Analysis shows mortgage subsidies increase volatility in housing markets, suggesting macroprudential measures may improve stability.
Purpose We compare the macroeconomic and housing-market effects of (1) reducing mortgage subsidies, (2) tightening borrower-based tools (debt-service-to-income [DSTI]/loan-to-value [LTV]) and (3) standard monetary and external shocks. Design/methodology/approach We develop a small open-economy (SOE) New Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model that embeds a housing market featuring LTV and DSTI constraints. Borrower-based policy instruments and mortgage interest subsidies are calibrated to Mongolian institutions. Findings High subsidies amplify house-price and consumption volatility and strengthen monetary transmission through the mortgage channel. Relative to tightening DSTI, cutting subsidies achieves comparable reductions in leverage and house-price pressures at lower output and consumption costs, suggesting a policy sequencing in which subsidies are scaled down before DSTI caps are tightened. Originality/value We develop the first Mongolia-calibrated small open-economy New Keynesian DSGE that embeds a mortgage block with explicit LTV and DSTI constraints and a government mortgage–subsidy wedge. By unifying monetary, macroprudential (DSTI/LTV) and fiscal (subsidy) instruments, the model quantifies policy sequencing and transmission under external shocks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seungjun Baek (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: