This chart shows the number of bank owned/REO properties and short sales in all areas of the RMLS™ system during the first quarter of 2013.

Below are links to additional charts for some of our larger areas.
• Portland Metro Distressed Properties (1st Quarter 2013)
• Clark County, WA Distressed Properties (1st Quarter 2013)
• Lane County, OR Distressed Properties (1st Quarter 2013)
• Douglas County, OR Distressed Properties (1st Quarter 2013)
• Coos County, OR Distressed Properties (1st Quarter 2013)

Here are some additional facts about distressed residential properties in the first quarter of 2013:

All areas when comparing percentage share of the market, first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012:
• When comparing the first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 6.1% (15.3% v. 21.4%).
• In a comparison of the first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales increased by 0.9% (24.5% v. 23.6%).
• Short sales comprised 9.2% of new listings and 11.4% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, down 2.1% and down 0.5% from the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 6.1% of new listings and 13.1% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, down 4.0% and up 1.4% from the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.

Portland Metro when comparing percentage share of the market, first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012:
• When comparing the first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 7.2% (13.9% v. 21.1%).
• In a comparison of first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 0.6% (22.2% v. 22.8%).
• Short sales comprised 8.7% of new listings and 11.2% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, down 3.3% and 1.1% from the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 5.2% of new listings and 11.0% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, down 3.9% and up 0.5% from the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.

Clark County when comparing percentage share of the market, first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012:
• When comparing the first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 3.0% (23.7% v. 26.7%).
• In a comparison of first quarter 2013 to fourth quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales increased by 1.8% (30.6% v. 28.8%).
• Short sales comprised 14.7% of new listings and 18.7% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, down 3.1% for new listings and up 0.1% for sales when compared to the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 9.0% of new listings and 11.9% of sales in the first quarter of 2013, up 0.1% and 1.7% from the fourth quarter of 2012, respectively.

If you’d like more information or percentages of distressed residential sales in other areas not represented by our charts, please contact us at communications@rmls.com.

This chart shows the number of bank owned properties and short sales in all areas of the RMLS™ system during the fourth quarter of 2012.

Below are links to additional charts for some of our larger areas.
• Portland Metro Distressed Properties (4th Quarter 2012)
• Clark County, WA Distressed Properties (4th Quarter 2012)
• Lane County, OR Distressed Properties (4th Quarter 2012)
• Douglas County, OR Distressed Properties (4th Quarter 2012)
• Coos County, OR Distressed Properties (4th Quarter 2012)

Here are some additional facts about distressed residential properties in the fourth quarter of 2012:

All areas when comparing percentage share of the market, fourth quarter 2012 to third quarter 2012:
• When comparing the fourth quarter of 2012 to the third quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings increased by 3.2% (21.4% v. 18.2%).
• In a comparison of the fourth quarter of 2012 to the third quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 1.2% (23.6% v. 24.8%).
• Short sales comprised 11.3% of new listings and 11.9% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up 1.5% and down .3% from the third quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 10.1% of new listings and 11.7% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up 1.7% and down .9% from the third quarter of 2012, respectively.

Portland Metro when comparing percentage share of the market, fourth quarter 2012 to third quarter 2012:
• When comparing the fourth quarter of 2012 to the third quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings increased by 2.6% (21.1% v. 18.5%).
• In a comparison of fourth quarter 2012 to third quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 1.4% (22.8% v. 24.2%).
• Short sales comprised 12.0% of new listings and 12.3% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up 1.8% and down .2% from the third quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 9.1% of new listings and 10.5% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up .8% and down 1.2% from the third quarter of 2012, respectively.

Clark County when comparing percentage share of the market, fourth quarter 2012 to third quarter 2012:
• When comparing the fourth quarter of 2012 to the third quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings increased by 2.1% (26.7% v. 24.6%).
• In a comparison of fourth quarter 2012 to third quarter 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 1.0% (28.8% v. 29.8%).
• Short sales comprised 17.8% of new listings and 18.6% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up .6% for new listings and down 1.5% for sales when compared to the third quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 8.9% of new listings and 10.2% of sales in the fourth quarter of 2012, up 1.5% and .5% from the third quarter of 2012, respectively.

If you’d like more information or percentages of distressed residential sales in other areas not represented by our charts, please contact us at communications@rmls.com.

This chart shows the number of bank owned properties and short sales in all areas of the RMLS™ system during the third quarter of 2012.

Below are links to additional charts for some of our larger areas.
• Portland Metro Distressed Properties (3rd Quarter 2012)
• Clark County, WA Distressed Properties (3rd Quarter 2012)
• Lane County, OR Distressed Properties (3rd Quarter 2012)
• Douglas County, OR Distressed Properties (3rd Quarter 2012)
• Coos County, OR Distressed Properties (3rd Quarter 2012)

Here are some additional facts about distressed residential properties in the third quarter of 2012:

All areas when comparing percentage share of the market, third quarter 2012 to second quarter 2012:
• When comparing the third quarter of 2012 to the second quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by .6% (18.2% v. 18.8%).
• In a comparison of the third quarter of 2012 to the second quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 5.3% (24.8% v. 30.1%).
• Short sales comprised 9.8% of new listings and 12.2% of sales in the third quarter of 2012, down .1% and up .5% from the second quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 8.4% of new listings and 12.6% of sales in the third quarter of 2012, down .5% and 5.8% from the second quarter of 2012, respectively.

Portland Metro when comparing percentage share of the market, third quarter 2012 to second quarter 2012:
• When comparing the third quarter of 2012 to the second quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 1.4% (18.5% v. 19.9%).
• In a comparison of 3Q 2012 to 2Q, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 5.3% (24.2% v. 29.5%).
• Short sales comprised 10.2% of new listings and 12.5% of sales in 3Q 2012, down .3% and up 1.1% from 2Q 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 8.3% of new listings and 11.7% of sales in 3Q 2012, down 1% and 6.4% from 2Q 2012, respectively.

Clark County when comparing percentage share of the market, third quarter 2012 to second quarter 2012:
• When comparing the third quarter of 2012 to the second quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by .4% (24.6% v. 25.0%).
• In a comparison of 3Q 2012 to 2Q 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 5.3% (29.7% v. 35%).
• Short sales comprised 17.2% of new listings and 20.1% of sales in the third quarter of 2012, down .1% for new listings and down .3% for sales when compared to the second quarter of 2012, respectively.
• Bank owned/REO properties comprised 7.4% of new listings and 9.7% of sales in the third quarter of 2012, down .4% and 4.9% from the second quarter of 2012, respectively.

If you’d like more information or percentages of distressed residential sales in other areas not represented by our charts, please contact us at communications@rmls.com.

This chart shows the number of Bank Owned and Short Sales in all areas of the RMLS™ system during the second quarter of 2012. To download or print the chart, click here.

Below are links to additional charts for some of our larger areas*:
Portland Metro
Clark County, WA
Lane County, OR
Douglas County, OR

*If you want information on percentages of distressed residential sales in other areas not represented by our charts, please contact us at communications@rmls.com.

Here are some additional facts about distressed residential properties in the second quarter of 2012:

All Areas when comparing percentage share of the market 2nd quarter of 2012 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 10.1% (18.8% v. 28.9%).
• In a comparison of the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 8.8% (30.1% v. 38.9%).
• Short Sales comprised 9.9% of new listings and 11.7% of sales in the second quarter of 2012, down 5.1% and 1.3% from the first quarter 2012, respectively.
• Bank Owned/REO properties comprised 8.9% of new listings and 18.4% of sales in the second quarter of 2012, down 5% and 7.5% from the first quarter of 2012, respectively.

Portland Metro when comparing percentage share of the market 2nd quarter of 2012 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 11.2% (19.8% v. 31%).
• In a comparison of the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 9.7% (29.5% v. 39.2%).
• Short Sales comprised 10.5% of new listings and 11.4% of sales in the second quarter of 2012, down 5.6% and 2.1% from the first quarter 2012, respectively.
• Bank Owned/REO properties comprised 9.3% of new listings and 18.1% of sales in first quarter 2012, down 5.6% and 7.6% from the first quarter of 2012, respectively.

Clark County when comparing percentage share of the market 2nd quarter of 2012 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 10% (25.1 % v. 35.1%).
• In a comparison of the second quarter of 2012 to the first quarter, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales increased by 13.1% (35% v. 48.1%).
• Short Sales comprised 17.3% of new listings and 20.4% of sales in the second quarter of 2012, down 6.5% for new listings and holding steady for sales when compared to first quarter 2012, respectively.
• Bank Owned/REO properties comprised 7.8% of new listings and 14.6% of sales in 2012, down 3.5% and 13.1% from the first quarter of 2012, respectively.

Written By Phil Querin, Querin Law, LLC – PMAR Legal Counsel

Upon closing of a real estate transaction in the U.S., a Federal law, known as the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (“FIRPTA”), may require that escrow withhold a portion of the seller’s proceeds if the property is located within the United States and seller is a “foreign person.” A “foreign person” includes a non-resident alien individual, foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust and foreign estate (hereinafter “a foreign entity”).  The amount deducted from seller’s proceeds is ten percent (10%) of the gross sales price and is required to be remitted to the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”).

The buyer may become responsible for payment if FIRPTA applies and escrow is not instructed to withhold the funds.  This means that if a transaction closes and funds are distributed to the seller, who was legally a “foreign person,” the buyer may be on the hook.  There are some instances in which the real estate agents may become liable as well. 

Here are the major FIRPTA exclusions: (a) The sale price is $300,000 or less; (b) The property is to be used by buyer as a residence; and, (c) The buyer is an individual and not a foreign entity.

Under the OREF Residential Real Estate Sale Agreement (“Sale Agreement”), the seller represents that he/she is not a “foreign person” (i.e. their “Non-FIRPTA Status”).  If the seller is unsure about their legal status, he/she should first confer with their tax counsel or a CPA before entering into the real estate transaction. If FIRPTA is applicable, the Sale Agreement recommends that buyer and seller agree to execute and deliver such instruments, affidavits or statements, as may be requested by escrow to carry out the provisions of FIRPTA.

In addition, the Sale Agreement contains the following:

Buyer has no knowledge, information, or belief that Seller is a foreign person or that this transaction is subject to FIRPTA.  Seller acknowledges that Buyer, Listing and Selling Licensees, their respective Firms, and Escrow, its agents, employees and representatives shall have the absolute right to rely upon Seller’s representation of Seller’s Non-FIRPTA Status at Section 12, above.  This right of reliance shall continue through the Closing Date and thereafter, unless Seller has disclosed otherwise in a written counter-offer to this Sale Agreement.  If at any time during this transaction, it is determined that Seller’s representation of Seller’s Non-FIRPTA Status was incorrect, for any reason, Seller and Buyer hereby appoint and instruct Escrow to act as the Qualified Substitute for purposes of preparing the necessary paperwork, withholding the necessary funds, and remitting the same to the IRS.  Seller and Buyer acknowledge that if FIRPTA applies to this transaction, Escrow’s role as a Qualified Substitute may result in a delay in closing this transaction.  Unless otherwise provided in this Sale Agreement or any subsequent signed written agreement between Seller and Buyer, confirmation of Seller’s Non-FIRPTA Status is not a contingency in this transaction.

The reason that the Sale Agreement goes to such great lengths regarding FIRPTA is because commencing with the listing of real property, there was no vetting of the seller’s FIRPTA status.  This has recently changed, thanks to RMLS™’s cooperation in dealing with this issue.  The RMLS™ Listing Agreement will now contain the following required field:

16. FIRPTA. In general, the sale or other disposition of a U.S. real property interest by a foreign person is subject to income tax withholding under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act of 1980 (FIRPTA). A “foreign person” includes a non-resident alien individual, foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust and foreign estate. If

FIRPTA applies, the buyer or other qualified substitute may be legally required to withhold this tax at closing. In order to avoid closing delays, SELLER is requested to initial one of the two statements:

______ / ______ SELLER warrants and represents to BROKER and BROKER’S Firm that SELLER is not a foreign person under FIRPTA.

______ / ______ SELLER is a foreign person under FIRPTA.

Date of BROKER’S signature

BROKER Signature

FIRM NAME

Date of PRINCIPAL BROKER’S signature

PRINCIPAL BROKER Signature

Phone

Conclusion
Now, listing agents will be the initial point of contact on the FIRPTA issue.  This is a good thing, as it will now permit all Realtors® to be aware, at the commencement of the transaction, that there may be some federal tax withholding requirements imposed on the seller as a part of the closing.  In such instances, company policy and managing brokers should mandate that the transactional file be properly flagged, and that escrow be immediately notified that the parties request that it handle all FIRPTA compliance obligations.  Caveat: Escrow will not do this automatically, and in most cases, the standard closing documents provide that the escrow company is exempted from handling FIRPTA compliance matters.  So, be aware that if they are not asked, they will not undertake the responsibility. 

Phil has served as legal counsel for the Portland Metropolitan Association of REALTORS^®  for the past 20 years, and serves on the PMAR Brokerage Risk Management Committee.  Phil is also legal counsel to the OREF Forms Committee.

©2012 Phillip C. Querin, QUERIN LAW, LLC

Photo Credit

This chart shows the number of Bank Owned and Short Sales in all areas of the RMLS™ system during the first quarter of 2012. To download or print the chart, click here.

Below are links to additional charts for some of our larger areas*:
Portland Metro
Clark County, WA
Lane County, OR
Douglas County, OR

*If you want information on percentages of distressed residential sales in other areas not represented by our charts, please contact us at communications@rmls.com.

Here are some additional facts about distressed residential properties in the first quarter of 2012:

All Areas when comparing percentage share of the market 1st quarter of 2011 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the first quarter of 2011 to 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 0.6% (29.5% v. 28.9%).
• In a comparison of the first quarter of 2011 with the same period in 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 2.0% (40.9% v. 38.9%).
• Short Sales comprised 15.0% of new listings and 13.0% of sales in 2012, down 0.2% and up 2.7% from first quarter 2011, respectively.
• Bank Owned properties comprised 13.9% of new listings and 25.9% of sales in first quarter 2012, down 0.4% and up 4.7% from 1first quarter 2011, respectively.

Portland Metro when comparing percentage share of the market  1st quarter of 2011 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the first quarter of 2011 to 20112 distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 0.5% (31.5% v. 31.0%).
• In a comparison of the first quarter of 2011 with the same period in 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales decreased by 2.5% (41.7% v. 39.2%).
• Short Sales comprised 16.1% of new listings and was down 0.2% from 2011. However, the percentage of sales rose from 9.9%  in 2011 to 13.5%  in 2012, a 3.6% rise.
• Bank Owned properties comprised 14.9% of new listings and 25.7% of sales in first quarter 2012, down 0.3% and 6.1% from 2011, respectively.

Clark County when comparing percentage share of the market  1st quarter of 2011 to 1st quarter of 2012

• When comparing the first quarter of 2011 to 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of new listings decreased by 4.6% (39.7% v. 35.1%).
• In a comparison of the first quarter of 2011 with the same period in 2012, distressed sales as a percentage of closed sales increased by 0.3% (47.8% v. 48.1%).
• Short Sales comprised 23.8% of new listings and was down 0.6% from 2011. However, the percentage of sales rose from 17.1%  in 2011 to 20.4%  in 2012, a 3.3% rise.
• Bank Owned properties comprised 11.3% of new listings and 27.7% of sales in 2012, down 4.0% and 3.0% from 2011, respectively.

By Nick Church

As a Multiple Listing Service we often get the question: “Which Smartphone is the best for Realtors®?” There’s no easy answer to that question. The predominant phones on the market, which currently have most of the features a Realtor® might need, are:

• Android (which has many different models)
• iPhone (which has a couple different versions, 3, 3GS, 4, 4S)
• Win7 (which also has different models)

The availability of a particular smartphone is completely dependent on your service provider (ex. AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile or Verizon.) Some sources will try to tell you that as a Realtor®   you need a specific device or operating system to do your business. This just simply isn’t true. It really depends on your preferences and how you want to use your phone for business.

We’ve made RMLSweb available in an abbreviated mobile version, rather than an app, so that it can be used on any smartphone or tablet. It’s important to note that at this time you will not have access to Listing Load on a mobile device.

As for the smartphone and your Supra key service – there are many different options of approved devices and you can you read more here.  All of the phones mentioned above require the purchase of a fob to work with the Supra eKey system.

While RMLS™ cannot recommend a specific phone or carrier over another, our general suggestion is that you go into your local store (when you have no intention to purchase) and simply “try them out.” Many carriers have versions of their devices that you can explore, navigating to the Internet, finding various links, seeing how you’ll type in messages, etc. I think you’ll find being able to experience the device will help you find that “perfect fit.” There isn’t a “best phone for Realtors®.” There’s simply a best phone for you.

If you have questions on how to utilize your new smartphone with our system, feel free to email RMLS™ Training or the RMLS™ Help Desk You can also call Help Desk at 503-872-8002 or 877-256-2169 (toll-free). We’re happy to answer any questions you may have.

Photo Credit

See a visual representation of distressed properties in our market!