Pub Date : 2023-06-15DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2218840
Vincent Fusaro, R. Coley, Naoka Carey
Abstract Forty-four state governments enacted eviction moratoria freezing or tempering the eviction process during the COVID-19 pandemic in an effort to forestall evictions. Combining data on state and federal eviction policies with data on eviction filings at the census tract level in 27 municipal areas from very late December 2019 through March 2022, we estimated correlated random effects Poisson models to examine effects of the moratoria. We found that state eviction moratoria were associated with a 32% lower rate of filings for a given tract, with moratoria targeting earlier stages of the eviction process having a particularly pronounced effect. We further found that state and federal moratoria were synergistic: eviction filings were lowest when both a strong state moratorium and a federal moratorium were in effect. Finally, state moratoria tempered the relationships between risk factors such as community poverty or racial and ethnic demographic composition and eviction filings. Results suggest that state eviction moratoria, particularly those targeting earlier stages of the eviction process, were successful in meeting their primary goal of decreasing eviction risks during the pandemic.
{"title":"Shelter From the Storm: State Eviction Moratoria, Implementation Context, and Eviction Filings During the First Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"Vincent Fusaro, R. Coley, Naoka Carey","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2218840","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2218840","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Forty-four state governments enacted eviction moratoria freezing or tempering the eviction process during the COVID-19 pandemic in an effort to forestall evictions. Combining data on state and federal eviction policies with data on eviction filings at the census tract level in 27 municipal areas from very late December 2019 through March 2022, we estimated correlated random effects Poisson models to examine effects of the moratoria. We found that state eviction moratoria were associated with a 32% lower rate of filings for a given tract, with moratoria targeting earlier stages of the eviction process having a particularly pronounced effect. We further found that state and federal moratoria were synergistic: eviction filings were lowest when both a strong state moratorium and a federal moratorium were in effect. Finally, state moratoria tempered the relationships between risk factors such as community poverty or racial and ethnic demographic composition and eviction filings. Results suggest that state eviction moratoria, particularly those targeting earlier stages of the eviction process, were successful in meeting their primary goal of decreasing eviction risks during the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47240526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2212662
Henry Gomory, D. Massey, James R. Hendrickson, Matthew Desmond
Abstract Eviction is a common and consequential event in the lives of tenants and is shaped by the legal environments in which it takes place. In this study, we show that eviction filing fees, or the amounts of money it costs landlords to begin formal evictions, have a large effect on eviction practices. Specifically, fees that are higher by $76 (one standard deviation) lead to lower eviction filing rates by 1.71 percentage points (0.26 standard deviations) and lower eviction judgment rates by 0.49 percentage points (0.19 standard deviation). Filing fees affect not only the rate but also the purpose of filing, as lower fees make landlords more likely to file serially against the same tenants as a form of rent collection. Each of these effects appears to be disproportionately large in majority-Black tracts, suggesting that low filing fees have disparate impacts on Black renters. These findings contribute to our understanding of the legal basis of housing insecurity and the racialization of eviction practices in the United States.
{"title":"The Racially Disparate Influence of Filing Fees on Eviction Rates","authors":"Henry Gomory, D. Massey, James R. Hendrickson, Matthew Desmond","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2212662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2212662","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Eviction is a common and consequential event in the lives of tenants and is shaped by the legal environments in which it takes place. In this study, we show that eviction filing fees, or the amounts of money it costs landlords to begin formal evictions, have a large effect on eviction practices. Specifically, fees that are higher by $76 (one standard deviation) lead to lower eviction filing rates by 1.71 percentage points (0.26 standard deviations) and lower eviction judgment rates by 0.49 percentage points (0.19 standard deviation). Filing fees affect not only the rate but also the purpose of filing, as lower fees make landlords more likely to file serially against the same tenants as a form of rent collection. Each of these effects appears to be disproportionately large in majority-Black tracts, suggesting that low filing fees have disparate impacts on Black renters. These findings contribute to our understanding of the legal basis of housing insecurity and the racialization of eviction practices in the United States.","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42734721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-24DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2210560
Nathaniel Decker
Abstract Low-cost but unsubsidized one- to four-unit rental properties provide a critical source of housing for millions of low- and moderate-income renters. These properties are disproportionately in high-poverty neighborhoods and, until recently, studies of these low-end small rental properties (SRPs) primarily focused on their financial viability. Scholars found that, in general, these properties were marginally profitable at best and carried serious financial risks. Recently, however, studies have found that low-end SRPs may be as profitable as or even more profitable than properties in lower-poverty neighborhoods, and have suggested that these profits are driven by exploitative management. I surveyed the owners and managers of SRPs to understand whether low-end properties were more likely to be profitable and whether the owners who did achieve profits at the low end used “milking” strategies. I found that SRPs in high-poverty neighborhoods are about as likely to be profitable as the rest of the market, but are also financially riskier. I found no compelling evidence of a link between profit and more exploitative management practices at the low end of the market. These findings call for a change in policymakers’ understanding of profit and exploitative management among low-end SRPs.
{"title":"The Prevalence, Profitability, and Risks of Milking Among Low-End Small Rental Properties","authors":"Nathaniel Decker","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2210560","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2210560","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Low-cost but unsubsidized one- to four-unit rental properties provide a critical source of housing for millions of low- and moderate-income renters. These properties are disproportionately in high-poverty neighborhoods and, until recently, studies of these low-end small rental properties (SRPs) primarily focused on their financial viability. Scholars found that, in general, these properties were marginally profitable at best and carried serious financial risks. Recently, however, studies have found that low-end SRPs may be as profitable as or even more profitable than properties in lower-poverty neighborhoods, and have suggested that these profits are driven by exploitative management. I surveyed the owners and managers of SRPs to understand whether low-end properties were more likely to be profitable and whether the owners who did achieve profits at the low end used “milking” strategies. I found that SRPs in high-poverty neighborhoods are about as likely to be profitable as the rest of the market, but are also financially riskier. I found no compelling evidence of a link between profit and more exploitative management practices at the low end of the market. These findings call for a change in policymakers’ understanding of profit and exploitative management among low-end SRPs.","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49537355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-25DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2197431
Jaclene Begley, Mark Palim
Housing affordability is a key policy concern and an important component of sustainable homeownership. It follows that reducing housing costs without increasing the risk of mortgage default is a critical approach to sustaining homeownership for current and future generations. In this paper, we break down the different elements of housing costs, specifically focusing on the nuances of mortgage costs. We use internal Fannie Mae data to establish a pro forma of housing costs for different owner-occupant borrower profiles over a typical ownership period (all homebuyers, first-time homebuyers [FTHBs], and low-income first-time homebuyers [LI FTHBs]). We find that the biggest contributors to overall housing costs are transactions costs, ongoing utility expenses, property taxes, home improvement costs, and the component of the mortgage interest rate that compensates investors for the time value of money, with utilities and home improvement costs particularly conspicuous for FTHBs and LI FTHBs. The guaranty fees charged by the government-sponsored enterprises and private mortgage insurance are estimated to be less than 6% of the cost of homeownership. These general patterns hold across racial and ethnic groups, although mortgage insurance alone is roughly 6% of total costs for Black and Hispanic FTHBs and LI FTHBs compared to 2% for white FTHBs and LI FTHBs. Overall, our findings suggest that nonmortgage housing costs are key areas that policymakers should focus on to reduce housing costs and foster sustained homeownership rates.
{"title":"Mortgage Costs as a Share of Housing Costs—Placing the Cost of Credit in Broader Context","authors":"Jaclene Begley, Mark Palim","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2197431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2197431","url":null,"abstract":"Housing affordability is a key policy concern and an important component of sustainable homeownership. It follows that reducing housing costs without increasing the risk of mortgage default is a critical approach to sustaining homeownership for current and future generations. In this paper, we break down the different elements of housing costs, specifically focusing on the nuances of mortgage costs. We use internal Fannie Mae data to establish a pro forma of housing costs for different owner-occupant borrower profiles over a typical ownership period (all homebuyers, first-time homebuyers [FTHBs], and low-income first-time homebuyers [LI FTHBs]). We find that the biggest contributors to overall housing costs are transactions costs, ongoing utility expenses, property taxes, home improvement costs, and the component of the mortgage interest rate that compensates investors for the time value of money, with utilities and home improvement costs particularly conspicuous for FTHBs and LI FTHBs. The guaranty fees charged by the government-sponsored enterprises and private mortgage insurance are estimated to be less than 6% of the cost of homeownership. These general patterns hold across racial and ethnic groups, although mortgage insurance alone is roughly 6% of total costs for Black and Hispanic FTHBs and LI FTHBs compared to 2% for white FTHBs and LI FTHBs. Overall, our findings suggest that nonmortgage housing costs are key areas that policymakers should focus on to reduce housing costs and foster sustained homeownership rates.","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":"131 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135068180","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-31DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2186749
Dan Treglia, Thomas Byrne, Vijaya Tamla Rai
{"title":"Quantifying the Impact of Evictions and Eviction Filings on Homelessness Rates in the United States","authors":"Dan Treglia, Thomas Byrne, Vijaya Tamla Rai","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2186749","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2186749","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49645209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-20DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2186750
Salim Furth, Mary E. Webster
Abstract The city of Minneapolis recently changed its zoning to allow two- and three-family houses in formerly single-family zones, in part with the goal of furthering racial integration. To test whether this policy approach holds promise, we assemble digital zoning data covering the Minneapolis–St. Paul metro area and quantify the relationship between different types of residential zoning and racial and ethnic shares of neighborhood populations. Controlling for neighborhood location, we find that a neighborhood zoned for middle housing, such as Minneapolis’ triplexes, has a non-White population share that is 14 percentage points higher than that of a single-family zoned neighborhood. A neighborhood zoned for multifamily housing has a non-White population share 21 percentage points higher. This is consistent with the argument that upzoning single-family zones to allow middle and multifamily housing can promote racial integration. Our method can be easily replicated in other regions as data become available.
{"title":"Single-Family Zoning and Race: Evidence From the Twin Cities","authors":"Salim Furth, Mary E. Webster","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2023.2186750","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2186750","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The city of Minneapolis recently changed its zoning to allow two- and three-family houses in formerly single-family zones, in part with the goal of furthering racial integration. To test whether this policy approach holds promise, we assemble digital zoning data covering the Minneapolis–St. Paul metro area and quantify the relationship between different types of residential zoning and racial and ethnic shares of neighborhood populations. Controlling for neighborhood location, we find that a neighborhood zoned for middle housing, such as Minneapolis’ triplexes, has a non-White population share that is 14 percentage points higher than that of a single-family zoned neighborhood. A neighborhood zoned for multifamily housing has a non-White population share 21 percentage points higher. This is consistent with the argument that upzoning single-family zones to allow middle and multifamily housing can promote racial integration. Our method can be easily replicated in other regions as data become available.","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":"33 1","pages":"821 - 843"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46018903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：