Search

Both Sweden and the Netherlands had housing systems that include broad models of municipal housing (Sweden) or social housing (Netherlands). These broad models, however, came under discussion due to the competition policy of the European Commission. Financial government support – state aid – for public or social housing is considered to create false competition with commercial landlords. The countries chose different ways out of this problem. The Netherlands choose to direct state aid to a specified target group and had to introduce income limits for dwellings owned by housing associations. Sweden instead chose to change the law regulating municipal housing companies and demands that these companies should act in a ‘businesslike way’ and with that aims to create a level playing field. This paper will describe why the two countries chose different options, the development during the first years, and also speculate about the consequences on the longer run and the future role of the public/social housing sec...

This paper discusses the role of government mortgage guarantee schemes in housing policy. It explores different types of government mortgage guarantee scheme, which play different roles, in eight countries. Mortgage guarantee schemes interfere in the mortgage market in order to improve access to mortgages. Such guarantees can be shaped as self-supporting instruments or as subsidies. If the latter is the case the issue of competition and a level playing field is relevant. This paper explores the US and the Dutch guarantee models in depth in order to answer the question of whether these schemes are unsubsidised mortgage market instruments or subsidised programmes. It concludes by reflecting on the meaning of the outcomes in the context of EU competition policy.

This contribution explores the relationship between housing policy, which is the responsibility of national governments, and competition policy, including the decision on the legitimacy of state support, which is the responsibility of the European Commission (EC). The paper paints a general picture of EU policy on competition and state support and describes the Dutch social housing system. Attention then turns to the recent intervention by the European Commission in the governance of Dutch social housing and it is asked whether the factors that prompted the intervention exist in other EU member states as well. The analysis shows that this is indeed the case. It is concluded that the intervention of the EC in the Netherlands could become a precedent for other European countries, particularly for those countries that opt against a residualised social rented sector and for a competitive role of social housing providers on the housing market.

One of the key aims of housing policy has been to extend homeownership. This paper examines the role that mortgage market deregulation has played in extending access to homeownership. It also examines its social and economic impacts. Deregulation is characterised as an unfolding process, rather than an explicit policy with identifiable objectives. It is identified as involving the ending of direct controls over building society lending, the opening up of the mortgage market to competition as a consequence of the abolition of exchange controls and the ‘corset’, the creation of a level playing field between banks and building societies, and a shift towards regulatory convergence between banks and building societies. Institutional, social and economic consequences of deregulation are identified. Deregulation led to a much more competitive mortgage market, facilitated the shift of the bulk of mortgages from the mutual to banking sectors and contributed towards the polarisation of the industry between speciali...