Knight Frank research: market liquidity affected by stamp duty changes and affordability


knight frank

Affordability and stamp duty are impacting UK property markets

The proportion of homes sold in London was lower than any other part of England and Wales last year, a Knight Frank analysis of Land Registry sales data shows.

 

In total, 3.2% of all private London residential properties were sold in 2017, which was below the average of 4.1% for England and Wales.

 

The analysis, which focuses on existing privately-owned homes, means that on a street of 100 properties, an average of just over 3 were sold in London last year.

 

The London figure marked a decline from 3.6% in 2016 while the average for England and Wales was down from 4.3% the previous year. The decline and relatively lower level of market liquidity in London suggests that affordability remains a key constraint on the property market in the capital, which is likely to explain fewer sales transitions as plans are delayed or more people decide to rent.

 

With the exception of 2009, liquidity in the London market equalled or exceeded the England and Wales average between 2001 and 2014. However, it has been lower by comparison since then.

 

“Average prices in London were 59% above the pre-financial crisis peak in February 2018, which compares to 18% in the West Midlands and -6.5% in north-east England,” said Tom Bill, head of London Residential Research at Knight Frank. “The clear message is that relatively high house prices in the capital are a contributory factor to the slower rate of sales.”

 

Property market liquidity was highest in Wales, where 4.8% of all properties transacted in 2017. Other areas included south-east England (4.2%), north-west England (4.2%), south-west England (4.4%) and the West Midlands (4.1%).

 

An analysis of London boroughs compared market liquidity in 2017 to the long-run average since 2001 and the results underline how higher rates of stamp duty have acted as an additional drag on activity.

 

No single borough saw liquidity levels in 2017 exceed their 17-year average, however some of the largest declines were in boroughs that typically contain higher-value properties, as the table below shows. Figures will also be influenced to some extent by the rate of Right-to-Buy purchases.

 

The ten boroughs that recorded the largest declines in 2017 compared to the long-run average were all in inner London: Camden, Hammersmith & Fulham, Islington, Kensington & Chelsea, Lambeth, Lewisham, Southwark, Tower Hamlets, Wandsworth, and Westminster.

 

Meanwhile, the most resilient borough was Havering, which was only 0.3 percentage points below its long-run average in 2017. The long-run average rate of liquidity for the whole of London is 4.7%, which was 1.5 percentage points above the figure of 3.2% recorded in 2017, which was the widest gap of any region.

 

The highest ratio recorded for London was 7.2% in 2002. Southwark has historically had the most liquid property market, peaking at 10.2% in 2001.

 

“Higher rates of stamp duty have clearly also played their part in curbing transactions in the capital,” said Tom.  “Add a dose of political uncertainty into the mix and the result is a residential property market that is being kept in check to some extent, despite low interest rates and high levels of employment.”

 

ENGLAND AND WALES

Region 2016 liquidity ratio 2017 liquidity ratio Average since 2001 Difference 2017 vs average since 2001
East Midlands 4.5% 4.3% 4.6% -0.2%
East of England 4.6% 4.3% 4.9% -0.6%
England & Wales * 4.3% 4.1% 4.6% -0.5%
London 3.6% 3.2% 4.7% -1.5%
North East 3.8% 3.9% 4.4% -0.5%
North West 4.2% 4.2% 4.4% -0.1%
South East 4.5% 4.2% 4.9% -0.7%
South West 4.6% 4.4% 4.7% -0.3%
West Midlands 4.1% 4.1% 4.2% -0.1%
Yorkshire and The Humber 4.1% 4.2% 4.5% -0.3%
Wales 4.6% 4.8% 4.7% n/a

* Figures apply to England only before 2016

 

LONDON BOROUGHS VS AVERAGE SINCE 2001

  2017 Average since 2001 Difference between 2017 and average since 2001 Peak Year of Peak
Barking and Dagenham 3.96% 4.99% -1.03% 7.91% 2003
Barnet 2.82% 4.07% -1.26% 6.19% 2002
Bexley 4.02% 4.63% -0.61% 6.80% 2002
Brent 2.15% 3.56% -1.41% 6.02% 2001
Bromley 3.96% 5.00% -1.04% 7.06% 2002
Camden 2.72% 4.56% -1.85% 6.80% 2002
Croydon 3.54% 4.58% -1.04% 7.06% 2002
Ealing 2.51% 4.09% -1.58% 6.37% 2002
Enfield 2.84% 4.35% -1.51% 7.03% 2002
Greenwich 3.78% 5.06% -1.29% 7.33% 2002
Hackney 3.65% 4.71% -1.06% 8.17% 2002
Hammersmith and Fulham 3.06% 5.17% -2.10% 7.76% 2002
Haringey 2.67% 4.29% -1.61% 6.86% 2001
Harrow 2.46% 3.83% -1.37% 5.94% 2002
Havering 4.06% 4.35% -0.29% 6.19% 2007
Hillingdon 3.39% 4.51% -1.11% 6.74% 2002
Hounslow 3.11% 4.36% -1.25% 6.73% 2002
Islington 2.81% 5.00% -2.19% 7.54% 2002
Kensington and Chelsea 2.60% 4.48% -1.88% 6.92% 2002
Kingston upon Thames 3.42% 4.93% -1.51% 7.34% 2002
Lambeth 3.80% 5.66% -1.87% 8.62% 2002
Lewisham 3.61% 5.37% -1.76% 8.48% 2002
London 3.25% 4.73% -1.48% 7.21% 2002
Merton 3.47% 4.71% -1.23% 6.81% 2002
Newham 2.83% 4.33% -1.50% 7.79% 2001
Redbridge 2.93% 4.31% -1.38% 6.90% 2002
Richmond upon Thames 3.55% 5.12% -1.58% 7.33% 2002
Southwark 3.60% 6.09% -2.49% 10.20% 2001
Sutton 3.95% 5.01% -1.07% 7.39% 2002
Tower Hamlets 3.31% 5.83% -2.52% 9.29% 2002
Waltham Forest 3.65% 4.81% -1.16% 7.50% 2002
Wandsworth 3.51% 5.83% -2.32% 8.69% 2002
Westminster 2.62% 4.68% -2.06% 7.91% 2002

Have any Question or Comment?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.