unfortunately, today the expectations of young couples are very high, and buyers and their parents need to be realistic about the real, real estate market.

Just because the parents purchased their property 30 years ago for a certain price, in a certain area and with a certain size, it doesn’t mean that their children will be able to do the same today.

There were different problems 40 years ago than there are today, but problems there were, and these had to be solved, just as the problems of today have to be solved.

When I was first married, I had to live in an area that was not to my liking, and so did a great many of my friends, but we all moved in to the properties and worked hard to improve ourselves and eventually got the property that we wanted. Really, there is very little difference today.

The luxury market is a completely different matter. It is something completely new for Malta.

We have dabbled with it in the past, but the demand for our local property market was so strong by local purchasers that we managed very successfully with the small number of foreigners who came to settle and have holiday homes in our Islands.

Things are now completely different.

We are now joining the big boys, and that means that we must compete and compete strongly with all the countries in the Mediterranean and elsewhere that can offer the same product. Compete with them to get into our country thousands of people who would settle here either permanently or as tourists, bringing into Malta much needed income, for the benefit of all.

We have to see what our advantages are and promote these through all the necessary and effective means possible. This will cost money. Big money. But it has to be done.

It is also my opinion that this process should also be helped and not hindered by Government, because the latter will be the largest beneficiary.

Of these new luxury properties, some will be sold to Maltese, but today most Maltese have property, and second properties and investments to rent, so by far the majority will be sold to either Maltese investors to resell to foreigners or to foreigners themselves.

Because of the low interest given on investments worldwide, many of these properties will be sold as a buy to let investment.

Now let me explain what I mean by Government helping and not hindering the sale of these properties. This is information from the horse’s mouth. From the industry that is at the sharp end of the property market. Information from the people who know the facts. Helping private enterprise to sell their properties is basically telling people that they are welcome and not putting obstacles in their way. Hindering the sale of properties to foreigners, is by putting obstacles in their way and making the purchase of the properties not worth while, or at best very inconvenient.

For example. It is a fact that there are thousands of properties being built or being planned that are mainly suitable for foreign purchasers. A lot of these foreign purchasers would probably want to buy to let, or live in it for 6 months and rent it out for the remainder of the year.

In Malta, three obstacles have been created by the Authorities, to make purchasing property unattractive. First is the 12% Capital gains tax on the full sale price if the property has been owned by the purchaser for longer than 5 years. This tax was created by goodness knows who, when there was a large increase in the value of property in Malta for one single year. A 25% increase in 2006. This tax of 12% was only viable if the property market continued to increase at a rate of 15% per annum ad infinitum. If this actually happened, it would be a catastrophe for the local market as we would be completely priced out of the market. The increase of 2006 couldn’t continue, and in fact the increase in prices so far this year is only1.7%.

A foreigner or Maltese buys a property for €200,000. Let us say there will be a capital increase of 5% every year for the next 5 years... Which would be good. The property in 5 years would be worth €255,000. Now after 5 years the owner wishes to sell. There was 5% stamp duty to buy and another 5% commission to sell, so if the owner sells at €255,000, he will make €32,493. profit. On the contract the Government would take 12% tax on the gross selling price of €255,000. which is €30,600.

So the owner would make €32,493. out of which the Government would take €30,600. Even if there is a smaller capital gain per annum, which could happen, or even if, God forbid, the seller makes a loss when the property is sold after 5 years, the seller still has to pay the 12% capital gains tax on the full sale price.

Now that is one heck of an incentive to purchase property on a buy to let basis. This most unfair tax has to go, and sellers after 5 years of ownership should have the choice of either 12% capital gains tax, or the 7% provisional capital gains tax. This will be fair and just.

Second. The Government doesn’t allow foreigners to rent properties unless they are in a Special Designated Area. So if a developer builds a luxury block of 20 flats, and they are not designated Special Designated area, these properties if purchased by foreigners cannot be let.

We have been trying to get Government to change their attitude, but unless they are prepared to give every luxury new development being built a Special Designation Status, they would be very difficult to sell.

Why cause problems when none need to be there? We badly need these properties to be sold, and we should not put off potential purchasers. How can we sell properties to foreigners and promote them to buy to let, if they cannot be let?

The irony is, that if a Foreign buyer from the EU comes to Malta, and declares that his business is buying and renting property, he can buy as many properties as he wants and let them all as and when he wants. Yet a normal individual wanting to purchase one property to live in it for 6 months and rent it for the remaining period, can’t, unless it is a Special Designated Area.

That just doesn’t make sense.

When The Federation of Estate Agents approached the EU Ombudsmen on the matter of EU citizens not being allowed to rent their property in Malta, their reply was that this clearly goes against the spirit and law of the EU. Protocol No6, of the accession treaty grants that Malta can maintain in force the rules on the Acquisition and holding of immovable property for secondary residence purposes by nationals of Member States who have not legally resided in Malta for at least 5 years as laid down in the Immovable Property( Acquisition by non-residents) Act.

Any changes in this particular provision would require a modification to the Treaty agreed by all Member States, including Malta, or a unilateral relaxation by Malta of it’s restrictions. Therefore the rules at issue are not contrary to Community Law.

Malta can, on its own, change the condition in the AIP permit, which restricts the use of the property, to EU members.

Third. A few months ago, when a foreigner wanted to become a permanent or temporary resident of Malta, all he had to do was to apply in Malta through one of the many competent people here who helped him very efficiently. They deposited the original documents or certified copies here, and everything moved very smoothly and efficiently.

Then someone decided that this had to be changed. The regulations now state that “every applicant for residency has to be certified by a notary in the country of Nationality”. For example, a Swede living in London has to go back to Stockholm to apply and register. A Canadian living in France, has to go to Canada to register. This makes it very difficult and inconvenient for the applicant, and is basically telling them not to come.

This is not an EU directive. An applicant who comes from a country that has no Maltese mission, can carry on applying as before here in Malta.

Government has put three totally unnecessary obstacles in the way, which will make it very difficult to sell to foreigners and to compete with other competing destinations.

How can one attract high worth individuals, when one legislates specifically against these individuals?

Why do we do this? Why do we always seem to deliberately make life difficult, and when we finally succeed, we do so in spite of and not thanks to the authorities?

We are in competition with the rest of the World for these wealthy people.

Why are we promoting Smart City, Yacht Marinas, new five star developments, and yet on the other hand we create obstacles?

Government cannot afford to put off investors, especially in such a competitive and delicate market.

It is my estimation that there are appx 10,000 very good luxury properties, either on the market, being built, awaiting MEPA permits or being planned. These have all to be sold.

If they are sold at an average of €450,000 each, then we will have €4,500,000,000 coming into the country over the period of the next 10 years. Stamp duty alone of €225,000,000.

Government will also get annual incomes coming into Malta from these foreign purchasers of appx €30,000 per property, or eventually €300,000,000 per annum. These foreigners are effectively good solid permanent tourists.

These are not pie in the sky figures.There ARE approx 10,000 properties built, being built, or planning to be built, and these HAVE to be sold. This is not theory... it is fact. We must be successful at selling the properties being built. We cannot afford to be unsuccessful... it will be a disaster.

These business figures put construction and property sales and the resulting recurrent expenditure as a major player, if not the major player in our Island’s economy, for the foreseeable future.

It benefits Government to officially help promote these luxury properties along with private enterprise, because without them the promotion would not be so effective, and the sooner these thousands of luxury properties are sold, the better for everyone.

Government actively, officially, promoting and helping the sales and occupation of these luxury properties, will not effect the other more sensitive and socially important property market, because as we have already seen, the property market in Malta and Gozo has evolved into two completely different segments.