5 Comments

1. Amy Webb February 27, 2009 at 09:23

   I’d like to see some sort of cap or restriction on the value of personal property which can be offered for sale with a home. Obviously the Merc is a gimmick and chances are strong it will not convey in the end, but we are in the business of selling real estate, not automobiles, tractors or housefuls of furniture.The added value of the car should/will not be included in the recorded sale price of the home in the MLS ( I hope) and the lender will not allow it’s value to be folded into the mortgage. I like to see a real list price on a house, not an inflated price for a house plus a hottub plus a 60″ flat screen, a john deere and a mercedes. Let’s stick to the business we know and keep the market data reliable.

   Reply ↓
2. Pavel February 27, 2009 at 11:11

   Amy, the technology group at CAAR submitted a request to Solid Earth to add a field called “seller subsidy” which will be a mandatory number field (if the subsidy is”‘0″ then “0” will be entered). This should result in more accurately portrayed sales prices in MLS. The request was submitted last year (in 2008) and the last update was that it is waiting processing at Solid Earth. I realize the “seller subsidy” number will not account for the personal property which is sometimes included with a sale of a real property, but I believe it’s a step in the right direction.

   Reply ↓
3. Amy Webb February 27, 2009 at 11:31

   Thanks Pavel. I don’t know why the excessive personal property shouldn’t be included in that field. It works for me. Any thing the seller provides the Buyer in the form of incentives, transfers or underwriting of expense should be in there so we get a true picture of what the home sold for…Further to that, I just don’t think we should be in the car sales business. Let’s stick to what we know. Put a real price on the home and park the merc. in the driveway with a for sale sign on it. I can see how special furnishings or lawn equipment or even an elaborate built in home theater system might, in some instances, rationally convey with a home, but a car…come on.

   Reply ↓
4. Anslem Gentle February 27, 2009 at 15:13

   Um…..Maybe I am missing something, but what are you guys talking about? No article is showing up.

   Reply ↓
5. Serious Buyer February 28, 2009 at 12:16

   You might consider how these non-real property “incentives” are treated by the IRS and mortgage lender — my guess is not well.

   The IRS and other government tax authorities treat barters as sales (or income) just as they treat cash transactions. i.e., sales and use taxes apply

   Reply ↓