re: Trump wants to cut regulations on home builders to cut costs

Most housing regulations are local/state, not federal. Need more info on this to actually understand the potential impacts.

quote:

---

Exactly. I'm in this industry and the supermajority of building codes are not federal. Floodplain regulations from the NFIP are the only thing that comes to mind immediately.

---

I know that the new energy code (IECC) is "locally mandated", but not really. The Fedgov threatened to withhold funds from states if they didn't start enforcing the newest version of the IECC, which is much more stringent than ~8 years ago. Specifically, for Louisiana, FEMA funds were going to be withheld if we didn't adopt the new code.

That's just one regulation that could be rolled back to help with housing costs, but it would be up to individual states on whether or not they wanted to roll it back. Or he could get ballsy and start withholding federal funds from states that don't ease energy code regulations.

I suspect that there are other construction regulations that the Fedgov is pressuring states to enforce. He could also ease regulations/taxes on "upstream" producers (companies that produce lumber, steel, HVAC equipment, electrical equipment, etc). The 30-40% number is unrealistic, but 5-15% is probably doable, especially for the states that agree to ease regulations that the Feds no longer care about.

quote:

---

People either get fricked by not making quite as much or people get fricked by not being able to afford a home and paying rent their whole lives

---

Owning a home has always been a big part of the "American dream". It can't be as out-of-reach for so many people as it is now. We need to lower home costs. And that's coming from someone that bought around the housing peak (though with sub 4% interest) and could be underwater if this happens.

In my opinion, the best ways to fix this:
-limits on how many single family homes investment firms can own. I'd focus almost entirely on how many existing homes/properties they can own. These firms buying up rural land and building new rental properties isn't a big deal, but buying existing homes in established neighborhoods and converting them to rentals is. This is one of my very few fiscal policies that I could be considered a "leftist" on, though I don't know of any democrat politicians calling for this (because they're all bought and paid for).
-deport the ~25 million illegals living in this country. I get that they typically pack themselves into places (like squeezing 10 in a 3 bedroom rental), but that would free up a significant amount of inventory in fairly cheap areas. Lowering costs of cheaper homes will have a "trickle up" effect and lower costs of middle and upper-middle class homes.
-ease construction regulations. As previously discussed, state/local governments need to help out here.

The worst ways to fix this:
-print money and give it to homebuyers so that they can "better afford" homes. This will help a limited number of people in terms of affordability. It WILL increase the wealth of people/firms that own multiple homes, and increase the taxes/insurance of current homeowners.

Builders price to their margins and market conditions.

If regulations are cut and the market can sustain you are not going to see builders suddenly slash their prices….they will just increase their profit and/or include more amenities in the homes to attract more buyers.

Abolishing OSHA would be a good start.