• List

• Facebook
• X

In the real estate market, interim payments and relocation cost loans are directly linked to housing supply costs. These loans serve as a crucial means to cover the minimum project costs necessary for demolishing homes and initiating construction. According to the governments 10·15 Housing Market Stabilization Measures, a reduction in interim payment loans could hinder financing for construction companies, significantly worsening their financial health. This situation could lead to intensified conflict with associations and result in successful applicants for housing contracts abandoning their agreements, causing considerable chaos in the subscription market. Critics argue that the governments dual objectives of increasing supply to stabilize housing prices while imposing loan regulations to curb speculation are misaligned.

As reported on the 24th, businesses preparing for general sales in 12 regulated areas of Seoul and Gyeonggi Province are re-evaluating their plans for recruiting residents due to the impact of the governments 10·15 Measures. The limit on interim payment loans has been reduced from the previous loan-to-value ratio (LTV) of 60% to 40%. Initially, it was understood that interim payments would be exempt from this change, applying the LTV restriction only to the final payment. This interpretation stemmed from a statement by financial authorities indicating that interim payment and relocation cost loans were not subject to regulation. However, a representative from the Financial Services Commission clarified that the limits on interim payments of 40 million won (for properties valued between 150 million to 250 million won) and 20 million won (for properties above 250 million won) would still apply, while the LTV regulation remains unchanged.

In the pre-sale system structured with 10% for the down payment, 60% for interim payments, and 30% for the final payment, interim payments are a vital means of funding construction costs. This system allows for collective lending, ensuring that cash flow is maintained regardless of the individual financing capabilities of contract signers, serving as a catalyst for project funding. As such, the tightening of loan regulations poses significant challenges not only for construction firms but also for the overall stability of the housing market, raising concerns among industry stakeholders about the potential repercussions on supply and pricing dynamics.

Like

0

Upvote

0