Posts Tagged ‘loans’


History of Daylight Savings Time

Thursday, November 3rd, 2011

In 1784 Benjamin Franklin, anonymously published a letter suggesting that Parisians economize on candles by rising earlier to use morning sunlight. His satire letter proposed taxing shutters, rationing candles, and waking the public by ringing church bells and firing cannons at sunrise. Franklin did not actually propose daylight saving time (DST) though as 18th-century Europe did not keep precise schedules at that time. However, this soon changed as rail and communication networks came to require a standardization of time unknown in Franklin’s day.

Modern DST was first proposed by the New Zealand entomologist George Vernon Hudson, whose shift-work job gave him leisure time to collect insects, and made him aware of the value of after-hours daylight. In 1895 he presented a paper to the Wellington Philosophical Society proposing a two-hour daylight-saving shift.

In 1883 the United States and Canadian railroads instituted standard time in time zones. Use of standard time gradually increased because of its obvious practical advantages for communication and travel. Standard time in time zones was not established in U.S. law though until the Act of March 19, 1918, sometimes called the Standard Time Act. At the same time the Act also instituted DST for the United States.

On August 8, 2005 former President George Bush signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005 into law. Part of the act extended daylight saving time, from the second Sunday in March to the first Sunday in November.

This Sunday, November 6th, at 2:00a.m. don’t forget to “fall back” once again, and set your clocks back 1 hour. DST can also be a great time to remember to replace the batteries in your smoke detectors to keep you and your family safe!

Photo of Philip Duncan
Philip Duncan

Executive Vice President



History of Daylight Savings Time

Thursday, November 4th, 2010

In 1784 Benjamin Franklin, anonymously published a letter suggesting that Parisians economize on candles by rising earlier to use morning sunlight. His satire letter proposed taxing shutters, rationing candles, and waking the public by ringing church bells and firing cannons at sunrise. Franklin did not actually propose daylight saving time (DST) though as 18th-century Europe did not keep precise schedules at that time. However, this soon changed as rail and communication networks came to require a standardization of time unknown in Franklin’s day.

Modern DST was first proposed by the New Zealand entomologist George Vernon Hudson, whose shift-work job gave him leisure time to collect insects, and made him aware of the value of after-hours daylight. In 1895 he presented a paper to the Wellington Philosophical Society proposing a two-hour daylight-saving shift.

In 1883 the United States and Canadian railroads instituted standard time in time zones. Use of standard time gradually increased because of its obvious practical advantages for communication and travel. Standard time in time zones was not established in U.S. law though until the Act of March 19, 1918, sometimes called the Standard Time Act. At the same time the Act also instituted DST for the United States.

On August 8, 2005 former President George Bush signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005 into law. Part of the act extended daylight saving time, from the second Sunday in March to the first Sunday in November.

This Sunday, November 7th, at 2:00a.m. don’t forget to “fall back” once again, and set your clocks back 1 hour. DST can also be a great time to remember to replace the batteries in your smoke detectors to keep you and your family safe!

Photo of Philip Duncan
Philip Duncan

Executive Vice President



15% Increase in Values on Homes Under $200,000

Wednesday, June 16th, 2010

The median price for homes in the five-county area of Sacramento, Placer, El Dorado, Nevada and Yolo increased 1% from April to May, also representing a 3% increase over the last 12 months in all price-points. Additionally, homes under $200,000 have seen their price-per-square-foot values increase 15% in the last 12 months. “This very large increase is due to an overall inventory shortage as well as record-low interest rates,” stated Michael Lyon, CEO, Lyon Real Estate. “The majority of all sales are occurring under the $300,000 threshold; however, due to significant price-reductions, we are starting to see an increase in sales in the $500,000+ upper-end market.”

TRENDGRAPHIX’s latest report shows that sales increased 6 percent during the month of May for the Tri-County region of Sacramento, Placer and El Dorado Counties. May 2010 sales were the same than May 2009 sales. Pending sales decreased by 10 percent from April to May 2010.

May 2010 inventory of 7,229 homes for sale is 10 percent lower than May 2009 inventory. This is a 53 percent decrease for the regional inventory record high of 15,302 set in August 2007.

COUNTY HIGHS AND LOWS

Sacramento County sales increased 8 percent from April to May 2010. Inventory increased 8 percent during the month of May. Pending sales decreased by 14 percent in the month of May. 55 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 39 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 6 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 2 percent during the month of May to $127.

Placer County sales increased by 5 percent and inventory increased by 1 percent during the month of May 2010. Pending sales increased by 5 percent from April to May. 4 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 51 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 45 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased by 1 percent during the month of May to $149.

El Dorado County sales remained the same from April to May, and the inventory increased by 6 percent from April to May. Pending sales have decreased 11 percent during the month of May. 18 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 50 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 32 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot decreased 1 percent during the month of May to $153.

Yolo County sales increased by 14 percent for May 2010 and the inventory increased by 5 percent. Pending sales decreased 3 percent during the month of May. 22 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 52 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 26 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 3 percent during the month of May to $163.

Nevada County sales have decreased by 15 percent during the month of May, and inventory increased 8 percent. Pending sales decreased by 29 percent. No homes sold for under $200,000; 49 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 51 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased by 4 percent during the month of May to $175.

San Joaquin County sales have decreased by 10 percent during the month of May, and inventory increased by 10 percent in May. Pending sales decreased 9 percent. 36 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 52 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 12 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 2 percent during the month of May to $103.


Tons of Pending Escrows but Closings Slow

Monday, May 10th, 2010

TRENDGRAPHIX’s latest report shows that sales decreased 12% during the month of April for the Tri-County region of Sacramento, Placer and El Dorado Counties; which is 13% lower than April 2009 sales. However, pending sales increased by 34% from March to April 2010.

“Industry experts really have no explanation as to why so many closings were pushed from April into May”, said Michael Lyon, CEO-Lyon Real Estate. “The rate of new sales continues to accelerate, but this increase is not represented in all price-points. When looking at the Months of Inventory per Price Bracket statistics, it shows that lower priced properties have too little inventory and high priced properties have too much.”

PriceMonths of Inventory based on Closed Sales
0 – $200,000                    2 months
$200,000 – $400,000        3.5 months
$400,000 – $750,000         6.5 months
$750,000 +                       20 months

April 2010 inventory of 6,802 homes for sale is 20% lower than April 2009 inventory. This represents a 56% decrease from the regional inventory record high of 15,302 set in August 2007.

COUNTY HIGHS AND LOWS

Sacramento County sales decreased 15 percent from March to April 2010. Inventory increased 2 percent during the month of April. Pending sales increased by 34 percent in the month of April. 56 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 39 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 5 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 3 percent during the month of April to $125.

Placer County sales decreased by 12 percent and inventory increased by 7 percent during the month of April 2010. Pending sales increased by 30 percent from March to April. 5 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 47 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 48 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased by 1 percent during the month of April to $148.

El Dorado County showed an 8 percent increase in sales from March to April, and the inventory increased by 8 percent from March to April. Pending sales have increased 31 percent during the month of April. 21 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 48 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 31 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 1 percent during the month of April to $154.

Yolo County sales decreased by 1 percent for April 2010 and the inventory increased by 10 percent. Pending sales increased 18 percent during the month of April. 35 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 48 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 17 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 3 percent during the month of April to $160.

Nevada County sales have decreased by 5 percent during the month of April, and inventory increased 7 percent. Pending sales increased by 77 percent. 8 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 49 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 43 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot decreased by 7 percent during the month of April to $170.

San Joaquin County sales have decreased by 10 percent during the month of April, and inventory remained at 1766 in April. Pending sales increased 22 percent. 38 percent of the homes sold for under $200,000; 51 percent of the homes sold for between $200,000 and $400,000; and 11 percent of the homes sold for over $400,000. The average price per square foot increased 2 percent during the month of April to $101.


Questions, Questions, Questions…

Monday, April 5th, 2010

Below are questions often asked of me and answers to them, as found on the IRS web site. As always, since I am not a tax advisor, I will not be held liable to the accuracy of the below information, and I strongly encourage you to seek council from a tax professional.

Q. Does previously inheriting a home and living in it automatically disqualify me as a first-time homebuyer if I buy a different home on or before Nov. 6, 2009?

A. Yes, an ownership interest in a prior principal residence would bar you from being considered a first-time homebuyer. As long as you owned and used the prior home as your principal residence, you are not a first-time homebuyer. There is no exception for taxpayers who did not buy their prior residences. (11/19/09)

Q. If I claim the first-time homebuyer credit in 2009 and stop using the property as my main home before the 36 month period expires after I purchase, how is the credit repaid and how long would I have to repay it?

A. If, within 36 months of the date of purchase, the property is no longer used as your principal residence, you are required to repay the credit. Repayment of the full amount of the credit is due at the time the income tax return for the year the home ceased to be your principal residence is due. The full amount of the credit is reflected as additional tax on that year’s tax return. Form 5405 and its instructions will be revised for tax year 2009 to include information about repayment of the credit. (05/06/09)

Q. If a person does not actually make the payments on a home that’s their principal residence, but the deed and mortgage documents are in their name, can they be considered a first-time homebuyer?

A. Yes. If a taxpayer purchases a home to be used as a principal residence from an unrelated person and has not owned a home within the previous 36 months, the taxpayer is eligible for the first-time homebuyer credit regardless of who makes the mortgage payment. (05/06/09

For more information please visit the IRS website.


Ingrid Pierson
(530) 885-1545
ipierson@teamvitek.com


We'll walk you through each step of the loan process.
Contact us today to get started!