June National Construction

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FRIDAY, JULY 17, 2015 AT 8:30 A.M. EDT
CB15-121
Raemeka Mayo or Stephen Cooper
Economic Indicators Division
(301) 763-5160
NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IN JUNE 2015
The U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development jointly announced the following new residential construction statistics for June 2015:
BUILDING PERMITS
Privately-owned housing units authorized by building permits in June were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,343,000. This is 7.4 percent (±1.2%) above the revised May rate of 1,250,000 and is 30.0 percent (±2.3%) above the June 2014 estimate of 1,033,000.
Single-family authorizations in June were at a rate of 687,000; this is 0.9 percent (±1.1%)* above the revised May figure of 681,000. Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 621,000 in June.
HOUSING STARTS
Privately-owned housing starts in June were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,174,000. This is 9.8 percent (±19.9%)* above the revised May estimate of 1,069,000 and is 26.6 percent (±19.6%) above the June 2014 rate of 927,000.
Single-family housing starts in June were at a rate of 685,000; this is 0.9 percent (±11.5%)* below the revised May figure of 691,000. The June rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 476,000.
HOUSING COMPLETIONS
Privately-owned housing completions in June were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 972,000. This is 6.7 percent (±11.8%)* below the revised May estimate of 1,042,000, but is 22.0 percent (±14.8%) above the June 2014 rate of 797,000.
Single-family housing completions in June were at a rate of 647,000; this is 0.3 percent (±9.3%)* below the revised May rate of 649,000. The June rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 317,000.
New Residential Construction data for July 2015 will be released on Tuesday, August 18, 2015, at 8:30 A.M. EDT.
Our Internet site is: http://www.census.gov/starts
To learn more about this release and the other indicators the U.S. Census Bureau publishes, join us for the Investigating Economic Indicators Webinar Series. For more information, visit www.census.gov/econ/webinar.
To receive the latest updates on the Nation's key economic indicators, download the America's Economy app for Apple and Android smartphones and tablets.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
In interpreting changes in the statistics in this release, note that month-to-month changes in seasonally adjusted statistics often show movements which may be irregular. It may take 3 months to establish an underlying trend for building permit authorizations, 6 months for total starts, and 5 months for total completions. The statistics in this release are estimated from sample surveys and are subject to sampling variability as well as nonsampling error including bias and variance from response, nonreporting, and undercoverage. Estimated relative standard errors of the most recent data are shown in the tables. Whenever a statement such as “2.5 percent (±3.2%) above” appears in the text, this indicates the range (-0.7 to +5.7 percent) in which the actual percent change is likely to have occurred. All ranges given for percent changes are 90-percent confidence intervals and account only for sampling variability. If a range does not contain zero, the change is statistically significant. If it does contain zero, the change is not statistically significant; that is, it is uncertain whether there was an increase or decrease. The same policies apply to the confidence intervals for percent changes shown in the tables. On average, the preliminary seasonally adjusted estimates of total building permits, housing starts and housing completions are revised three percent or less. Explanations of confidence intervals and sampling variability can be found on our web site listed above.
* 90% confidence interval includes zero. The Census Bureau does not have sufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the actual change is different from zero.
U.S. Census Bureau NewsJoint ReleaseU.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentU.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20233

Global ECONOMICS, HOUSING BUBBLE?

Global saving glut, monetary policy, and housing bubble: Further Evidence

It is generally agreed that housing bubble of the United States at the turn of this century led to the unprecedented global financial crisis and subsequent great recession. Among many theories which attempt to explain reasons for the real estate bubble and the following financial crisis, the hypothesis of global saving glut suggested by Ben S. Bernanke (2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011), a Distinguished Fellow at Brookings Institution and former Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, is a most influential yet controversial one. 

Bernanke (2005) raised a concept of global saving glut and initially used it to account for the U.S. current account deficit. Then he (2007a, 2007b) claimed that the global saving glut “played an important role in the decline in long-term rates”.  Although Bernanke (2009) did not directly attribute the financial crisis to the global saving glut, he considered that “to achieve more balanced and durable economic growth and to reduce the risks of financial instability, we must avoid ever-increasing and unsustainable imbalances in trade and capital flows”.
In January 2010, Bernanke delivered a keynote speech entitled “Monetary Policy and the Housing Bubble,” at the annual American Economic Association (AEA) meeting, in which he thoroughly discussed adequacy of the Fed’s monetary policy and examined relationship between monetary policy and the rise in housing prices in the first half of the decade. Based on the evidence offered, he (2010a) concluded that the “direct linkages (between monetary policy and housing bubble), at least, are weak.” Moreover, he said, “(monetary) policy during that period—though certainly accommodative (to reduce capital flows)—does not appear to have been inappropriate……What does explain the variability in house price appreciation across countries? In my previous remarks, I have pointed out that capital flows from emerging markets to industrial countries can help to explain asset (housing) price appreciation and low long-term real interest rates in the countries receiving the funds—the so-called global saving glut.”  
Bernanke (2010b) reiterated that “because large flows of capital into the United States drove down the returns available on many traditional long-term investments, such as Treasury bonds, investors' appetite for alternative investments—such as loans to finance corporate mergers or commercial real estate projects—increased greatly in the years leading up to the crisis. These securities too were packaged and sold through the shadow banking system.” Bernanke (2010c) further explained that “a key driver of this ‘uphill’ flow of capital is official reserve accumulation in the emerging market economies that exceeds private capital in-flows to these economies. The total holdings of foreign exchange reserves by selected major emerging market economies… have risen sharply since the crisis and now surpass $5 trillion…China holds about half of the total reserves of these selected economies, slightly more than $2.6 trillion.”
Moreover, Bernanke (2011) pointed out that “the failures of the U.S. financial system in allocating strong flows of capital, both domestic and foreign, helped precipitate the recent financial crisis and global recession…A significant portion of these capital inflows reflected a broader phenomenon that, in the past, I have dubbed the global saving glut. Over the past 15 years or so, for reasons on which I have elaborated in earlier remarks, many emerging market economies have run large, sustained current account surpluses and thus have become exporters of capital to the advanced economies, especially the United States. These in-flows exacerbated the U.S. current account deficit and were also a factor pushing U.S. and global longer-term interest rates below levels suggested by expected short-term rates and other macroeconomic fundamentals.”
In sum, the global saving glut hypothesis contains a cluster of logically articulated arguments: 1) monetary policy of the U.S. Federal Reserve is appropriate prior to the financial crisis during the first decade of this century; 2) the linkage between monetary policy and housing price appreciation across industrial countries including the United States is statistically insignificant and economically weak during this period; 3) the monetary policy is accommodative to cope with capital flows from reserve-rich countries, especially developing and emerging-market nations; and 4) massive accumulation of foreign reserves and consequent capital inflows from these economies to the United States leads to low long-term real rates and housing price bubble, so as to bring about the financial crisis.
However, the literature has far from reached a consensus regarding this important assumption. On the one hand, many authors offered theoretical explanations and presented some empirical evidences in favor of the global saving glut hypothesis from various respects. For example, Caballero, Farhi and Gourinchas (2008) used a formal framework to account for central role of international financial development heterogeneity on the global imbalances and low interest rates. Warnocka and Warnockd (2009) estimated that if there were absent the substantial foreign inflows into U.S. government bonds, the long-term Treasury yield would be 80 basis points higher. Dokko et al. (2009) argued that monetary policy was not a primary factor in the housing bubble and also suspect that tighter monetary policy would not have been the best response to the bubble. Bean et al. (2010) showed that low policy rates only played a modest direct role to the growth in credit and the rise in house prices in the run‐up to the crisis. Poole (2010) pointed out that the federal policies were just supporting actors for the financial crisis but the responsibility rests primarily with the private sector. Kuttner (2012) reviewed empirical studies and concluded that impact of interest rates on house prices appears to be quite modest and the estimated effects are too small to explain the housing boom in the United States and elsewhere over the past decade. Hofmann and Bogdanova (2012) suggested that monetary policy has probably been systematically accommodative globally due to “an asymmetric reaction of monetary policy to the different stages of the financial cycle in core advanced economies, and global behavioral monetary policy spillovers through resistance to 
undesired capital flows and exchange rate movements in other countries, especially in EMEs.”
On the other hand, Taylor (2007, 2009, 2010, 2012) argued that excessively low policy rates led to the housing bubble. Based on the statistical analysis, Taylor (2009) concluded that “government actions and interventions caused, prolonged, and worsened the financial crisis. They caused it by deviating from historical precedents and principles for setting interest rates, which had worked well for 20 years”. Seyfried (2010) found that loose monetary policy significantly affected housing price inflation in Ireland, Spain and the United States in the recent years. Rötheli (2010) stated that the easing monetary policy was responsible for the financial crisis and it is necessary to employ monetary policy to restrain financial boom–bust cycles in the future. Mishikin (2011) commended that “although it is far from clear that the Federal Reserve is to blame for the housing bubble, the explosion of microeconomic research, both theoretical and empirical, suggests that there is a case for monetary policy to play a role in creating credit bubbles.” Sá, Towbin and Wieladek (2011) used a panel data of the OECD countries to prove that monetary policy and capital inflows shocks had a significant and positive effect on real house prices, real credit to the private sector and real residential investment. Borio and Disyatat (2011) indicated that it was not global excess saving but credit creation, a defining feature of a monetary economy, which played a key role as main contributor to the financial crisis. Sánchez (2011) suggested that expansionary monetary policy beyond optimal rules during a long-lasting period and policies of artificially promoting credit expansion should be avoided, because they produced inadequate incentives for private sectors. McDonald and Stokes (2013) employed three alternative models and monthly data of the period 1987 to 2010 to reveal that the Federal funds rate in the U.S. had negative impacts on changes of housing prices. Based on panel data of 18 OECD countries from 1920 to 2011, Bordo, and Landon-Lane (2013) documented that loose monetary policy (either an interest rate below the target rate or a money growth rate above the target growth rate) positively affected general asset prices. This result was robust across multiple asset prices and different specifications, and it was present with other alternative explanations such as low inflation or "easy" credit controlled.
Although the above-mentioned researchers explored the issue from different perspectives, there were no decisive and convincing evidence regarding it. Therefore, more studies must be pursued to fully assess validity of the global saving glut assumption. This paper aims to provide additional evidence to verify the global saving glut hypothesis. Section I will broadly evaluate appropriation of the Fed’s monetary policy in line with the Taylor rule by using wide range of data sets. Section II will further document relationship between monetary policy and housing prices across countries. Section III will discuss linkage between the Fed’s monetary policy and foreign reserves of the East Asian export-oriented economies and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) member countries. Section VI will search documentary clues to identify if monetary policy is accommodative to internal or external factors. Finally, Section V will provide concluding remarks.

Downloads

• Global Saving Glut, Monetary Policy, and Housing Bubble: Further Evidence

Authors

• Qiao Yu
• Fan Hanwen
• Wu Xun

May Results

$300-$500K Housing Market Gains Momentum in May  Contacts: Pat Pitocchi, NABOR® Media Relations Committee Chairman, (239) 398-8650,         Marcia Albert, NABOR® Director of Marketing, (239) 597-1666 Naples, Fla. (June 19, 2015) - Historically, many local REALTORS® consider May an "in-between month" as it sits between when seasonal winter residents leave Naples for their homes up north and summer visitors arrive. Yet despite this perception, activity for May in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category of the housing market was on fire with a 30 percent increase (month over month) in overall closed sales from 181 homes in May 2014 to 236 homes in May 2015 according to a report released by the Naples Area Board of REALTORS® (NABOR®), which tracks home listings and sales within Collier County (excluding Marco Island). Many of the homes in the under $300,000 price category have moved into the $300,000-$500,000 price category (bracket creep), a phenomenon that contributes to the increase in inventory levels for single family homes in all price categories above $300,000, all of which increased by double digits. NABOR®'s May 2015 Market Report also indicated closed sales for single family homes in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category, while impressive at an increase of 25 percent from 102 single family homes in May 2014 to 127 single family homes in May 2015, was not actually the highest performing price segment. It was closed sales for single family homes in the $1M to $2M price category that experienced the highest increase - 38 percent - from 32 single family homes in May 2014 to 44 single family homes in May 2015. Interestingly, closed sales in the $300,000 to $500,000 condominium market in May were also impressive with an increase of 38 percent from 79 condominiums in the 12-months ending May 2014 to 109 condominiums in the 12-months ending May 2015. Homes in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category saw positive double-digit action in overall pending and closed sales (and inventory), yet the overall median closed price did not change. Contributing to this category's median closed pricing stabilization was a 2 percent increase for single-family homes from $380,000 in the 12-months ending May 2014 to $386,000 in the 12-months ending 2015; and a 1 percent decrease in the median closed price for condominiums in the same price category from $370,000 in the 12-months ending May 2014 to $367,000 in the 12-months ending May 2015. According to Jeff Jones, NABOR treasurer and Managing Broker at the Naples-Park Shore office of Coldwell Banker®, the May report also indicated that, "historically, the median closed price for homes above $300,000 in May was the lowest since NABOR®'s been tracking statistics [March 2008]." Effectively, the median closed price for homes above $300,000 was $520,000 in the 12-months ending May 2015 compared to $550,000 in the 12-months ending May 2009. "In all actuality, prices for homes between $300,000 and $1M are remaining relatively static," said John Steinwand, Broker and Principal at Naples Realty Services, Inc. The May Market Report supported Steinwand's observation as it indicated that the overall median closed price for homes under $300,000 increased 10 percent from $170,000 in the 12-months ending May 2014 to $187,000 in the 12-months ending May 2015; and the overall median closed price for homes $2 million and above increased 11 percent from 2,900,000 in the 12-months ending May 2014 to 3,212,000 in the 12-months ending May 2015. The NABOR® May 2015 Market Report provides comparisons of single-family home and condominium sales (via the Southwest Florida MLS), price ranges, and geographic segmentation and includes an overall market summary. The NABOR® May 2015 sales statistics are presented in chart format, including these overall (single-family and condominium) findings: Overall pending sales decreased 11 percent from 1,096 in May 2014 to 977 in May 2015. Overall closed sales remained flat for a second month with no increase or decrease reported on a 12-months ending basis. Closed sales for single family homes in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category increased 22 percent from 1,075 homes in the 12-months ending May 2014 to 1,316 homes in the 12-months ending May 2015. Closed sales for condominiums in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category increased 33 percent from 691 condominiums in the 12-months ending May 2014 to 922 condominiums in the 12-months ending May 2015 Overall median closed price increased 15 percent from $252,000 in the 12-months ending May 2014 to $289,000 in the 12-months ending May 2015. Overall inventory decreased 3 percent from 3,919 homes in May 2014 to 3,800 homes in May 2015. Inventory for single-family homes in the under $300,000 price category decreased 34 percent from 465 single-family homes in May 2014 to 307 single-family homes in May 2015. Inventory for condominiums in the $2M and above price category increased 83 percent from 30 condominiums in May 2014 to 55 condominiums in May 2015. Average days on market decreased 21 percent from 95 days in May 2014 to 75 days in May 2015.  As pointed out by Bill Coffey, Broker Manager of Amerivest Realty Naples, there is only a 1.85-month supply of homes under $300,000. "Inventory is not going down as much as it once did," noted Mike Hughes, NABOR® president, Vice President and General Manager of Downing-Frye Realty. "The inventory of properties below $300,000 has been reduced quite a bit from several years ago. This market is under tremendous pressure from multiple groups including first time home buyers, retirees and boomerang buyers. The dynamics of the Naples market in 2015 are quite different than they were in 2005. We are not seeing the rampant flipping of properties that occurred in 2005. Many of our buyers recently are end users. The financing market today is a lot tougher now than it was in 2005. Roughly 60 to 70 percent of our buyers these days are cash buyers. Also, many of the developers are requiring a larger down payment than they did back in 2005. Certainly property values have climbed in the area. With respect to the low-end part of the market, we still have many properties within Naples and there are plenty of these properties on the outskirts of the Naples area too. The bottom line is that the consumer looking for properties below $300,000 still has a wide selection of choices in Southwest Florida." Hughes also pointed to similar dynamics affecting other high demand cities like Washington, DC, where most of the affordable homes are located in suburban areas. The projections are for tremendous growth east of Collier Boulevard over the next 20+ years. This area is very desirable for the consumer who wants land and wants to stay in a more affordable budget. Homebuyers are fueling the decrease in days on market according to broker analysts, as shown by an overall decrease of 21 percent from 95 days on the market in May of 2014 to 75 days on the market in May of 2015. "It takes a lot less time to sell your house when it's priced right," remarked Brenda Fioretti, Managing Broker at Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices Florida Realty. "And if a buyer finds a home they like, they need to move quickly!" To ensure your next sale or purchase in the Naples area is a success contact a REALTOR® on Naplesarea.com." The Naples Area Board of REALTORS® (NABOR®) is an established organization (Chartered in 1949) whose members have a positive and progressive impact on the Naples Community. NABOR® is a local board of REALTORS® and real estate professionals with a legacy of nearly 60 years serving 5,000 plus members. NABOR® is a member of the Florida Realtors and the National Association of REALTORS®, which is the largest association in the United States with more than 1.3 million members and over 1,400 local board of REALTORS® nationwide. NABOR® is structured to provide programs and services to its membership through various committees and the NABOR® Board of Directors, all of whose members are non-paid volunteers.    The term REALTOR® is a registered collective membership mark which identifies a real estate prof

US Housing Starts

NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IN MAY 2015
The U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development jointly announced the following new residential construction statistics for May 2015:
BUILDING PERMITS
Privately-owned housing units authorized by building permits in May were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,275,000.  This is 11.8 percent (±1.8%) above the revised April rate of 1,140,000 and is 25.4 percent (±2.1%) above the May 2014 estimate of 1,017,000.
Single-family authorizations in May were at a rate of 683,000; this is 2.6 percent (±1.2%) above the revised April figure of 666,000.  Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 557,000 in May.
HOUSING STARTS Privately-owned housing starts in May were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,036,000.  This is 11.1 percent (±10.4%) below the revised April estimate of 1,165,000, but is 5.1 percent (±11.2%)* above the May 2014 rate of 986,000.
Single-family housing starts in May were at a rate of 680,000; this is 5.4 percent (±7.0%)* below the revised April figure of 719,000.  The May rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 349,000.
HOUSING COMPLETIONS Privately-owned housing completions in May were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,034,000.  This is 4.7 percent (±13.8%)* above the revised April estimate of 988,000 and is 14.5 percent (±14.4%) above the May 2014 rate of 903,000.
Single-family housing completions in May were at a rate of 635,000; this is 5.2 percent (±11.4%)* below the revised April rate of 670,000.  The May rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 392,000.
New Residential Construction data for June 2015 will be released on Friday, July 17, 2015, at 8:30 A.M. EDT.

April Results

Traditional Sales of Homes Highest on Record   Contacts: Pat Pitocchi, NABOR® Media Relations Committee Chairman, (239) 398-8650,         Marcia Albert, NABOR® Director of Marketing, (239) 597-1666 Naples, Fla. (May 22, 2015) - What makes a room full of real estate brokers happy? Record-breaking sales! This realization surfaced during a recent meeting where 10 NABOR® brokers reviewed the April 2015 Market Report released by the Naples Area Board of REALTORS® (NABOR®), which tracks home listings and sales within Collier County (excluding Marco Island). The report showed that traditional sales comprised 94% of all closed sales as compared to non-traditional sales (foreclosures or short sales). Carmen Vasquez, owner/broker U.S. Prime Realty, pointed out that, "April 2015 had 1,095 traditional sales. This is the highest number of traditional sales in a month since we started tracking the NABOR® numbers back in 2009." Veteran Broker and Principal at Naples Realty Services, Inc. John Steinwand concurred with Vasquez and illustrated further that, "Not only did April register the highest percentage of traditional sales since 2009, but the data revealed the highest total number of closed sales since July 2009, and the lowest level of distressed property closings in the past six years. Just 10 short sales and 57 foreclosed sales were closed this April versus 330 total distressed sales back in July of 2009." April was a remarkable month for the real estate market with notable results in pending sales (properties under contract) of condominiums in the $2 million and above price category, which saw a 58 percent increase from 12 pending sales in April 2014 to 19 pending sales in April 2015. Relative to this increase was an increase in the same category's inventory, which rose by 74 percent from 34 condos in inventory in April 2014 to 59 condos in inventory in April 2015. Further, the April 2015 Market Report indicated that overall closed sales had positive gains in all price categories above $300,000 with the $300,000 to $500,000 category capturing the highest gain - 21 percent from 1,787 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to 2,162 in the 12-months ending April 2015. The overall median closed price increased 13 percent in April from $250,000 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to $283,000 in the 12-months ending April2015. This was fueled mostly by activity on both ends of the price spectrum. Homes in the $0 to $300,000 price category experienced a 10 percent increase in median home price from $168,000 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to $185,000 in the 12-months ending April 2015, while homes in the $2 million and above price category experienced a 9 percent increase in median home price from $2,900,000 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to $3,175,000 in the 12-months ending April 2015. According to Cindy Carroll, SRA, with the real estate appraisal and consultancy firm Carroll & Carroll, Inc., "We can see some real trends when we look at the market with an historic comparison. For example, in the fall of 2013, the median closed price for single-family homes in the $0 to $300,000 price range increased 18 percent. For April 2015, there was only a 9 percent increase from $182,000 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to $199,000 in the 12-months ending April 2015." The self-correcting trend became even more apparent when Carroll compared activity from the report by neighborhood, "In July 2014, the median closed price for single-family homes in the Naples Beach area increased 36 percent. In April 2015, this area saw an 11 percent increase. I think the market played catch up between 2013 and 2014 and we are seeing a tempering of it now." The NABOR® April 2015 Market Report provides comparisons of single-family home and condominium sales (via the Southwest Florida MLS), price ranges, and geographic segmentation and includes an overall market summary. The NABOR® April 2015 sales statistics are presented in chart format, including these overall (single-family and condominium) findings: Overall pending sales decreased 2 percent from 1,231 in April 2014 to 1,210 in April 2015. Overall closed sales remained flat with no increase or decrease reported on a 12-months ending basis. Overall closed sales in the $300,000 to $500,000 price category increased 21 percent from 1,787 homes in the 12-months ending April 2014 to 2,162 homes in the 12-months ending April 2015. Overall median closed price increased 13 percent from $250,000 in the 12-months ending April 2014 to $283,000 in the 12-months ending April 2015. Overall inventory decreased 3 percent from 4,157 homes in April 2014 to 4,040 homes in April 2015. Inventory for single-family homes increased 4 percent from 2,206 single-family homes in April 2014 to 2,289 single-family homes in April 2015. Inventory for condominiums decreased 10 percent from 1,951 condominiums in April 2014 to 1,751 condominiums in April 2015. Average days on market decreased 28 percent from 99 homes in April 2014 to 71 homes in April 2015.  "Overall, April 2015 had a 5.06-month supply of inventory compared to a 34.78-month supply in April 2007," said Bill Coffey, Broker Manager of Amerivest Realty Naples. Many of the brokers who analyzed the April 2015 Market Report had recently returned from the National Association of REALTORS® Legislative Meetings & Trade Expo in Washington, DC, and concurred that sales activity in the Naples area, as also reflected in the report, is in line with the national average. However, the April 2015 Market Report by NABOR® showed an 18 percent decline in the days on market to 76 days from 93 days a year ago. Yet according to a REALTOR® Confidence Index report published by Lawrence Yun, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist with the National Association of REALTORS®, the national average in March 2015 was 52 days. When you are ready to put your home on the market, look to a REALTOR® for the experience and knowledge you need to determine whether now is the right time to sell your home and ensure your next sale or purchase in the Naples area is a success. Contact a REALTOR® on NaplesArea.com®. The Naples Area Board of REALTORS® (NABOR®) is an established organization (Chartered in 1949) whose members have a positive and progressive impact on the Naples Community. NABOR® is a local board of REALTORS® and real estate professionals with a legacy of nearly 60 years serving 5,000 plus members. NABOR® is a member of the Florida Realtors and the National Association of REALTORS®, which is the largest association in the United States with more than 1.3 million members and over 1,400 local board of REALTORS® nationwide. NABOR® is structured to provide programs and services to its membership through various committees and the NABOR® Board of Directors, all of whose members are non-paid volunteers.    The term REALTOR® is a registered collective membership mark which identifies a real estate professional who is a

US and regional existing sales stats

Single-family and Condo/Co-op Sales

Single-family home sales rose 5.5 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.59 million in March from 4.35 million in February, and are now 10.9 percent above the 4.14 million pace a year ago. The median existing single-family home price was $213,500 in March, up 8.7 percent from March 2014.

Existing condominium and co-op sales increased 11.1 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 600,000 units in March from 540,000 units in February, and are now 7.1 percent higher than March 2014 (560,000 units). The median existing condo price was $201,400 in March, which is 1.6 percent higher than a year ago.

Regional Breakdown

March existing-home sales in the Northeast increased 6.9 percent to an annual rate of 620,000, and are 1.6 percent above a year ago. The median price in the Northeast was $240,500, which is 1.6 percent below a year ago.

In the Midwest, existing-home sales jumped 10.1 percent to an annual rate of 1.20 million in March, and are now 12.1 percent above March 2014. The median price in the Midwest was $163,600, up 9.7 percent from a year ago.

Existing-home sales in the South climbed 3.8 percent to an annual rate of 2.19 million in March, and are now 11.7 percent above March 2014. The median price in the South was $187,900, up 9.3 percent from a year ago.

Existing-home sales in the West rose 6.3 percent to an annual rate of 1.18 million in March, and are now 11.3 percent above a year ago. The median price in the West was $305,000, which is 8.3 percent above March 2014.

US statistics

Sales of new single family houses in March 2015 were 481,000 at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR), down 11.4 percent from February’s revised rate but up 19.4 percent from March 2014.