Canadian Debt In 2012: Either We'll Rein In Our Expenses, Or Someone Will Do It For Us

Credit Card

First Posted: 01/05/12 04:10 PM ET Updated: 01/06/12 09:42 AM ET

TORONTO -- Record high Canadian household debt levels will factor into how the economy shapes up in 2012, leading to a slowdown in consumer spending or further tightening of mortgage rules, leading bank economists predict.

Economists from Canada’s five big bank economists have suggested two possible outcomes of the growing household debt burden.

Neither is particularly reassuring.

Speaking after an annual panel discussion at the Economic Club of Canada Thursday, TD Bank economist Craig Alexander said there is evidence to suggest that consumers are beginning to exercise restraint, despite the bargain basement interest rates -- which most economists expect to stay in place until 2013 -- that are meant to spur consumer spending in tough times.

“At this point, they've taken on so much debt that the pace of debt growth is likely to slow,” Alexander said. “All of us agree that household debt is actually going to act as a constraint on economic growth in Canada.”

CIBC World Markets economist Avery Shenfeld echoed this sentiment.

“Canadians are starting to take matters into their own hands,” he said. “Consumer spending has become a much diminished force in driving growth.”

But predicting consumer behaviour in a prolonged low interest rate environment is at best a guess. Particularly in the area of mortgage debt, which already accounts for 70 per cent of household debt, consumers may very well opt to plunge further into the red.

If that happens, says BMO Capital Markets economist Doug Porter, house prices may very well push even higher, despite the belief of some that a significant correction is imminent.

“We have seen some moderation in Vancouver already, so that city will continue to be an outlier, but in terms of the rest of the country, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if prices continue rise this year,” he said. “Sales will level off, but I don’t think that the conditions are in place yet for even a mild correction.”

The International Monetary Fund in December cited household debt and an over-heated housing market as significant risks to the Canadian economy. In the third quarter, the household debt-to-income ratio surpassed 153 per cent -- a new high.

All of which explains why higher prices -- and debt -- would likely trigger a policy response in Ottawa, Alexander predicts.

“If we see the housing market surprise on the upside and debt growth surprise on the upside, then the government will likely take action to further tighten mortgage insurance rules,” he said.

The most probable reaction, he says, would be to drop the maximum period for a government-insured mortgage from 30 to 25 years.

“Quite frankly, if you can’t afford a mortgage at 25 years versus 30, then you probably shouldn’t be buying a house in the first place,” he said.

5 ECONOMIC LANDMINES THAT COULD IMPACT CANADA IN 2012

1. RISING HOUSEHOLD DEBT
1  of  6
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
Canada's household debt burden climbed to yet another record high in the third-quarter, prompting Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney to call it "the greatest risk to the domestic economy." At 150.8, Canada's debt-to-income ratio is now higher than in the U.S. or the U.K. Meanwhile, household net worth fell, which, as many observers have warned, has made Canadians more vulnerable to adverse economic shocks.



FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA BUSINESS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 22
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leader Newworldparty
11:51 PM on 01/09/2012
Mortgages is the biggest component of people's debt by far. This has exploded because Canada's Housing Bubble has surpassed the US bubble.

http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html
12:49 AM on 01/08/2012
I like this analogy... http://www.tomatobubble.com/id39.html

***Be aware if you follow links from this page the leanings are pro German/ Anti Semitic but if Kevin O'Leary can go to prison to find the next great business leader I feel ok using a simple way to understand the problem from that site***

Do you really think this was an accident in an environment where you could hear "NO MONEY, NO CREDIT? NO PROBLEM!" every 15-20 minutes on the radio? When credit cards are pushed on us at box stores and when we enter college by some accounts.

People need to get on top of their finances and in control of their perceptions of what is needed/wanted in order to get back some sort of control.

Seems like there's a name for a scheme with one person at the top that get's money in a trickle up fashion from a bunch of suckers at the bottom. I wised up almost the moment the money left my hands and sold my spot to somebody that wanted to get a step up the pyramid. I'm trying to do the same thing now.

If enough of us get out of the rut of being between a rock and a hard place then no amount of government/corporate manipulations will allow them to dictate whose labor market it is or indeed whose land it is.
09:05 AM on 01/06/2012
The truth is that, in an economy, it doesn't suffice to produce goods or services, these must be sold. If they can't, then the economic activity that produces them stops. So with economic growth MUST come consumer spending growth. But consumers are workers, and workers' wages have not grown as quickly as the economy. Wealth is more and more concentrated.

In order to prevent an economic collapse, the system had to support consumer spending and it did by encouraging consumer debt accumulation.Canadians have been encouraged by policies and private financial institutions to get more in debt. That's because the idea of increasing wages was apparently disgusting.

Talking only of personal responsibility is a way for those at the top of the ladder to hide their own responsibility in setting up a system that encouraged and pushed households to acquire more and more debt.

Now, they want Canadians to pay back their debts, but they still don't want to increase their wages. Not only that, but they want to cut government spending at the same time. But if the Canadian population consumes less to save more money, and the government consumes less to save more money... who is going to buy the economy's production? Seems like we are setting ourselves up for a new recession, just like the Cameron government did in the UK.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Runey
anti-religionists, converge and amass
08:51 AM on 01/06/2012
What is this walking contradiction of an article trying to convince me of?
"despite the bargain basement interest rates -- which most economists expect to stay in place until 2013 -- that are meant to spur consumer spending in tough times."

You're going to sit there and claim to decry policy to the consumers? the "so called professionals" have enacted the low interest rates, go take the issue up with them, the consumer is not to blame.

This "blame the consumer" game is getting more hollow as it echoes off the false walls these so called "professionals" have erected around us. Go take your blabbering to the professionals enacting these policies.
08:10 AM on 01/06/2012
Interest rates have to climb. No waiting. They have to start now! Encourage saving.
07:29 AM on 01/06/2012
A sane government would boost the federal deficit to compensate but don't expect sanity from this crew in Ottawa.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spinnerator
05:25 AM on 01/06/2012
Really? Economists offer a HYPOTHETICAL theory that the gov't may reduce mortgage insurance at some future point from 30 yr. coverage to only 25 yr. coverage and you extrapolate that into -curb your debt or someone else will? You people are beyond bizarre, you have to be, bar none, the shittiest 'supposed' news organization on the planet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
Bipolar-Playing life on hard mode!
04:39 AM on 01/06/2012
Here in Canada, we are doing what they did in the USA. We cut down payments, we have allowed people to buy more house than they can afford and we are using our homes as personal piggy banks with Mortgage backed lines of credit. It seems everyone I know has several credit cards as well as that line of credit backed by their home. What happens to that line of credit when the home loses 15 to 25% of its value when the bubble crashes? What happens when we return to 8%, 10% or 12% mortgage rates? How are so many of these families who bought a 350,000 to 500,000 home going to afford it when interest rates return to normal?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
Bipolar-Playing life on hard mode!
04:36 AM on 01/06/2012
I have rented most of my life. We did own a home from 2002 to 2005 but hated it. I love that any real problems I call the Landlord and She fixes it. I love not having to repair my furnace, or fix any light fixtures. If an outlet stops working, I will go ahead and fix that, but the big stuff, its all on the landlord. With homes being so overvalued, and so many having lines of credit on their homes as well as credit cards for their credit cards, its just a matter of time for our housing bubble to crash. Then, those of us who waited, well we can then buy our house.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Runey
anti-religionists, converge and amass
08:55 AM on 01/06/2012
you have a good landlord, that's not often the case. Our landlord doesn't fix anything.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mike Keohane
01:17 AM on 01/06/2012
I went to the bank machine the other day to make a deposit and the machine told me my VISA limit had been increased from $3,500.00 to $14,000.00. The machine is always looking out for my best interests because the machine wants wants me to be it's friend.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
02:17 AM on 01/06/2012
Love, honour and obey the machine.
photo
ontariogirl
Power to the People
09:25 AM on 01/06/2012
When it spits out a complimentary martini then I may trust the machine......until then.....
01:14 AM on 01/06/2012
The high debt is due to the increased cost of living. The necessities such as gas, and food are going up while wages and income are the same or eliminated such as mass lay offs and no jobs. People tend to borrow to cover the costs, and then spiral out of control. It's not the peoples' fault.
07:30 AM on 01/06/2012
Correct. They are always blamed and punished however and that their wages aren't what they were they are told is because they are losers who deserve it. Interesting that most people are losers to then. Misanthropes run things.
11:11 PM on 01/05/2012
No problem. In saskatchewan if you owe more than 1,000.00 you can declare bankruptcy! Now it is the banks and tax payers problem.! gotta love those bankruptcy laws. Oh did i mention you get to keep your house (or home quarter)! You also get to keep your best car(or best of one of each of a complete machinery line)! And if you line things up right the 2 years prior to the bankruptcy you can keep everything! Only thing you have to watch out for is income tax! Business peoples unemployment insurance or welfare check! Heck,wage earners too! The joke is on you honest,principaled people! Are you laughing? cause they are all the way to the bank!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
Bipolar-Playing life on hard mode!
04:53 AM on 01/06/2012
And what is your solution? A return to Debtors Prison? Yours is a simplistic statement. How about some facts.
Bankruptcy is a Federal law and except for Exemptions, which are set by the provinces and territories, is applicable to all provinces and territories
http://www.bankruptcycanada.com/question1.htm
Saskatchewan Bankruptcy Exemptions are:

For Non-Farmers:
Household furniture and personal effects to a value of $4,500 per person;
Tools of the trade to a value of $4,500;
A motor vehicle, if required for employment;
Equity in personal residence to a value of $32,000 ($64,000 if jointly owned) to a Maximum of $128,000 if held by four parties;
Certain life insurance policies;
RRSPs, RRIFs and DPSPs are exempt from seizure.

For Farmers:

Furniture, furnishings and appliances to a value of $10,000;
The cash equivalent of produce sufficient to provide food and fuel for heating until the next harvest;
All livestock, farm machinery and equipment, including one car or truck, necessary for the next twelve months operations;
One motor vehicle, if required for business or profession, but not in addition to the one above;
Tools and equipment to a value of $4,500 used by a farmer in his trade or profession;
Equity in personal residence to a value of $32,000 ($64,000 if jointly owned) to a maximum of $128,000 if held by four parties;
Seed grain equal to two bushels per acre of land under cultivation;
RRSPs, RRIFs and DPSPs are exempt from seizure;
certain life insurance policies.
Cash equivalent of crop
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Runey
anti-religionists, converge and amass
08:59 AM on 01/06/2012
That's the end result you get to? is that people just take advantage of bankruptcy whenever possible? That's naive.
10:49 AM on 01/07/2012
In all respect I must respond. I know personally at least two relatives,at least four friends,(one was a business associate),and various other rumoured aquaintances that declared bankruptcy! i also know of a few corporations that declared bankruptcy. How do you think a lot of corporations get ahead? Farmers and ranchers in the 1930's had a broad debt adjustment board (10 cents on the dollar) This occured again in the 1980"s (in another form). Just as examples. It does not matter what the law is on bankruptcy what matters is who your lawyer is. That is why it goes to court-to negotiate the terms of the bankruptcy. The result is not cast in stone it is negotiated! And yes people and corporations do purposely line up bankruptcies ahead of time. In our society it does not matter what the law is what matters is what you can get away with. By the way this also turns lnto generational behaviour just like welfare can. Get ready for more of it in our economy not less. Woe to the honest hard working peons. Do you speed (or drink and drive) what does the law say if caught? It does not matter what matters is who you get as a lawyer and then you negotiate in court.
06:40 PM on 01/05/2012
. Yes we do need to own the idea that each of us is responsible for a certain amount of our overall household debt. We are constantly bombarded everyday with media that extolls extravagant and privileged lifestyles. All of us have a tendency to believe the unlikely and that is that all of us can share of the 'pie of privilege and wealth. .Unfortunately that is the last thing that is likely to happen.
The big issue for household debt now is how much the average person earns which believe me is much lower than $44K a year. I know people who have no choice but to make up shortfalls with credit-these shortfalls were once non existent due to the fact that they earned much better wages . If we continue to let things slide in this country and we refuse to see the fact that the rich need to pay more this is highly unlikely to change. The average Canadian is being trodden upon by the super rich..they profit from an economy in which people lose their homes-they can buy them up for a song. Then you can rent them from them and continue to pay rent and in the end own nothing.
06:02 PM on 01/05/2012
"Quite frankly, if you can’t afford a mortgage at 25 years versus 30, then you probably shouldn’t be buying a house in the first place.”

Or maybe something should be done to bring the possibility of home ownership, and with it greater stability for individuals, families, and the economy, back within the reach of the average person.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
05:18 PM on 01/05/2012
The banks would be able to avoid default with many of their clients but offering less credit to marginal people. Furthermore if the banks were to offer better rates of return to their clients there would be less borrowing and spending. As for clients who run the risk of default who really cares. Many poeple are over spent but the banks and credit unions have allowed this to happen by provideing money based on inflated house values and low interest rates. the Central Bank and Mr. Carney keep warning people but they don't create the rules to discourage or at least make people think. If things tank who cares. For those that have money that's good for them. They can snatch up other people's loses and I'm all for that.