by Calculated Risk on 9/01/2009 01:14:00 PM

To calculate the cost of a tax credit per additional unit sold, we need to sum up the total cost of the credit - as an example $2.877 billion for Cash-for-Clunkers according to the Dept. of Transportation - and then divide by the estimated increase in sales because of the credit.

Remember some cars or houses would have been sold anyway (even though they still receive the tax credit), but it is the additional sales that matter. That was the purpose of the tax credit! (update: Shnaps notes that the auto credit had an additional benefit of better mileage)

We have two examples today.

First, for autos, if sales in August had been about the same as June (pre-tax credit), there would have been 850 thousand light vehicles sold (NSA). This is about a 9.7 million SAAR.

Next we add in the tax credit: Although the DOT reported close to 700 thousand car sales associated with the Cash-for-Clunkers program, probably about 550 thousand were in August. If these were all additional sales, then the total sales (NSA) for August would be about 1.4 million, or almost 16 million SAAR.

If Edmonds.com is correct, and total sales were 1.17 million (NSA) in August, then the tax credit only generated about 320 thousand extra sales. Of course some regular car buyers might have put off a purchase to avoid the rush in August, so this isn't perfect, but instead of costing taxpayers $4,170 per car (as announced by DOT), the cost to taxpayers per additional car sold was close to $7,200.

The numbers are much worse for the first-time home buyer tax credit. The NAR reported this morning:

NAR estimates that about 1.8 to 2.0 million first-time buyers will take advantage of the $8,000 tax credit this year, with approximately 350,000 additional sales that would not have taken place without the credit.

I believe the NAR underestimates first-time home buyers, especially considering the definition for the tax credit is anyone who hasn't owned a home in three years - not really a "first-time" buyer. I also think the NAR is overestimating the number of additional buyers.

But using their numbers ...

With 1.9 million first-time buyers, the total cost of the tax credit will be $15.2 billion. Divide $15.2 billion by 350 thousand, and the program cost $43.4 thousand per additional buyer. The actual number could be much higher if there were fewer additional first-time buyers than the NAR's estimate - or if the overall cost is higher (more buyers claiming tax credit).

This is the actual cost per additional home sold. And since buyer interest will fade (like with the Clunkers program), the cost per additional house will increase sharply if the program is extended.

by Calculated Risk on 9/01/2009 12:08:00 PM

From MarketWatch: Ford U.S. August sales rise 17%

Ford Motor Co. said Tuesday that total U.S. sales in August rose 17% to 182,149 vehicles from 155,690 last year.

From MarketWatch: Volkswagen U.S. August sales rise 11.4%

From MarketWatch: Daimler U.S. August sales fall 10.5%

Update: MarketWatch: Chrysler U.S. August sales decline 15%

Toyota, GM and more to come.

Once all the reports are released, I'll post a graph of the estimated total August sales (SAAR: seasonally adjusted annual rate). The range of estimates for August have been very wide because of the Clunker program - from a low of 13 million SAAR to a high of about 16 million SAAR.

by Calculated Risk on 9/01/2009 10:29:00 AM

Two of the key stories in 2009 are the probable bottom for residential construction spending, and the collapse in private non-residential construction. Both stories are still developing ... but this report shows further evidence of both stories.

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

The first graph shows private residential and nonresidential construction spending since 1993. Note: nominal dollars, not inflation adjusted.

Residential construction spending increased in July, and nonresidential spending continued to decline.

Private residential construction spending is now 63.7% below the peak of early 2006.

Private non-residential construction spending is still only 9.7% below the peak of last September.

The second graph shows the year-over-year change for private residential and nonresidential construction spending.

Nonresidential spending is off 8.3% on a year-over-year basis, and will turn strongly negative as projects are completed. Residential construction spending is still declining YoY, although the negative YoY change will get smaller going forward.

From the Census Bureau: July 2009 Construction at $958 Billion Annual Rate

by Calculated Risk on 9/01/2009 10:00:00 AM

From the NAR: Pending Home Sales on a Record Roll

The Pending Home Sales Index, a forward-looking indicator based on contracts signed in July, increased 3.2 percent to 97.6 from a reading of 94.6 in June, and is 12.0 percent higher than July 2008 when it was 87.1. The index is at the highest level since June 2007 when it was 100.7.
...
NAR estimates that about 1.8 to 2.0 million first-time buyers will take advantage of the $8,000 tax credit this year, with approximately 350,000 additional sales that would not have taken place without the credit.
emphasis added

The increase in pending sales has been mostly from lower priced homes with demand from first time home buyers (taking advantage of the tax credit) and investors.

And look at the cost of the tax credit! If NAR is close to being correct, 2 million buyers will claim the tax credt - times $8,000 - is $16 billion. But this only resulted in "approximately 350,000 additional sales".

So this tax credit cost taxpayers about $45,000 per each additional home sold. Not very effective ... especially considering most of these are lower priced homes.

by Calculated Risk on 9/01/2009 08:50:00 AM

In my weekly posts on hotel occupancy and RevPAR (Revenue per available room), I've been noting:

Earlier this year business travel was off much more than leisure travel. So it was expected that the summer months would not be as weak as earlier in the year. September - after Labor Day (Sept 7th) - will be the real test for business travel, and for the hotel industry.

Here is an excerpt from some Morgan Stanley research released last week on hotels making the same point: A False Bottom in RevPAR? (no link).

"[W]e are in an operating environment in which a) group demand is significantly worse than transient demand, and b) leisure demand is holding up better than the other segments. Due to the seasonality of the lodging demand mix, we believe that July and August RevPAR improvement is partially a mirage created by a shift in the demand mix away from groups and toward leisure. As the demand mix shifts back away from leisure and toward group in September and October, we expect RevPAR trends to deteriorate from this false bottom. ... we expect ... RevPAR declines to be close to 20% for [September and October].
emphasis added

Last week, from HotelNewsNow.com: STR reports US performance for week ending 22 August 2009

Revenue per available room for the week decreased 16.7 percent to finish at US$57.84.

With the expected seasonal decline in leisure travel, I wouldn't be surprised to see RevPAR off 20% in September and October - and that will put additional pressure on hotels.