Hubbry Logo
Real estate appraisalReal estate appraisalMain
Open search
Real estate appraisal
Community hub
Real estate appraisal
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Real estate appraisal
Real estate appraisal
from Wikipedia

Real estate appraisal, home appraisal, property valuation or land valuation is the process of assessing the value of real property (usually market value). The appraisal is conducted by a licensed appraiser. Real estate transactions often require appraisals to ensure fairness, accuracy, and financial security for all parties involved.

Appraisal reports form the basis for mortgage loans, settling estates and divorces, taxation, etc. Sometimes an appraisal report is also used to establish a sale price for a property. Factors like size of the property, condition, age, and location play a key role in the valuation.[1]

Obtaining an appraisal

[edit]

Appraisals are often required by lenders for issuing or refinancing a loan. In such cases, when the borrower asks the lender for a loan or a refinance, the lender will order an appraisal. Once ordered, the borrower will have to schedule an appointment with the appraiser for the in-home visit.

The appraiser will visit the property, assess it, gather data and leave. This usually takes a few hours, depending on the size of the property. After the on-site visit, the appraiser will spend time researching and preparing an appraisal report. The appraiser will provide the completed report to the lender within a couple business days. The borrower may also obtain the report upon request.[2][3]

On average, the entire process of obtaining an appraisal takes from 5 to 15 days.[3]

Types of value

[edit]

There are several types and definitions of value sought by a real estate appraisal. Some of the most common are:

Market value – the estimated amount for which an asset or liability should exchange on the valuation date between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm's length transaction, after proper marketing and where the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently and without compulsion.[4]
  • Value-in-use, or use value[5] – the net present value (NPV)[6] of a cash flow that an asset generates for a specific owner under a specific use. Value-in-use is the value to one particular user, and may be above or below the market value of a property.
  • Investment value – the value to one particular investor, and may or may not be higher than the market value of a property. Differences between the investment value of an asset and its market value motivate buyers or sellers to enter the marketplace. International Valuation Standards (IVS) define:
Investment value – the value of an asset to the owner or a prospective owner for individual investment or operational objectives.[4]
  • Ad valorem tax value – the value used for taxation purposes, determined by the collection of data through the mass appraisal process. The mass appraisal process applies the data collected through various sources to real property to determine taxable value.[7]
  • Insurable value – the value of real property covered by an insurance policy. Generally, it does not include the site value.
  • Liquidation value – may be analyzed as either a forced liquidation or an orderly liquidation and is a commonly sought standard of value in bankruptcy proceedings. It assumes a seller who is compelled to sell after an exposure period which is less than the market-normal time-frame.

Price vs value

[edit]

There can be differences between what the property is worth (market value) and what it cost to buy it (price). A price paid might not represent that property's market value. Sometimes, special considerations may have been present, such as a special relationship between the buyer and the seller where one party had control or significant influence over the other party. In other cases, the transaction may have been just one of several properties sold or traded between two parties. In such cases, the price paid for any particular piece is not its market "value" (with the idea usually being, though, that all the pieces and prices add up to the market value of all the parts) but rather its market "price".

At other times, a buyer may willingly pay a premium price, above the generally accepted market value, if his subjective valuation of the property (its investment value for him) was higher than the market value. One specific example of this is an owner of a neighboring property who, by combining his property with the subject property (assemblage), could obtain economies-of-scale and added value (plottage value). Similar situations sometimes happen in corporate finance. For example, this can occur when a merger or acquisition happens at a price which is higher than the value represented by the price of the underlying stock. The usual explanation for these types of mergers and acquisitions is that "the sum is greater than its parts", since full ownership of a company provides full control of it. This is something that purchasers will sometimes pay a high price for. This situation can happen in real estate purchases too.

But the most common reason for value differing from price is that either the buyer or the seller is uninformed as to what a property's market value is but nevertheless agrees on a contract at a certain price which is either too expensive or too cheap. This is unfortunate for one of the two parties. It is the obligation of a real property appraiser to estimate the true market value of a property and not its market price.

Frequently, properties are assessed at a value below their market values; this is known as fractional assessment.[8] Fractional assessment can result in properties that are assessed at 10% or less of their given market values.[9]

Market value definitions in the United States

[edit]

In the United States, appraisals are for a certain type of value (e.g., foreclosure value, fair market value, distressed sale value, investment value). The most commonly used definition of value is market value. While Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) does not define market value, it provides general guidance for how Market Value should be defined:

A type of value, stated as an opinion, that presumes the transfer of a property (i.e., a right of ownership or a bundle of such rights), as of a certain date, under specific conditions set forth in the definition of the term identified by the appraiser as applicable in an appraisal.

Thus, the definition of value used in an appraisal or current market analysis (CMA) analysis and report is a set of assumptions about the market in which the subject property may transact. It affects the choice of comparable data for use in the analysis. It can also affect the method used to value the property. For example, tree value can contribute up to 27% of property value.[10][11]

Main approaches to value

[edit]

There are three traditional groups of methodologies for determining value. These are usually referred to as the "three approaches to value" which are generally independent of each other:

  • The sales comparison approach (comparing a property's characteristics with those of comparable properties that have recently sold in similar transactions).
  • The cost approach (the buyer will not pay more for a property than it would cost to build an equivalent).
  • The income approach (similar to the methods used for financial valuation, securities analysis or bond pricing – where the implied property value is a function of the property's pro forma cash flow, or NOI in the context of real estate).

However, the recent trend of the business tends to be toward the use of a scientific methodology of appraisal which relies on the foundation of quantitative-data,[12] risk, and geographical based approaches.[13][14] Pagourtzi et al. have provided a review on the methods used in the industry by comparison between conventional approaches and advanced ones.[15]

As mentioned before, an appraiser can generally choose from three approaches to determine value. One or two of these approaches will usually be most applicable, with the other approach or approaches usually being less useful. The appraiser has to think about the "scope of work", the type of value, the property itself, and the quality and quantity of data available for each approach. No overarching statement can be made that one approach or another is always better than one of the other approaches.

The appraiser has to think about the way that most buyers usually buy a given type of property. What appraisal method do most buyers use for the type of property being valued? This generally guides the appraiser's thinking on the best valuation method, in conjunction with the available data. For instance, appraisals of properties that are typically purchased by investors (e.g., skyscrapers, office buildings) may give greater weight to the income approach. Buyers interested in purchasing single family residential property would rather compare price, in this case, the sales comparison approach (market analysis approach) would be more applicable. The third and final approach to value is the cost approach to value. The cost approach to value is most useful in determining insurable value, and cost to construct a new structure or building.

For example, single apartment buildings of a given quality tend to sell at a particular price per apartment.[16] In many of those cases, the sales comparison approach may be more applicable. On the other hand, a multiple-building apartment complex would usually be valued by the income approach, as that would follow how most buyers would value it. As another example, single-family houses are most commonly valued with the greatest weighting to the sales comparison approach. However, if a single-family dwelling is in a neighborhood where all or most of the dwellings are rental units, then some variant of the income approach may be more useful. So the choice of valuation method can change depending upon the circumstances, even if the property being valued does not change much.

The sales comparison approach

[edit]

The sales comparison approach is based primarily on the principle of substitution. This approach assumes a prudent (or rational) individual will pay no more for a property than it would cost to purchase a comparable substitute property. The approach recognizes that a typical buyer will compare asking prices and seek to purchase the property that meets his or her wants and needs for the lowest cost. In developing the sales comparison approach, the appraiser attempts to interpret and measure the actions of parties involved in the marketplace, including buyers, sellers, and investors.

Data collection methods and valuation process

[edit]

Data is collected on recent sales of properties similar to the subject being valued, called "comparables". Only SOLD properties may be used in an appraisal and determination of a property's value, as they represent amounts actually paid or agreed upon for properties. Sources of comparable data include real estate publications, public records, buyers, sellers, real estate brokers and/or agents, appraisers, and so on. Important details of each comparable sale are described in the appraisal report. Since comparable sales are not identical to the subject property, adjustments may be made for date of sale, location, style, amenities, square footage, site size, etc. The main idea is to simulate the price that would have been paid if each comparable sale were identical to the subject property. If the comparable is superior to the subject in a factor or aspect, then a downward adjustment is needed for that factor.[clarification needed] Likewise, if the comparable is inferior to the subject in an aspect, then an upward adjustment for that aspect is needed.[clarification needed] The adjustment is somewhat subjective and relies on the appraiser's training and experience. From the analysis of the group of adjusted sales prices of the comparable sales, the appraiser selects an indicator of value that is representative of the subject property. It is possible for various appraisers to choose a different indicator of value which ultimately will provide different property value.

Steps in the sales comparison approach

[edit]
  1. Research the market to obtain information pertaining to sales, and pending sales that are similar to the subject property
  2. Investigate the market data to determine whether they are factually correct and accurate
  3. Determine relevant units of comparison (e.g., sales price per square foot), and develop a comparative analysis for each
  4. Compare the subject and comparable sales according to the elements of comparison and adjust as appropriate
  5. Reconcile the multiple value indications that result from the adjustment (upward or downward) of the comparable sales into a single value indication

The cost approach

[edit]

The cost approach was once called the summation approach. The theory is that the value of a property can be estimated by summing the land value and the depreciated value of any improvements. The value of the improvements is often referred to by the abbreviation RCNLD (for "reproduction/replacement cost new less depreciation"). Reproduction refers to reproducing an exact replica; replacement cost refers to the cost of building a house or other improvement which has the same utility, but using modern design, workmanship and materials. In practice, appraisers almost always use replacement cost and then deduct a factor for any functional dis-utility associated with the age of the subject property. An exception to the general rule of using the replacement cost is for some insurance value appraisals. In those cases, reproduction of the exact asset after a destructive event like a fire is the goal.

In most instances when the cost approach is involved, the overall methodology is a hybrid of the cost and sales comparison approaches (representing both the suppliers' costs and the prices that customers are seeking). For example, the replacement cost to construct a building can be determined by adding the labor, material, and other costs. On the other hand, land values and depreciation must be derived from an analysis of comparable sales data.

The cost approach is considered most reliable when used on newer structures, but the method tends to become less reliable for older properties. The cost approach is often the only reliable approach when dealing with special use properties (e.g., public assembly, marinas). However, it is important to consider if there is actually a market for the use and all forms of obsolescence. Some special use properties lack an active market such that the cost approach may not be reliable either and may be more indicative of a use value or such. In some cases, it may be appropriate to consider alternative uses.

Obsolescence

[edit]

The cost approach requires adjustments for obsolescence, stemming from three sources.

  • Physical (depreciation) - Reduction based on the wearing-out of the physical components
  • Functional - Loss in value for some functional or design aspect of the property
  • External - Loss in value for something outside of the property

Physical depreciation is most familiar. As a structure ages, there is an effect on value. For example, buyers may reduce prices because they expect to make expensive replacements soon. Or in other cases, buyers expect higher utility expenses because they figure the property has older and worn insulation.

Functional obsolescence relates to the design of the property. It could be something that is inadequate about a property (say a house that lacks a swimming pool in a hot climate like Arizona) or something that is superadequate (say a 2-bedroom house that has 9 bathrooms). In either case, there is a deduction to the value compared to the costs of the structures that are there. For example, the 9 bathrooms all cost the same to construct but they add less and less. The appraisal should evaluate whether it is feasible to cure (fix) the item - that is, consider if the increase in value by fixing it exceeds the cost of the fix.

External obsolescence is something outside of the property. It could be changes in market conditions, or an undesirable neighboring property. External obsolescence cannot be fixed.

The income approach

[edit]

The income capitalization Approach (often referred to simply as the "income approach") is used to value commercial and investment properties. Because it is intended to directly reflect or model the expectations and behaviors of typical market participants, this approach is generally considered the most applicable valuation technique for income-producing properties, where sufficient market data exists.

In a commercial income-producing property this approach capitalizes an income stream into a value indication. This can be done using revenue multipliers or capitalization rates applied to a Net Operating Income (NOI). Usually, an NOI has been stabilized so as not to place too much weight on a very recent event. An example of this is an unleased building which, technically, has no NOI. A stabilized NOI would assume that the building is leased at a normal rate, and to usual occupancy levels. The Net Operating Income (NOI) is gross potential income (GPI), less vacancy and collection loss (= Effective Gross Income) less operating expenses (but excluding debt service, income taxes, and/or depreciation charges applied by accountants).

Alternatively, multiple years of net operating income can be valued by a discounted cash flow analysis (DCF) model. The DCF model is widely used to value larger and more expensive income-producing properties, such as large office towers or major shopping centres. This technique applies market-supported yields (or discount rates) to projected future cash flows (such as annual income figures and typically a lump reversion from the eventual sale of the property) to arrive at a present value indication. In Canada, reversion values typically range from 16x-21x the NOI of year of sale.

When homes are purchased for personal use the buyer can validate the asking price by using the income approach in the opposite direction. An expected rate of return can be estimated by comparing net expected costs to the asking price. This return can be compared to the home owner's other investing opportunities.[17]

UK valuation methods

[edit]

In the United Kingdom, valuation methodology has traditionally been classified into five methods:[18]

1. Comparative method. Used for most types of property where there is good evidence of previous sales. This is analogous to the sales comparison approach outlined above.

2. Investment method, also known as hardcore. Used for most commercial (and residential) property that is producing future cash flows through the letting of the property. This method compares the estimated rental value (ERV), or "top slice" to the current ("passing") income, or "bottom slice", to give an indication of whether the future value of the property should rise or fall based on income. If a property's income is higher than the ERV this is sometimes known as "froth", which may be confused with the US use of "froth" describing the period before a real estate bubble.

The cash flows can be compared to the market-determined equivalent yield, and the property value can be determined by means of a simple model. Note that this method is really a comparison method, since the main variables are determined in the market. In standard U.S. practice, however, the closely related capitalizing of NOI is confounded with the DCF method under the general classification of the income capitalization approach (see above).

3. Residual method. Used for properties ripe for development or redevelopment or for bare land only. The site or unimproved property value is based on the improved or developed value less costs of construction, professional fees, development finance costs and a developer's profit or return on risk. [clarification needed]

4. Profit method. Used for trading properties where evidence of rates is slight, such as hotels, restaurants and old-age homes. A three-year average of operating income (derived from the profit and loss or income statement) is capitalized using an appropriate yield. Note that since the variables used are inherent to the property and are not market-derived, therefore unless appropriate adjustments are made, the resulting value will be value-in-use or investment value, not market value.

5. Cost method. Used for land and buildings of special character for which profit figures cannot be obtained or land and buildings for which there is no market because of their public service or heritage characteristics. Both the residual method and the cost method would be grouped in the United States under the cost approach (see above).

Under the current RICS Valuation Standards, the following bases of value are recognized:

  • Market value (see PS 3.2)
  • Market rent (see PS 3.3)
  • Worth (investment value) (see PS 3.4)
  • Fair value (see PS 3.5)

Practice in the UK

[edit]

The common public experience of chartered surveyors is in the process of obtaining a mortgage loan.[19] A mortgage valuation is required by any mortgage lender as a condition of obtaining a mortgage loan. The homebuyer may take the option to instruct the same surveyor to carry out a "RICS HomeBuyer Report" or a "RICS Building Survey" (sometimes called a "Structural Survey"[20]), usually at additional cost.[19] When the surveyor is instructed in this combined role, the mortgage valuation is still produced for the lender, and the HomeBuyer Report or Building Survey is additionally prepared for the borrower. This arrangement can avoid the potential conflict of interest where the surveyor has as client both the lender and the borrower in the transaction. Because of the ethics and professional liability aspect, borrowers should note that the lender's survey is produced solely for the lender and the surveyor will not be liable for loss or omission to the borrower. Since reform of the RICS Red Book of valuation practice in recent years, the definition of a mortgage valuation has been deleted. It is now a market valuation, which is the same definition given to the valuation in the RICS HomeBuyer Report.

The Council of Mortgage Lenders recommends that buyers should not rely only on the mortgage valuation, but obtain a fuller survey for their own purposes.[citation needed] However, a fuller survey is rarely a condition of the loan.

A structural defect

The borrower may prefer to select an independent surveyor to undertake the HomeBuyer Report or Building Survey.

Mortgage valuation report

A mortgage valuation is for the benefit of the lender. Its purpose is merely to confirm the property is worth the price paid, in order to protect the lender's interests.[21] Invariably there is a disclaimer on the report that confirms that the surveyor has no responsibility to the borrower. This is a legally valid exclusion.

RICS Home Surveys

Under the reforms undertaken by RICS in the early 21st century to better regulate the provision of professional products to the general public, a sector that is usually unable to fully appreciate the consequences of inadequate specification of the required items to be surveyed and how they are reported, RICS produced a new range of consumer products with RICS branding. Three consumer products are now available:

  • RICS Condition Report
  • RICS HomeBuyer Report
  • RICS Building Survey

These products have a consistent appearance over the range, with common typefaces and general format. The distinctions come in the detail that is subsequently provided. These are discussed below.

RICS Condition Report

This is a short report that looks briefly at the property to report on the visual condition of nine external elements of construction, nine internal elements of construction, seven services supplied to the building, and three key components of the grounds in which the property is sited. The reports rates conditions from 1 - good, 2, - needing attention in the near future, 3 - needing attention now using a traffic light system to draw attention to things that matter.

In practice this report is of little value to the buyer unless the surveyor attends at the same time as the buyer is carrying out a viewing and wants an early indication of general condition, making the most of the surveyor's expert knowledge about how buildings can fail that are not obvious to the average buyer. Some surveyors agree to carry out these surveys as a precursor to then extending the service with a more detailed report in either of the other two types in the RICS Home Surveys suite.[22] Usually, the fee for the first report is discounted in the fee for the detailed follow up report, since when the surveyor returns to the property, there is already an understanding of what problems are in the property.

RICS HomeBuyer Report

This document format has been revised in 2010 to include an easy to assimilate format for the reader. The problem with the earlier format often reported to RICS by clients in receipt of the previous 'Homebuyer's Survey and Valuation' was that the structure did not easily distinguish the faults from the main description. A traffic light system was introduced and surveyors have to rate each element of the inspection according to priority. In this way, serious impediments are identified easily, and less critical defects commented upon to give the reader advice on what will need attention in the near future. It does not comment on the maintenance requirements for items found to be in satisfactory condition, only confirming that there is no cause for concern at this time. This format is suitable for a wide range of properties, but is best suited to traditionally built houses that are not subject to very serious distress or previous major alterations or extensions. This report is much longer than the condition report and looks in more detail at the property to report on the visual condition and maintenance needs of nine external elements of construction, nine internal elements of construction, seven services supplied to the building, and three key components of the grounds in which the property is sited. The reports rates conditions from 1 - good, 2 - needing attention in the near future, 3 - needing attention now using a traffic light system to draw attention to things that matter. The report also includes commentary to advise the solicitor on issues that need addressing in the conveyance, and any risks that affect the building, grounds and people of a more general nature. There is also a market valuation of the property and an assessment of rebuilding costs for insurance purposes.

Not all chartered surveyors are permitted to undertake providing the RICS HomeBuyer Report as it contains a market valuation. Under rules of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, any surveyor undertaking these surveys must also be an RICS Registered Valuer and carry professional indemnity insurance for this task. This is an attempt by RICS to provide consumer confidence after the older valuation reports came into disrepute.

RICS Building Survey
A thatched cottage

There are a number of variations to a residential building survey which offers the home purchaser a choice of products. The two main variants are the RICS Guidance note version stemming from the earlier RICS guidance note 2004 (more recently updated by the "Surveys of residential property RICS guidance note 3rd edition" which was introduced in December 2013). The primary difference between guidance note and the practice note for the consumer is the format of the reports. A bespoke style or a framework (traffic light signal) style. For surveyors guidance is "best practice" and practice note is "mandatory".

The guidance note version can be provided in an agreed word document style format with an appendix for photographs etc. There is also a choice (at extra commissioning cost) to add a market valuation and other services such as costing for repairs and project management / further investigation services by agreement as cited at the end of this description. In effect, is a fully bespoke report.

The alternative is the practice note version (introduced to the market in November 2012). It is a similar traffic light signal format as the other RICS survey products such as the RICS condition report and the RICS homebuyer reports.

Both report formats (guidance note and practice note versions) are appropriate for virtually all properties, including but not limited to listed buildings, thatched cottages, timber-frame homes and so on,.

The building survey is the most detailed survey available[23] from most firms of chartered surveyors.[21] Thorough though it is, it may still lead to recommendations for further investigation from other specialists; see below. However, A competent surveyor will always try to investigate causes of damp and building defects before recommending for further investigation. The building survey report is much longer than the condition report but may not be much longer than the homebuyer report as its content depends on the condition observed in each individual case. The practice note version building survey looks in more detail at the property to report on the visual condition and maintenance needs of nine external elements of construction, with scope for sub-division into individual features, with the nine internal elements of construction and the seven services supplied to the building examined in a similar manner. Also, the three key components of the grounds in which the property is sited can be subdivided as necessary.

The practice note version of the report also rates conditions from 1 - good, 2 - needing attention in the near future, 3 - needing attention now using a traffic light system to draw attention to things that matter. In this format, if there is a defect, not only will it be identified but its causes analyzed and methods of repair and elimination of the cause discussed in some detail. The report also includes commentary to advise the solicitor on issues that need addressing in the conveyance, and any risks that affect the building, grounds and people of a more general nature. There is also discussion on the means of escape in case of fire, which in older houses in particular can be compromised by poor design and alterations. There is no market valuation or an assessment of rebuilding costs for insurance purposes in the document. These can be added, along with cost estimates for the repairs by a separate agreement as discussed in the helpful RICS explanatory notes to clients.

Collectively, a key feature of RICS building surveys are that they provide an opportunity for clients and surveyors to strike up a detailed dialogue about the property they are intending to purchase. Purchasers find a building survey useful in allowing for further negotiations on price or for providing a clients briefing document for extensions or repairs. The building survey is a very interactive process.

Energy performance certificate

Chartered surveyors can also provide an energy performance certificate.

Limits

Chartered surveyors are not necessarily specialists in other fields, and may recommend further investigations by an electrician, a gas engineer, a structural engineer or expert of another kind, depending on what they find during their inspection. They may also recommend work by the buyer's solicitor to confirm matters which might affect their valuation, such as (with leasehold properties), the unexpired term of the lease, who is responsible for the boundaries, and so forth.

The chartered surveyor's inspection is typically non-intrusive. They do not have the authority to lift floorboards, drill holes, or perform excavations at a property which the prospective buyer does not, at this stage, own, which means that certain defects or problems may not be apparent from their inspection.[24]

Their fees are a component of the cost of moving house in the United Kingdom.

Appraisers

[edit]

Besides the mandatory educational grade, which can vary from Finance to Construction Technology, most, but not all, countries require appraisers to have the license for the practice. Usually, the real estate appraiser has the opportunity to reach 3 levels of certification: Appraisal Trainee, Licensed Appraiser and Certified Appraiser. The second and third levels of license require no less than 2000 experience hours in 12 months and 2500 experience hours in no less than 24 months respectively.[25][26] Appraisers are often known as "property valuers" or "land valuers"; in British English they are "valuation surveyors". If the appraiser's opinion is based on market value, then it must also be based on the highest and best use of the real property. In the United States, mortgage valuations of improved residential properties are generally reported on a standardized form like the Uniform Residential Appraisal Report.[27] Appraisals of more commercial properties (e.g., income-producing, raw land) are often reported in narrative format and completed by a Certified General Appraiser.

Further considerations

[edit]

Scope of work

[edit]

While the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) has always required appraisers to identify the scope of work needed to produce credible results, it became clear in recent years[when?] that appraisers did not fully understand the process for developing this adequately. In formulating the scope of work for a credible appraisal, the concept of a limited versus complete appraisal and the use of the Departure Rule caused confusion to clients, appraisers, and appraisal reviewers. To deal with this, USPAP was updated in 2006 with what came to be known as the Scope of Work Project. Following this, USPAP eliminated both the Departure Rule and the concept of a limited appraisal, and a new Scope of Work rule was created. In this, appraisers were to identify six key parts of the appraisal problem at the beginning of each assignment:

  • Client and other intended users
  • Intended use of the appraisal and appraisal report
  • Definition of value (e.g., market, foreclosure, investment)
  • Any hypothetical conditions or extraordinary assumptions
  • Effective date of the appraisal analysis
  • Salient features of the subject property

Based on these factors, the appraiser must identify the scope of work needed, including the methodologies to be used, the extent of the investigation, and the applicable approaches to value. Currently, minimum standards for scope of work are:

  • Expectations of the client and other users
  • The actions of the appraiser's peers who carry out similar assignments

The scope of work is the first step in any appraisal process. Without a strictly defined scope of work, an appraisal's conclusions may not be viable. By defining the scope of work, an appraiser can properly develop a value for a given property for the intended user, and for the intended use of the appraisal. The whole idea of "scope of work" is to provide clear expectations and guidelines for all parties as to what the appraisal report does, and does not, cover; and how much work has gone into it.

Types of ownership interest

[edit]

The type of real estate "interest" that is being valued, must also be known and stated in the report. Usually, for most sales, or mortgage financings, the fee simple interest is being valued. The fee simple interest is the most complete bundle of rights available. However, in many situations, and in many societies which do not follow English Common Law or the Napoleonic Code, some other interest may be more common. While there are many different possible interests in real estate, the three most common are:

  • Fee simple value (known in the UK as freehold) – The most complete ownership in real estate, subject in common law countries to the powers reserved to the state (taxation, escheat, eminent domain, and police power)
  • Leased fee value – This is simply the fee simple interest encumbered by a lease. If the lease is at market rent, then the leased fee value and the fee simple value are equal. However, if the tenant pays more or less than market, the residual owned by the leased fee holder, plus the market value of the tenancy, may be more or less than the fee simple value.
  • Leasehold value – The interest held by a tenant. If the tenant pays market rent, then the leasehold has no market value. However, if the tenant pays less than the market, the difference between the present value of what is paid and the present value of market rents would be a positive leasehold value. For example, a major chain retailer may be able to negotiate a below-market lease to serve as the anchor tenant for a shopping center. This leasehold value may be transferable to another anchor tenant, and if so the retail tenant has a positive interest in the real estate.

Valuer and Valuation:

A "valuer" is an individual or professional who is trained and qualified to determine the value of assets, typically real estate or personal property, for various purposes. Valuers assess the worth or fair market value of these assets based on their knowledge, expertise, and analysis of relevant data.

"Valuation" refers to the process of determining the value or worth of an asset, property, business, or financial instrument. Valuation can be performed for a wide range of reasons, including businesses, assets, etc.

Home inspection

[edit]

If a home inspection is performed prior to the appraisal and that report is provided to the appraiser, a more useful appraisal can result. This is because the appraiser, who is not an expert home inspector, will be told if there are substantial construction defects or major repairs required. This information can cause the appraiser to arrive at a different, probably lower, opinion of value. This information may be particularly helpful if one or both of the parties requesting the appraisal may end up in possession of the property. This is sometimes the case with property in a divorce settlement or a legal judgment.[28]

Mass appraisal and automated valuation models

[edit]

Automated valuation models (AVMs) are growing in acceptance. These rely on statistical models such as multiple regression analysis, or machine learning algorithms.[29] While AVMs can be quite accurate, particularly when used in a very homogeneous area, there is also evidence that AVMs are not accurate in other instances such as when they are used in rural areas, or when the appraised property does not conform well to the neighborhood.

Computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) is a generic term for any software package used by government agencies to help establish real estate appraisals for property tax calculations. A CAMA is a system of appraising property, usually only certain types of real property, that incorporates computer-supported statistical analyses such as multiple regression analysis and adaptive estimation procedure to assist the appraiser in estimating value.

Geographic-assisted mass appraisal (GAMA) is a generic term for any geographic information system-centric software package used by government agencies to help establish real estate appraisals for property tax calculations.[30]

Spatial-CAMA (SCAMA) is a general term for mass appraisal where spatial data is used with spatial dependence or spatial heterogeneity models. Spatial Lag Model (SLM) and Spatial Autoregressive Moving Average (SARMA) fall under spatial dependence while Geographically Weighted Regression Models (GWR) falls under spatial heterogeneity.[31]

Governing authorities and professional organizations

[edit]

International

[edit]

The various U.S. appraisal groups and international professional appraisal organizations have started collaborating in recent years towards the development of International Valuation Standards. This will facilitate global real estate appraisal standards, a much-needed adjunct to real estate investment portfolios which cross national boundaries. Some appraisal groups are already international organizations and thus, to some extent, already incorporate some level of global standards.

The International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC) is a non-governmental organization (NGO) member of the United Nations with membership that encompasses all the major national valuation standard-setters and professional associations from 150 different countries (including the Appraisal Institute, the American Society of Appraisers, the RICS, the [Practising Valuers Association of India] and the Appraisal Institute of Canada). IVSC publishes the International Valuation Standards (IVS), now in its 12th edition.

Germany

[edit]

In Germany, real estate appraisal is known as real estate valuation (Immobilienbewertung). Real estate appraisers (Immobilienbewerter or Gutachter) can qualify to become a Öffentlich bestellter und vereidigter Sachverständiger (officially appointed and sworn expert). However, this formerly very important title has lost a lot of its importance over the past years, but still is of some value in court procedures. The title is not generally required for appraisals.

Governing authorities

[edit]

Real estate appraisal in Germany is partly codified by law. The federal Baugesetzbuch (abbr. BauGB, "German statutory code on building and construction'") contains guidelines on governing authorities, defines the term market value and refers to continuative rules (chapter 3, articles 192 ff.). Each municipality (city or administrative district) must form a Gutachterausschuss (appraisal committee), consisting of a chairman and honorary members.[32] The committee gathers information on all real estate deals (it is mandatory to send a copy of each notarial purchase contract to the Gutachterausschuss) and includes it in the Kaufpreissammlung (purchase price database). Most committees publish an official real estate market report every two years, in which besides other information on comparables the land value is determined. The committees also perform appraisals on behalf of public authorities.

Federal regulations

[edit]

The BauGB defines the Verkehrswert or Marktwert (market value, both terms with identical meaning) as follows: "The market value is determined by the price that can be realized at the date of valuation, in an arm's length transaction, with due regard to the legal situation and the effective characteristics, the nature and lay of the premises or any other subject of the valuation"[33] (non-official translation). The intention, as in other countries, is to include all objective influences and to exclude all influences resulting from the subjective circumstances of the involved parties.

This federal law is supported by the Wertermittlungsverordnung (abbr. WertV, "regulation on the determination of value").[34] The WertV defines the codified valuation approaches and the general valuation technique. German codified valuation approaches (other approaches such as DCF or residual approach are also permitted, but not codified) are the:

  • Vergleichswertverfahren (sales comparison approach) – used where good evidence of previous sales is available and for owner-occupied assets, especially condominiums and single-family houses;
  • Ertragswertverfahren (German income approach) – standard procedure for property that produces future cash flows from the letting of the property;
  • Sachwertverfahren (German cost approach) – used for specialised property where none of the above approaches applies, e. g. public buildings.

WertV's general regulations are further supported by the Wertermittlungsrichtlinie (abbr. WertR, "directive on the determination of value").[35] The WertR provides templates for calculations, tables (e.g., economic depreciation) and guidelines for the consideration of different influences. WertV and WertR are not binding for appraisals for nonofficial use, nonetheless, they should be regarded as best practice or Generally Accepted (German) Valuation Practice (GAVP).

Comments on German GAVP

[edit]

In most regards Generally Accepted (German) Valuation Principles is consistent with international practice. The investment market weighs the income approach most heavily. However, there are some important differences:

  • Land and improvements are treated separately. German GAVP assumes that the land can be used indefinitely, but the buildings have a limited lifespan; This coincides with the balancing of the assets. The value of the land is determined by the sales comparison approach in both the income and cost approaches, using the data accumulated by the Gutachterausschuss which is then added to the building value.
  • In order to account for the usage of the land, the net operating income is reduced by the Liegenschaftszins (interest paid to the land-owner by the owner of the building, i.e., ground rent). The Liegenschaftszins is the product of the land value and the Liegenschaftszinssatz (interest rate for land use). The Liegenschaftszinssatz is the equivalent of the yield—with some important differences—and is also determined by the Gutachterausschuss.
  • Unlike the All Risks Yield (ARY) in UK practice, the Liegenschaftszinssatz (abbr. LZ) does not include an allowance for default (not to be confused with a structural vacancy), therefore this needs to be subtracted from gross operating income. As a result, the Liegenschaftszinssatz will usually be lower than the All Risks Yield.
  • Based on the assumption that the economic life of the improvements is limited, the yield and remaining economic life determine the building value from the net operating income.
  • Contracts in Germany generally prescribe that the landlord bears a higher portion of maintenance and operating costs than their counterparts in the United States and the UK.

Criticism

[edit]

Mathematically the distinction between land and improvements in the income approach will have no impact on the overall value when the remaining economic life is more than thirty years. For this reason, it has become quite common to use the Vereinfachtes Ertragswertverfahren (simplified income approach), omitting the land value and the Liegenschaftszins. However, the separate treatment of land and buildings leads to more precise results for older buildings, especially for commercial buildings, which typically have a shorter economic life than residential buildings.

An advantage of the comparatively high degree of standardization practiced by professional appraisers is the greater ability to check an appraisal for inconsistency, accuracy and transparency.

Professional organizations

[edit]

The Federal German Organisation of Appointed and Sworn Experts (Bundesverband Deutscher Sachverständiger und Fachgutachter, abbr. BDSF)[36] is the main professional organization encompassing the majority of licensed appraisers in Germany. In recent years, with the move towards a more global outlook in the valuation profession, the RICS has gained a foothold in Germany, somewhat at the expense of the BDSF. Another German Organisation of Appointed and Sworn Experts is the Deutsche Sachverständigen Gesellschaft, abbr. DESAG.[37] This organization also includes a large number of licensed appraisers in Germany.

With special focus on hypothetical value, in 1996, German banks with real estate financing activities formed the HypZert GmbH, an association for the certification of real estate valuers.[38] A HypZert qualification is regarded as mandatory by many German banks.

Israel

[edit]

In Israel, the real estate appraisal profession is regulated by the Council of Land Valuers, an organ of the Ministry of Justice; the largest professional organization, encompassing the majority of appraisers/land valuers is the Association of Land Valuers. Valuers must be registered with the Council, which is a statutory body set up by law, and which oversees the training and administers the national professional exams that are a prerequisite for attaining registration. In 2005 the Council set up a Valuation Standards Committee with the purpose of developing and promulgating standards that would reflect best practice; these have tended to follow a rules-based approach.

Historically, most valuations in Israel were statutory valuations (such as valuations performed for purposes of Betterment Tax, a tax administered on any gains accruing to the property by way of changes to the local planning) as well as valuations performed for purposes of bank lending. Since Israel implemented the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in 2008, the profession has been engaged in performing valuations for purposes of financial reporting.

United Arab Emirates

[edit]

In the UAE, real estate appraisal is licensed and regulated by the Dubai Real Estate Regulatory Agency.[2] Valuations are carried out by regulated firms, AVMs such as YallaValue, or even the Dubai Land Department itself.[39]

United Kingdom

[edit]

In the UK, real estate appraisal is known as property valuation and a real estate appraiser is a land valuer or property valuer (usually a qualified chartered surveyor who specializes in property valuation).[18] Property valuation in the UK is regulated by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), a professional body encompassing all of the building and property-related professions. The RICS professional guidelines for valuers are published in what is commonly known as the Red Book. The 2017 version was the RICS Valuation – Global Standards (1 July 2017),[40] superseding an edition published in 2011. RICS Valuation Standards contains mandatory rules, best practice guidance and related commentary. The 2017 version adopts and applies the International Valuation Standards (IVS) published by the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC). Changes to the standards are approved by the RICS Valuation Professional Group Board, and the Red Book is updated accordingly on a regular basis. While based in the UK, RICS is a global organization and has become very active in the United States in recent years through its affiliation with the Counselors of Real Estate, a division of the National Association of Realtors.

United States

[edit]

Appraisal practice in the United States is regulated by state. The Appraisal Foundation (TAF) is the primary standards body; its Appraisal Standards Board (ASB) promulgates and updates best practices as codified in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), while its Appraisal Qualifications Board (AQB) promulgates minimum standards for appraiser certification and licensing.

The federal government regulates appraisers indirectly because if the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) finds that a particular state's appraiser regulation and certification program is inadequate, then under federal regulations all appraisers in that state would no longer be eligible to conduct appraisals for federally chartered banks.[41] The ASC oversees the TAF. Banks make widespread use of mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities, and would be unable to do so without appraisals.

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) demanded all the states to develop systems for licensing and certifying real estate appraisers.[42] To accomplish this, the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) was formed within the FFIEC, with representatives from the various Federal mortgage regulatory agencies.[43] Thus, currently all the real estate appraisers must be state-licensed and certified. But prior to the 1990s, there were no commonly accepted standards either for appraisal quality or for appraiser licensure. In the 1980s, an ad-hoc committee representing various appraisal professional organizations in the United States and Canada met to codify the best practices into what became known as the USPAP. The U.S. Savings and Loan Crisis resulted in increased federal regulation via FIRREA, which required federal lending regulators to adopt appraisal standards. A nonprofit organization, The Appraisal Foundation (TAF), was formed by the same organizations that had developed USPAP, and the copyright for USPAP was signed over to TAF. Federal oversight of TAF is provided by the Appraisal Subcommittee, made up of representatives of various federal lending regulators. TAF carries out its work through two boards: the Appraisal Standards Board promulgates and updates USPAP; the Appraisal Qualifications Board (AQB) promulgates minimum recommended standards for appraiser certification and licensure. During the 1990s, all of the states adopted USPAP as the governing standards within their states and developed licensure standards which met or exceeded the recommendations of TAF. Also, the various state and federal courts have adopted USPAP for real estate litigation and all of the federally lending regulators adopt USPAP for mortgage finance appraisal.[43]

Professional organizations

[edit]

In addition, there are professional appraisal organizations, organized as private non-profit organizations that date to the Great Depression of the 1930s. One of the oldest in the United States is the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers (ASFMRA), which was founded in 1929.[44] Others were founded as needed and the opportunity arose in specialized fields, such as the Appraisal Institute (AI) and the American Society of Appraisers (ASA) founded in the 1930s, the International Right of Way Association and the National Association of Realtors which were founded after World War II. These organizations all existed to establish and enforce standards, but their influence waned with increasing government regulation. In March 2007, three of these organizations (ASFMRA, ASA, and AI) announced an agreement in principle to merge. NAIFA (National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers), a charter member of The Appraisal Foundation, helped to write Title XI, the Real Estate Appraisal Reform Amendments. It was founded in 1961.

One of the most recognized professional organizations of real estate appraisers in America is the Appraisal Institute (AI). It was formed from the merger of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers. Founded along with others in the 1930s, the two organizations merged in the 1990s to form the AI. This group awards four professional designations: SRA, to residential appraisers, AI-RRS, to residential review appraisers, MAI, to commercial appraisers, and AI-GRS, to commercial review appraisers. The Institute has enacted rigorous regulations regarding the use and display of these designations. For example, contrary to popular belief, "MAI" does not stand for "Member, Appraisal Institute". According to the institute, the letters "do not represent specific words", and an MAI may not use the words "Member, Appraisal Institute" in lieu of the MAI mark. The primary motive for this rule is to prevent trademark dilution. These designations require attendance in appraisal technique classes, ethical training, exams, and a review of the candidate's work by designated appraisers.

The National Association of Appraisers (NAA) was formed with a purpose of uniting those engaged in the appraisal profession for the purpose of exerting a beneficial influence upon the profession and to advocate appraiser interests. The NAA has established an advisory group consisting of leadership at the state organizations and coalitions called the Board of Governors where those states can help guide the NAA in acting in the best interest of all appraisers. The NAA also has a designated membership, MNAA (Member of the National Association of Appraisers, who is an individual who holds an appraisal license, certification or similar appraisal credential issued by a governmental agency; and who accepts the membership requirements and objectives of the National Association of Appraisers.

Other leading appraisal organizations include the National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers and the National Association of Master Appraisers, which were also founding sponsor-members of the Appraisal Foundation.[45] The Massachusetts Board of Real Estate Appraisers (MBREA), founded in 1934, is the only state appraisal association that has been named a sponsor of the Appraisal Foundation.[46] In recent years, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has become highly regarded in the United States, and has formed a collaboration with the Counselors of Real Estate, a division of the National Association of Realtors. RICS, which is headquartered in London, operates on a global scale and awards the designations MRICS and FRICS to Members and Fellows of RICS. The Real Estate Counseling Group of America is a small group of top U.S. appraisers and real estate analysts who have collectively authored a disproportionately large body of appraisal methodology and, the National Association of Real Estate Appraisers (NAREA), founded in 1966, with the goal to elevate the professionalism and success of the Appraisal Industry.

The leading appraisal organization for personal property valuation is the American Society of Appraisers which is a sponsor member of the Appraisal Foundation and awards the ASA (Accredited Senior Appraiser) designation to candidates who complete five years of documented appraisal experience, pass a comprehensive exam along with required commercial and/or residential appraisal coursework, and submit two appraisal reports for review.

Racial bias

[edit]

Implicit bias and racial composition of neighborhoods have long been thought to impact on home appraisal values.[47] Recent studies from Freddie Mac and other industry leaders have confirmed that traditional modelling based on comparable sales and a variety of other factors (income, credit score, etc.) cannot explain the appraisal value gap minorities face.[48] Some would argue that these pricing disparities are partially explained by neighborhood quality, which opponents say is a byproduct of historical redlining.[49]

Russia

[edit]

In Russia, on par with many other former Soviet Union economies, the profession emerged in the first half of 1990, and represented a clean break with the former practice of industry-specific pricing specialists and with activities of statutory price-setting authorities in the Soviet Union. Currently, property valuation, as it is called, is a specialism within general-purpose "valuation profession", which functions in a self-regulatory mode overseen by "self-regulated professional organizations" of valuers (SROs), i.e. public supervisory entities established under provisions of special legislation (which very loosely can be likened to trade unions). The principal among those is Russian Society of Appraisers, established in 1993 and presently exercising oversight over about half of the valuation profession membership. Among its 6000+ members a sizeable majority are real property valuers, rubbing shoulders with business and intangible assets appraisers. The latter categories of valuers are also allowed to value property, though valuation professionals tend to specialize. In late 2016, it was mandated that valuers should pass through compulsory state-administered attestation process to verify their competence, the details of which as to breakdown in specialization or otherwise remain to be hammered out.

As of mid-2016, Valuers in Russia, including real property valuers, are deemed to be purposely educated individuals maintaining their Valuation SRO membership and bearing unlimited property liability for the result of their services, that is their professional status is modeled on the organization of public notaries. Regardless of the fact, over 80% of valuers tend to be employed by valuation or consulting companies, and thus do not enter practice as stand-alone individual entrepreneurs. High-end appraisal services are principally represented by valuation arms of the International "Big-four" consultancies in the country, but there also exist reputable national corporate valuation brands.

The majority of property valuations in the country are typically conducted to meet legal requirements outlined in the Federal Valuation Law, with the most recent amendment taking place in 2016. Additionally, other related laws, such as the Joint Stock Companies Law, outline over 20 instances where valuations are mandated. These mandatory cases include valuations for purposes such as privatization, securing loans, handling bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings, among others.

Before the year 2000, valuations for corporate financial reporting held greater significance. However, this changed when the national accounting regulator discontinued its promotion of the accounting fair value option. Currently, the government is in the process of outsourcing the mass appraisal of properties for taxation purposes to professional valuation institutions.

Adjudication of valuer-certified estimates of value in case of the onset of disputes is conducted through the Experts Councils of valuers' SROs. Official courts tend to concur with the resolutions of such Councils. In some rare instances the imprimatur of SRO's Experts Councils is also required for a valuation done by a particular valuer to enter into effect.

The technical details of practice of real estate valuers in Russia are aligned with the international pattern. Members of the Russian Society of Appraisers formerly were bound by the observance of the International Valuation Standards. There also exists a set of 14 general-purpose government-developed "Federal Valuation Standards" (FSOs 1,2,3 --are the general valuation standards first adopted in 2007 (and revised 2015) and covering Terms of engagement and Valuation report content requirements, FSOs 7–11 are asset-specific standards adopted in 2015, while FSO 9 is currently the only purpose-specific standard in the set dealing with valuations of property for loan security purposes; the last two FSO standards adopted in 2016 cover determination of investment and liquidation values, however, they do not touch on the methodology for determining these values, only scraping the reporting requirements). In view of the international conformity drive in the latest round of FSO standards setting, general requirements in the new FSO standards are close to those in the International Valuation standards set; however, they can be more specific on occasion and mandate compulsory disclosure of uncertainty in valuation reports using the interval/range format.

With effect from 1 August 2017, new amendments to the Federal Valuation Law came to impose the compulsory certification of valuers by a state-affiliated testing centre. Consequently, this two-hour written exam certification measure, aimed to counter a perception of widespread malpractice among the members of the national valuation profession, provides for three valuer-specializations: real estate valuers, plant and machinery valuers, and business and intangible asset valuers, with the exam content requirements varying substantially for each specialization. Valuers would lose a right to practice, unless they comply with the requirement to take this compulsory certification exam at or before 31 March 2018. A general assessment of this measure is that the numbers of certified valuers in Russia are set to dwindle down to some 2000–3000 valuers nationwide (across all the specialisms mentioned), i.e. decimating some 80% of the current Valuer SRO's membership, due to the complexity of the certification exams.

Hong Kong

[edit]

The Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors (HKIS) regulates property surveyors in Hong Kong. Established in 1984, Institute is the only professional organisation representing the surveying profession in Hong Kong. The HKIS was statutorily incorporated by virtue of the Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors Ordinance in January 1990 (Cap. 1148). In July 1991, the Surveyors Registration Ordinance (Cap. 417) was passed to set up a Registration Board to administer the registration of surveyors. In May 2006, the number of members had reached 6,723. A general practice surveyor advises on the best use of the land, assesses the feasibility and viability of the proposed development project as well as the valuation, marketing, sale, leasing and management of completed developments. It also has a website to provide real-time properties' value estimate across whole Hong Kong.[50]

Australia

[edit]

The Australian Property Institute (API) was formed in 1926 as the Commonwealth Institute of Valuers. The Institute has undergone several name changes over the last century as the array of services offered by its members expanded. It serves to regulate the profession of property valuers throughout Australia.

Today the API represents the interests of more than 8,600 property professionals throughout Australia. API members include residential, commercial and plant and machinery valuers, property advisers, property analysts, property fund and asset managers, property facility managers, property lawyers and property researchers and academics. The Institute's primary role is to set and maintain the highest standards of professional practice, education, ethics and professional conduct for its members and the broader property profession.[51]

New Zealand

[edit]

Real estate valuation in New Zealand is regulated by the New Zealand Institute of Valuers ('NZIV') and the Valuers Registration Board of New Zealand ('VRB'), both of which are statutory bodies established under the Valuers Act 1948 (NZ). The NZIV remains the statutory professional body for valuers in New Zealand, with perpetual succession under the Act. The NZIV can make Rules as lower level legislation and has a Code of Ethics (reviewed in 2023). The NZIV Rules were last changed in 2012 and remain current. The VRB has jurisdiction in relation to serious matters affecting the registration of a valuer including discipline where a valuer has acted in such a way as to meet the threshold. The Valuers Act 1948 sets the threshold under s31 as matters where a valuer could be struck off the register of valuers. The NZIV has power for discipline for relatively more minor matters. The NZIV governs NZIV members and has power to discipline members and fine them up to $500, admonish members or terminate their membership. The designations "Registered Valuer" and "Public Valuer" are legally protected under the legislation, being reserved for Valuers Registered under the Act. The NZIV, under the Act, can admit non-valuer members (such as non-valuer land economists).

There are also voluntary professional bodies for real estate valuation such as the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and the Property Institute of New Zealand (PINZ). Both of these bodies have a wider membership, beyond real estate valuers. PINZ has around 1,700 members in New Zealand and overseas (such as ex-pats in the UK, Asia and Australia). PINZ has a service level agreement with the NZIV, whereby PINZ contracts to perform tasks for the statutory professional body, NZIV. PINZ was formed in 2000 to act as the voice of the property professions. There have been 'political divisions' within the valuation profession in New Zealand, expressed at AGMs and through 'proxy wars' over the last 20 years or so. Many valuers are supportive of amalgamation of the NZIV functions under the multi-disciplinary voluntary body PINZ, whilst many others wish to retain a separate statutory professional body for valuers (the NZIV). There are various reasons in the debate and the governing legislation is under review and amendments or repeal is being considered. At present, the Act remains in force and the NZIV is legally a distinct body with statutory functions, powers and duties.

PINZ incorporated much of the membership of the NZIV, the Institute of Plant & Machinery Valuers (IPMV) and the Property & Land Economy Institute of New Zealand (PLEINZ). PINZ now represents the interests of valuers, property and facilities managers, property advisors and plant and machinery valuers. PINZ has developed into one of the largest professional bodies for standards, qualifications and ethics across all facets of the property profession within New Zealand. It works with government, industry and other professional associations, education stakeholders and the media to promote its standards and views.[52]

In New Zealand, the terms "valuation" and "valuer" usually relates to one who undertakes that professional role in terms of the Valuer Act 1948 requirements or the unregulated or voluntarily self-regulated (if members of PINZ) plant and machinery, marine or art valuers. Whereas, the term "appraisal" is usually related to an estimate by a real estate sales person or licensed agent under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. The Real Estate Institute of New Zealand includes many valuer members, but the governing legislation for sales and agency (disposal of interests of land on behalf of others) does not extend to include provision for that role by valuers regardless of membership of NZIV, RICS or PINZ.

There exists a significant difference in the responsibilities of a real estate agent and a valuer. While a real estate agent is allowed to represent the interests of their client, a valuer is required to offer an unbiased and independent assessment of value. The legal framework governing these roles is distinct as well. Lawyers, Conveyancers, and Real Estate Agents operate under legislation separate from that which regulates valuers. Specifically, the legal provision outlining the responsibilities of Lawyers and Conveyancers is the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act of 2006..

The number of Registered Valuers in New Zealand has generally between 1,000 - 1,300. This is an ageing 'top heavy' professional with difficulty retaining new and young members due to pay, work stress and the recent advent of 'clearing houses' for banks to order valuations for mortgage purposes. The clearing houses have largely ended the long-standing local practice of members of the public seeking advice directly from a valuer. The use of electronic estimates based on Rating Values (Local Government mass appraisal for levies) is also leading to a reduction in standard valuation work and is significantly affecting the viability of small valuation businesses. The profession is in the process of a wider corporate re-structuring of the valuation market due to these factors with various perceptions within profession as to the merits of the events of the last five years.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Real estate appraisal is the professional discipline of forming an unbiased opinion of the of through systematic data collection, analysis, and reasoning, typically performed by state-licensed or certified appraisers for purposes such as lending, property taxation, , and decisions. , the practice gained formal structure following the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), which mandated adherence to uniform appraisal standards for federally related transactions to mitigate risks exposed during the , thereby establishing the Appraisal Subcommittee and promoting the development of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). USPAP, updated biennially by The Appraisal Foundation, outlines ethical requirements, competency rules, and performance standards to ensure appraisals are credible, impartial, and defensible against market fluctuations or disputes. Appraisers primarily employ three reconciled approaches to value—the sales comparison approach, which analyzes recent transactions of similar properties; the cost approach, estimating reproduction or replacement cost minus ; and the income approach, capitalizing projected earnings for income-producing assets—selecting and weighting them based on property characteristics, data reliability, and market conditions. These methods underpin appraisals' critical role in lending, where lenders base the maximum loan amount on the lower of the purchase price or appraised value to maintain acceptable loan-to-value ratios; a lower appraisal than the purchase price may require the buyer to increase the down payment to cover the difference, alongside potential stricter lender overlays based on borrower credit, debt-to-income ratios, or property type, or specific loan program rules. Appraisals thereby influence interest rates and safeguard financial institutions by verifying collateral adequacy amid economic cycles. Despite advancements like automated valuation models, traditional appraisals remain essential for complex properties, though challenges such as appraiser shortages and valuation uncertainties relative to sale prices highlight ongoing tensions between and market dynamism.

History

Ancient Origins and Early Practices

The earliest documented practices resembling real estate appraisal emerged in ancient around 3000 BCE, where Sumerian clay tablets recorded land sales with specified prices in silver or barley, reflecting assessments based on area and . For instance, during the Fara Period (c. 2600–2450 BCE), contracts detailed transactions such as the purchase of 1-1/2 sar of land with a house for 8-1/2 shekels of silver, involving measurements of land units like the and witness validations to establish value for transfer. In the Old Babylonian period (c. 2000–1600 BCE), including under Hammurabi's Code (c. 1750 BCE), land values incorporated yield estimates, with fields often sold at prices approximating one year's grain harvest, as seen in Nuzi records from the 15th–14th centuries BCE; taxation further required evaluations tied to crop output, paid in portions of harvest. In , land valuation practices developed concurrently for taxation and boundary reestablishment after annual floods, with surveying techniques traceable to c. 1400 BCE using tools like plumb bobs, cubit rods, and ropes to measure plots in arouras (approximately 0.68 hectares each). The Wilbour from 1142 BCE documents assessments of smallholdings by and location, implying values derived from fertility and proximity to water, while sales in the New Kingdom (1540–1070 BCE) typically priced fields at 1 to 1.67 times the annual crop yield. A biblical account in the (c. 1400 BCE) describes an early reconnaissance-style appraisal, where dispatched 12 spies to to evaluate the land's productivity, reporting on , yields (e.g., clusters of grapes requiring two men to carry), and defensibility after 40 days of observation. By the and Empire (c. 500 BCE–400 CE), these practices formalized into judicial appraisals and cadastral surveys conducted by agrimensores, who valued properties based on location, usage, and output for taxation, , and sales, with records showing urban prices fluctuating due to factors like fire damage and . , as in the (c. 450 BCE), regulated land divisions and debt-related valuations, emphasizing empirical assessments over arbitrary pricing to resolve disputes.

Development in the Modern Era

In the early , real estate appraisal transitioned from ad hoc assessments toward more systematic methods, driven by expanding urban markets and economic analysis. Until the , valuations often depended on subjective principles and guesswork, lacking standardized . Influential texts, such as Richard Hurd's writings around 1900, advocated evaluating properties through economic utility and location factors, laying groundwork for professional practice. The of the 1930s exposed vulnerabilities in informal appraisals, as speculative lending and overvalued properties contributed to widespread foreclosures and a 67% drop in high-end prices from 1929 to 1932. This crisis spurred federal interventions, including the , which established the (FHA) to insure mortgages and promote reliable valuations focused on long-term property usefulness rather than transient market prices. FHA underwriting manuals, issued in multiple versions through the 1950s, outlined principles for dwelling valuation, emphasizing appraiser judgment on durability and income potential. Concurrently, professionalization advanced with the founding of the American Institute of Appraisers in 1932 and the Society of Appraisers in 1935, both aimed at standardizing education and ethics to mitigate appraisal inconsistencies. Mid-20th-century developments solidified the core valuation approaches: the sales comparison method, refined through comparable sales data; the cost approach, updated with reproduction cost calculations; and the income approach, incorporating capitalization rates for revenue-generating properties, as theorized by figures like Frederick Babcock in the 1930s. These methods gained traction post-World War II amid suburban expansion and mortgage growth, reducing reliance on intuition and enabling more empirical assessments for lending and taxation. By the late 20th century, such standardization supported the merger of key organizations into the Appraisal Institute in 1991, further institutionalizing rigorous training and uniform reporting.

Key Regulatory Milestones

The establishment of formal regulatory oversight for real estate appraisers in the United States primarily stemmed from the of the 1980s, which exposed deficiencies in appraisal practices contributing to inflated property values and financial losses. In response, Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA), enacted on August 9, 1989, introduced the first comprehensive federal framework for appraisal standards in federally related transactions. This legislation mandated that appraisals for transactions involving federally insured financial institutions adhere to uniform professional standards, required states to develop licensing and programs for appraisers, and established the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) within the to monitor state compliance. FIRREA also designated The Appraisal Foundation, a formed in 1987, as the entity responsible for developing and updating these standards, thereby shifting appraisal regulation from purely state-level or voluntary professional guidelines to a coordinated federal-state system. Central to FIRREA's implementation was the adoption of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), initially drafted in 1986–1987 by an committee of major appraisal organizations to promote consistency and . USPAP, formally incorporated into federal regulation via FIRREA in 1989, outlines ethical requirements, competency rules, and standards for appraisal development and reporting across , , and business valuations. By 1992, all states had enacted appraiser licensing laws in compliance with FIRREA, with the ASC overseeing temporary qualifications for federally related transactions during the transition; this marked the effective nationwide enforcement of minimum education, experience, and examination criteria for appraisers. Subsequent milestones addressed ongoing concerns over appraisal independence and accuracy, particularly following the . The Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) of 2008 authorized federal agencies to issue interagency guidelines on appraisal practices, culminating in the 2010 Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, which clarified requirements for appraisals versus less rigorous evaluations in lower-risk transactions. Title XIV of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on July 21, 2010, further strengthened safeguards by prohibiting coercion of appraisers to influence values, mandating registration of appraisal management companies (AMCs) with states, and empowering the to enforce appraisal-related rules under the . These reforms aimed to mitigate conflicts of interest, such as those arising from lender pressure, which empirical analyses linked to overvaluations in . More recent adjustments have balanced regulatory stringency with practical exemptions to reduce costs without compromising reliability. The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA) of 2018 raised the appraisal threshold for residential transactions from $250,000 to $400,000, allowing evaluations instead of full appraisals for smaller loans, based on data showing minimal risk differences. In 2020, temporary waivers under FIRREA permitted 120-day deferrals on appraisals for certain transactions amid COVID-19 disruptions, reflecting adaptive regulatory responses to economic shocks while maintaining core standards. These milestones collectively underscore a progression toward standardized, independence-focused regulation, driven by historical financial failures rather than proactive theorizing.

Definition and Purpose

Core Concepts and Objectives

Real estate appraisal is the process of developing an informed opinion of value for a specific as of a defined date, typically focusing on defined as the most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and under all conditions requisite to a fair sale. This opinion must be impartial and supported by relevant data, distinguishing appraisal from mere estimation or listing price setting. In the United States, appraisals adhere to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which establish ethical and performance requirements to ensure credibility and consistency across , , and business valuations. The primary objective of appraisal is to provide stakeholders—such as lenders, buyers, sellers, tax authorities, and courts—with a defensible estimate of value to facilitate informed in transactions, financing, , or litigation. For mortgage lending, which accounts for a significant portion of appraisals, the goal is to mitigate risk by confirming that the loan amount aligns with the property's collateral value, preventing over-lending. Appraisals also serve taxation by establishing assessed values for property taxes, where uniformity in ensures equitable burdens, as guided by principles like those in state assessor guidelines. Central concepts include the , which posits that a property's value is determined by its reasonably probable and legal use that maximizes value as of the appraisal date, evaluated through tests of physical possibility, legal permissibility, financial feasibility, and maximal productivity. The further holds that no prudent buyer will pay more for a property than the cost of acquiring or constructing a substitute with equivalent , assuming no undue delay from legal or economic factors. These principles, rooted in economic fundamentals like supply, demand, and anticipation of future benefits, underpin the appraisal process by anchoring value to market realities rather than speculative or sentimental factors.

Distinction Between Price and Value

In real estate appraisal, price refers to the actual amount paid or agreed upon in a specific transaction for a , representing a historical fact rather than an estimate. According to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), is defined as "the amount asked, offered, or paid for a ," which may reflect unique buyer-seller dynamics, such as urgency, personal motivations, or non-market influences like family transfers or distressed , rather than broader market conditions. Actual offers on a home for sale depend on recent comparable sales, the home's condition, upgrades, location, marketing, and current buyer demand, rather than the tax assessed value determined by local governments for taxation purposes. This distinguishes as a one-time event, potentially diverging from what would occur in a fully competitive market due to factors like limited comparable or emotional bidding. In contrast, value in appraisal contexts denotes an informed of a 's monetary worth, typically framed as , which USPAP describes as "the monetary relationship between properties and those who buy, sell, or use those properties." is more precisely the estimated amount a would fetch in an arm's-length transaction under conditions of open competition, informed parties, and no undue pressure, as outlined by standards from The Appraisal Foundation. Appraisers derive this through systematic analysis of comparable sales, costs, and income potential, aiming for objectivity to support lending, taxation, or litigation, whereas can incorporate subjective elements like overpayment in hot markets—evidenced by data showing appraisal values sometimes lagging or exceeding sale by 5-10% in volatile periods. This distinction underscores appraisal's role in mitigating risks from distortions, as a sale exceeding appraised value may signal overpricing unsupported by fundamentals. The divergence between price and value arises from market imperfections, where price captures a snapshot influenced by temporary supply-demand imbalances or irrational exuberance, while value seeks a reasoned equilibrium based on empirical evidence. For instance, in thin markets with few transactions, a high sale price might not indicate sustainable value, prompting appraisers to adjust for atypical conditions per USPAP guidelines. Empirical studies confirm this gap: during the 2008 housing crisis, sale prices often exceeded appraised values pre-crash due to speculative bubbles, highlighting how price can deviate from underlying value driven by credit availability rather than property utility. Appraisers thus prioritize value to inform decisions, recognizing that while recent prices provide data inputs, they do not equate to prospective worth without verification against multiple indicators.

Types of Property Interests and Ownership

In real estate appraisal, the valuation of a hinges on the specific or being assessed, as these define the extent of possession, use, enjoyment, and disposition available to the holder. The most common interest appraised is the fee simple absolute (or fee simple estate), which represents the highest degree of ownership with indefinite duration, subject only to , , and recorded encumbrances such as easements or covenants. This encompasses full rights to the surface, subsurface, and , barring legal restrictions, and typically yields the benchmark against which other interests are compared. Leasehold interests, by contrast, confer temporary possession and use rights to a tenant for a defined term, often appraised separately from the underlying . The value of a leasehold derives from the difference between contract rent and market rent over the remaining term, adjusted for renewal options and potential reversion to the landlord; appraisers commonly apply the income capitalization approach to estimate this, discounting future cash flows to . The corresponding leased fee interest held by the landlord includes the right to receive rents and the reversionary interest at lease end, which may exceed or fall short of value if contract terms deviate from market conditions— for example, below-market leases reduce leased fee value due to lost income potential. In jurisdictions like , leaseholds exclude land ownership, requiring payments that further diminish tenant value relative to . Non-possessory interests, such as , do not grant possession but impose burdens or benefits on the holder, directly influencing appraised value through restrictions on use or marketability. An appurtenant, benefiting an adjacent (e.g., for access or ), reduces the servient estate's value by limiting development potential or imposing maintenance obligations, with the deduction quantified via comparable sales of similarly encumbered properties or before-and-after valuation methods. Conservation easements, which permanently restrict land to preserve natural or historic features, can decrease value by curtailing highest-and-best-use options, though they may qualify for tax deductions if donated; appraisers must verify recording and assess impacts empirically rather than assuming uniform effects. Easements in gross, personal to the holder (e.g., ), similarly encumber , potentially complicating sales and requiring disclosure in appraisals to avoid liability. Other limited interests include life estates, where value is bifurcated between the life tenant's possessory rights (lasting until death) and the remainderman's ; appraisers allocate using actuarial tables based on the tenant's age and , often from IRS mortality data, with the life estate valued via discounted income potential. Defeasible fees, conditioned on events (e.g., reversion if used for non-residential purposes), introduce uncertainty that depresses value compared to absolute , requiring analysis of probability and market perception of restrictions. Ownership structures among multiple parties—such as tenancy in common (undivided fractional shares without survivorship) or joint tenancy (with right of survivorship)—primarily affect partial appraisals, where discounts for lack of control or partition risks apply, typically 10-40% for minority shares based on empirical studies of sales data. For full-property valuations, these forms yield values akin to sole unless fractional interests or transfer restrictions (e.g., in cooperatives, where shares represent proprietary leases) necessitate specialized adjustments, such as valuing co-op units via comparable share sales rather than physical property. Appraisers must identify the precise via review, as mischaracterizing it (e.g., appraising leased fee as ) can lead to inaccurate conclusions and legal challenges.

Valuation Methods

Sales Comparison Approach

The sales comparison approach, also known as the approach, derives an indication of value for a subject by analyzing recent sales of comparable properties, with adjustments made for differences in characteristics that affect price. This method rests on the substitution principle, positing that a rational buyer will not pay more for a property than the of acquiring an equivalent substitute in the market, assuming equivalent , exposure, and conditions of sale. It is the most commonly applied valuation technique for residential properties and owner-occupied commercial properties where market transaction data is abundant, as it directly reflects arm's-length market behavior. Under the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), appraisers must develop the sales comparison approach when it is necessary for credible assignment results, analyzing available comparable sales data to indicate value. (Note: Direct USPAP PDF link approximated from search; verify via official Appraisal Foundation site.) The process begins with selecting at least three to six comparable sales that are the most similar to the subject in terms of property type, location, size, age, and condition, prioritizing sales within six to twelve months prior to the effective date of appraisal to capture current market trends. involves confirming sale prices through , multiple listing services, or seller confirmations to ensure arm's-length transactions free from unusual financing or seller concessions. Adjustments are applied to the comparable sale prices to account for dissimilarities, typically derived from paired sales analysis (comparing two similar differing by one feature), extraction from , or cost schedules for depreciable items. Properties with fewer features, such as lacking an additional bathroom or attached garage, appraise lower due to downward adjustments based on comparable sales data reflecting buyer willingness to pay premiums for such amenities. Common adjustment categories include:
Adjustment TypeDescriptionExample
Physical CharacteristicsDifferences in size, quality, condition, or features like bedrooms, , or garage spaces.Add $10,000 to $20,000 for an extra bathroom or $15,000 to $25,000 for an attached garage if the comparable lacks it, depending on market segment and buyer preferences.
LocationVariations in neighborhood desirability, proximity to amenities, or site attributes like views or lot size.Subtract $15,000 from a comparable in a superior to align with the subject's lesser appeal.
Time/Market ConditionsChanges in market trends between sale date and appraisal effective date.Add 3% to a comparable sold six months prior if paired data indicates monthly appreciation of 0.5% in the area.
Conditions of SaleNon-market influences like motivated seller concessions or atypical financing.Deduct $10,000 for seller-paid closing costs exceeding typical terms.
Quantitative methods, such as on larger datasets, may supplement manual adjustments for greater precision in markets with sufficient data, though appraisers must qualify indications when data scarcity limits reliability. involves weighting the adjusted sale prices—often emphasizing the most similar comparables—to arrive at a final value indication, typically expressed as a range or bracket rather than a precise figure, with qualitative judgment applied to resolve discrepancies. This approach's strength lies in its reliance on empirical transaction evidence, providing a direct gauge of what willing buyers and sellers have transacted, making it robust in active residential markets. However, limitations arise in illiquid markets or for unique properties like specialized commercial assets, where insufficient comparable sales or poor data comparability undermine credibility, potentially requiring heavier reliance on alternative approaches. In such cases, USPAP mandates disclosure of data limitations and their impact on the value opinion.

Cost Approach

The cost approach to real estate appraisal estimates a property's value by summing the estimated value of the with the current of reproducing or replacing the improvements (such as buildings and site enhancements), then deducting any accrued from the improvements. This method rests on the principle of substitution, positing that a rational buyer would not pay more for a property than the to acquire or construct a substitute with equivalent , assuming no undue delay. The is typically expressed as: Value = Value + (Improvement New - ). value is derived separately, often via the sales comparison approach, as does not depreciate. Improvement costs distinguish between reproduction cost, which replicates the exact original structure using period-specific materials and methods, and replacement cost, which constructs a modern equivalent providing similar at potentially lower expense through updated techniques and materials. Replacement cost predominates in appraisals due to its alignment with current practices and cost efficiencies, though reproduction may apply for historically significant . Costs are estimated using methods like the comparative unit method (e.g., cost per from similar recent builds), the unit-in-place method (summing costs of individual components like foundations and roofing), or detailed quantity surveys for complex structures. Data sources include cost manuals from organizations like Marshall & Swift or RSMeans, adjusted for local market conditions, labor rates, and material prices as of the appraisal date. Depreciation represents the loss in value of improvements from their cost new and is categorized into physical deterioration (e.g., structural wear from age or weathering), functional (e.g., outdated layouts or inefficient systems relative to modern standards), and external (e.g., diminished desirability from nearby environmental hazards or economic shifts). Physical is measured via effective age and remaining economic life, often using the straight-line method: Depreciation = (Effective Age / Total Economic Life) × Cost New. Functional and external forms require market evidence, such as paired sales analysis, to quantify curable (fixable, adding value if repaired) versus incurable elements. Accurate estimation demands site inspections and historical data, as under- or over-stating can distort the indicated value. The approach suits scenarios with limited comparable sales, such as new or proposed , unique or specialty properties (e.g., schools, churches), or valuations where replacement informs coverage needs. For instance, guidelines permit its use for renovated or unique properties but require reconciliation with other methods for lending. It proves reliable for properties where directly correlates with , avoiding overpayment for depreciated assets. Limitations include challenges in verifying land availability for substitution, subjective depreciation assessments (particularly for older properties where historical costs diverge from current markets), and failure to capture investor demand or potential, rendering it less applicable for income-producing or rapidly appreciating urban properties. Empirical studies and appraisal practice indicate it often underperforms or approaches in competitive markets, as construction costs lag behind value increments from or premiums. Appraisers must corroborate results across methods to mitigate these issues, per Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).

Income Approach

The income approach, also known as the income capitalization approach, estimates the value of by converting anticipated future streams into a , reflecting the property's capacity to generate over time. It is primarily applied to income-producing properties such as commercial buildings, apartments, and , where rental or operational revenues drive economic utility, rather than owner-occupied residential homes. This method rests on the principle that value derives from the present worth of expected benefits, derived from market-derived rates of return and projections supported by comparable property data. Central to the approach is the calculation of net operating income (NOI), defined as potential gross income minus vacancy and collection losses, plus other income, less operating expenses such as utilities, maintenance, property taxes, and insurance—but excluding financing costs, depreciation, or capital expenditures. Potential gross income is estimated from current leases, market rents for similar properties, and lease terms, adjusted for effective gross income after accounting for typical vacancy rates (often 5-10% based on local market conditions). Operating expenses are derived from historical data of the subject property or averages from comparable properties, ensuring they represent stabilized, ongoing costs rather than one-off items. Two primary techniques implement the income approach: direct capitalization and yield capitalization. Direct capitalization applies a single-period model, dividing stabilized NOI by an overall (cap rate) to indicate value: Value = NOI / Cap Rate. The cap rate, expressed as a , is extracted from market sales of comparable income properties (Cap Rate = NOI / Sale Price) and incorporates expectations for return, , and growth; for instance, higher-risk properties like urban retail might yield cap rates of 7-9% as of 2023 data. This method assumes a constant stream and level value changes, making it suitable for stable markets but less robust for properties with volatile or growing incomes. Yield capitalization, in contrast, employs (DCF) analysis to project multiple years of future NOI, often over a 5-10 year holding period, discounted to using a yield rate that accounts for , risk, and reversion value upon resale. The yield rate is developed from band-of-investments (blending and equity rates) or investor surveys, with formulas incorporating (IRR) solved iteratively; for example, a with projected NOIs escalating at 3% annually might be valued lower under DCF if reversion cap rates expand due to anticipated market shifts. This technique better captures lease-up periods, rent growth, and terminal value but requires more data and assumptions, increasing sensitivity to forecast errors. The approach's reliability hinges on accurate market-derived inputs; inaccuracies in cap rates or NOI projections—often from over-optimistic rent assumptions—can lead to significant valuation variances, as evidenced in post-2008 commercial real estate corrections where cap rate compression masked underlying risks. It is reconciled with sales comparison and cost approaches in the final appraisal, weighted by property type; for non-stabilized or owner-user properties, it may receive lesser emphasis due to . Limitations include its inapplicability to vacant or unique properties without history, and vulnerability to macroeconomic factors like changes, which inversely affect cap rates and thus values.

Hybrid and Specialized Methods

Hybrid appraisals, also termed bifurcated appraisals, represent a procedural variant in real estate valuation where a third-party inspector collects on-site data, including photographs and measurements, which is then analyzed by a licensed to form an opinion of without the appraiser's physical presence at the property. This method emerged prominently post-2020 amid efforts by entities like and to accelerate lending processes and mitigate appraiser shortages, with adoption increasing as of 2023. Compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) requires appraisers to independently verify submitted data, perform desk reviews, and ensure no compromises objectivity. Proponents argue hybrid appraisals reduce turnaround times from weeks to days and leverage for transmission, potentially lowering costs for lenders. However, critics, including the Appraisal Institute, highlight risks such as incomplete or biased , diminished control over condition assessments, and challenges in detecting functional deficiencies remotely, which could undermine value accuracy. Empirical from early implementations show hybrid appraisals comprising a growing share of valuations for conventional loans, yet error rates and dispute frequencies remain understudied, with calls for enhanced training and oversight. Specialized valuation methods address properties lacking sufficient comparable sales or income data, particularly special-purpose assets designed for unique functions with limited alternative uses, such as churches, schools, government facilities, or custom industrial plants. For these, the cost approach predominates, estimating value via or replacement cost of improvements minus physical, functional, and external , plus land value, as market transactions are infrequent and non-representative. This method's causal foundation lies in the property's utility for its intended purpose, where buyer pools are narrow and adaptation costs prohibitive. In eminent domain proceedings, specialized techniques extend to substitution cost—valuing the least expensive functional equivalent—or assemblage analysis, aggregating parcels to reflect assembled utility, as under just compensation standards emphasizes economic reality over hypothetical repurposing. For owner-occupied special-purpose properties tied to operations, appraisers delineate realty from and intangible going-concern elements, often requiring certified general appraisers to apply hybrid cost- adjustments where operational informs estimates. Techniques like utilization rate modeling quantify economic in industrial contexts by correlating production efficiency to value erosion, providing empirical adjustments beyond standard schedules. These methods prioritize verifiable data and over speculative comparables, ensuring defensible estimates amid data scarcity.

Appraisal Process

Initiating and Scoping an Appraisal

The initiation of a real estate appraisal assignment occurs when a client engages an , providing initial details such as the , intended use (e.g., financing, litigation, or taxation), and basic assignment parameters. The reviews these to assess feasibility, confirming competency under USPAP's Competency Rule, which requires disclosure of any lack of knowledge or experience in the type or market and either acquiring needed competence or declining the assignment. This phase includes negotiating terms like fees, timelines, and delivery format, often formalized in an engagement letter to establish mutual expectations and avoid misunderstandings. Scoping the appraisal follows problem identification, as outlined in USPAP Standards Rule 1-2(a), where the defines the core elements: the subject property and its interest appraised (e.g., or leased fee), the purpose and intended use, the type and definition of value sought (typically as a estimate between willing buyer and seller), the effective date of the appraisal, and relevant assignment conditions such as special assumptions or hypothetical scenarios. These conditions must be reasonable and not limit the scope to the point of undermining credibility, ensuring the appraisal addresses the client's needs without bias or undue restriction. Determining the scope of work, per USPAP's Scope of Work Rule, involves deciding the type and extent of , analyses, and reporting necessary to develop credible results, considering factors like property complexity, data availability, market conditions, and peer expectations for similar assignments. This may specify valuation approaches (e.g., sales comparison, cost, or income), level of property inspection (interior/exterior or exterior-only), data sources (, market interviews), and any reliance on third-party information, with the retaining responsibility for the final opinion of value. The scope must be documented and disclosed in the report under Standards Rule 2-2(a)(vii), allowing flexibility but prohibiting shortcuts that compromise objectivity or accuracy. In practice, scoping aligns with client-specific requirements, such as federal guidelines for appraisals, which mandate elements like highest-and-best-use analysis and comparable sales verification, while adhering to USPAP's overarching standards for . Failure to properly scope can lead to non-compliant reports or challenges in or lending contexts, underscoring the appraiser's duty to tailor the work without external pressure influencing the outcome.

Data Collection and Site Inspection

Data collection constitutes a foundational phase in the real estate appraisal process, wherein appraisers assemble verifiable information on the subject property, comparable properties, and broader market influences to support value estimation under the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Standards Rule 1-2, which mandates identification of relevant property characteristics and collection of sufficient for credible results. This includes general encompassing economic indicators such as employment rates and interest trends, locational factors like and neighborhood demographics, and governmental elements including tax assessments and regulatory constraints; specific property detailing site dimensions, building specifications, and improvements; and yield for income-producing properties, such as rental rates and operating expenses derived from leases or . Appraisers source this information from (e.g., county assessor databases for land records), multiple listing services (MLS) for sales histories, interviews with property owners or agents, and proprietary databases to ensure reliability and minimize verification errors, with cross-checking against multiple outlets recommended to counter potential inaccuracies in self-reported or outdated records. Site inspection serves to empirically verify collected , assess physical condition, and identify value-affecting attributes that may not appear in records, aligning with USPAP's requirement for appraisals to reflect the extent of inspection deemed necessary for the assignment's scope. For conventional appraisals, this entails a personal of both exterior and interior elements, including measurements of gross living area using ANSI standards (e.g., excluding unfinished basements), evaluation of structural integrity such as foundation stability and roof condition, documentation of functional utilities like HVAC systems, and notation of deficiencies or externalities like easements or environmental hazards. Procedures typically involve sketching floor plans, photographing key features (e.g., upgrades or visible cracks indicating deferred ), and observing site-specific factors such as , access, and views that influence . In hybrid or desktop appraisals, permitted under certain lender guidelines like those from , third-party collectors may perform the , transmitting factual observations (e.g., room counts and photos) to the for , though this bifurcated approach risks reduced accuracy if on-site verification is curtailed, as evidenced by critiques of incomplete condition assessments in non-physical inspections. Regulatory overlays, such as FHA requirements for structural soundness (e.g., no evidence of settling foundations or ), further dictate depth to mitigate lending risks. Verification during inspection extends to legal and title aspects, confirming compliance with building codes and absence of unrecorded encumbrances through on-site cues like visible boundary markers, while economic data integration—such as local vacancy rates from or market surveys—contextualizes the property's performance potential. Appraisers document findings in field notes or digital tools to reconcile discrepancies, such as overstated square footage in seller listings, ensuring the appraisal's evidentiary basis withstands scrutiny; failure to collect or inspect adequately can undermine credibility, as seen in regulatory enforcement actions against incomplete reports. Emerging practices incorporate geospatial tools like drones for inaccessible roofs or GIS mapping for , enhancing precision without supplanting ground-level observation.

Analysis, Reconciliation, and Reporting

In the analysis phase of real estate appraisal, the appraiser applies the relevant valuation approaches—sales comparison, , and —to the collected data, adjusting for factors such as property condition, , and market trends to derive value indications from each method. This step requires verification of comparable sales data for accuracy, including confirmation of transaction details and market participant motivations, to ensure adjustments reflect rather than unsubstantiated assumptions. For income-producing properties, analysis incorporates projections based on verifiable rental rates and rates derived from market evidence. Reconciliation follows, where the appraiser evaluates the quality and quantity of supporting each approach, assessing their applicability to the type and market conditions to form a final value opinion. This process prioritizes approaches with the strongest evidentiary support—for instance, favoring the sales comparison method in active residential markets over the cost approach, which may undervalue due to entrepreneurial profit omissions—without resorting to simple averaging, as mandated by standards emphasizing reasoned professional judgment. USPAP requires that consider the relative persuasiveness of value indications, disclosing any limitations in reliability that could affect credibility. The reporting phase culminates in a written or oral appraisal report compliant with USPAP Standards Rule 2, which must identify the client, intended use, effective date of the appraisal, scope of work, and property characteristics, while clearly presenting the analyses performed, reconciliation rationale, and final value conclusion. Reports for federally related transactions, such as those under guidelines, include reconciled value, supporting data summaries, and photographs of the subject property and comparables to substantiate conclusions. Extraordinary assumptions or hypothetical conditions must be conspicuously stated, with the appraiser certifying independence from bias or advocacy.

Appraisers and Professional Standards

Qualifications, Licensing, and Ethics

In the , qualifications for real estate appraisers are established by the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) of The Appraisal Foundation, which sets minimum , experience, and examination criteria for state licensing and certification. Entry-level appraisers typically begin as trainees, requiring 75 hours of qualifying under supervisory oversight, with no independent signing authority. Progression to licensed residential status demands an additional 30 hours of (total 150 hours), 1,000 hours of supervised experience, and passage of a national examination. Certified residential appraisers need a or equivalent (such as 30 semester hours in specified subjects), 200 hours of , 1,500 hours of experience over at least 12 months, and the examination, enabling appraisals of properties with up to four residential units regardless of value. Certified general appraisers, qualified for nonresidential and complex properties, require a , 300 hours of , 3,000 hours of experience (with at least 1,500 in nonresidential appraisal), and the exam. These criteria, updated periodically (e.g., effective May 1, 2018, for practical applications of ), aim to ensure competency amid evolving market complexities. Licensing occurs at the state level, with all 50 states and territories requiring compliance with AQB standards for federally related transactions under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989, overseen by the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC). States administer their own boards to verify education, experience logs, background checks, and exam passage, often mandating errors and omissions insurance and (e.g., 28 hours biennially, including USPAP updates). Noncompliance can result in denial or revocation, with reciprocity available for appraisers meeting equivalent standards across states. Internationally, licensing varies widely; many lack mandatory certification, relying on voluntary professional bodies or national standards like the International Valuation Standards (IVS), which emphasize global consistency but do not enforce licensing uniformly, potentially leading to less rigorous oversight compared to U.S. federal mandates. Ethical standards for U.S. appraisers are primarily governed by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), promulgated biennially by The Appraisal Foundation since 1987, which all state-licensed appraisers must adhere to for credibility in federally related work. USPAP's Ethics Rule mandates integrity, objectivity, independent judgment, and impartiality, prohibiting subordination of opinion to client pressure or undisclosed conflicts of interest; appraisers must disclose any services that could impair objectivity and maintain client confidentiality except as legally required. The Record Keeping Rule requires retention of workfiles for at least five years (or two years post-final disposition), supporting verifiability. Professional organizations like the Appraisal Institute supplement USPAP with their Code of Professional Ethics, emphasizing competence, avoidance of misrepresentation, and promotion of public trust through enforceable disciplinary processes. Violations, such as biased valuations influenced by lender incentives—a concern highlighted in post-2008 analyses—can lead to sanctions, license suspension, or civil liability, underscoring the profession's reliance on self-regulation amid historical pressures for inflated appraisals.

Role of Professional Organizations

Professional organizations play a central role in establishing and enforcing standards for real estate appraisers, promoting uniformity, ethical conduct, and professional competence to safeguard public trust in valuations. In the United States, The Appraisal Foundation, authorized by in 1987 under Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act, serves as the primary standards-setting body, developing and updating the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which outlines ethical and performance requirements for appraisals used in federally related transactions. The Foundation's Appraisal Standards Board (ASB) and Appraisal Qualifications Board (AQB) oversee these standards and qualifications, respectively, while collaborating with the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) of the for regulatory monitoring to ensure compliance across states. Membership-based associations such as the (AI) and the American Society of Appraisers (ASA) build upon these foundational standards by offering advanced credentialing, continuing , and advocacy for appraisers. The AI, with over 25,000 members as of 2023, administers designations like the MAI (Member of the Appraisal Institute) for experienced professionals who demonstrate expertise through rigorous examinations, , and adherence to its Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice, which align with USPAP but include additional guidance notes for complex valuations. Similarly, the ASA certifies appraisers in valuation, emphasizing independence and objectivity to mitigate conflicts of interest in business and real estate contexts. These organizations conduct peer reviews, provide resources for best practices, and lobby for policies that preserve appraiser independence, particularly post-2008 reforms that addressed appraisal pressure from lenders. Internationally, bodies like the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) harmonize global practices to facilitate cross-border transactions. The IVSC, established in 1981, publishes the International Valuation Standards (IVS), last updated effective January 31, 2025, which define conceptual frameworks for asset valuations, including , emphasizing market-based evidence and transparency for consistency across jurisdictions. RICS, with members in over 140 countries, integrates IVS into its Red Book global standards, requiring chartered surveyors to follow mandatory valuation protocols that promote ethical reporting and competency in appraisals. These entities foster international reciprocity in qualifications and address emerging challenges like sustainable valuation adjustments, though adoption varies by national regulations, with some countries adapting IVS to local legal contexts rather than fully supplanting domestic rules.

Training and Continuing Education

Initial training for real estate appraisers in the United States is governed by the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) of The Appraisal Foundation, which establishes minimum education requirements aligned with federal mandates under Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989. Aspiring appraisers typically begin as trainees, completing at least 75 hours of qualifying education covering basic appraisal principles (30 hours), basic appraisal procedures (30 hours), the 15-hour National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) course, and a 7-hour supervisory appraiser/trainee course, followed by supervised experience under a certified appraiser. Advancement to licensed residential status requires 150 total hours of education, including the trainee modules plus residential market analysis and (15 hours), residential appraiser site valuation and cost approach (15 hours), residential sales comparison and income approaches (30 hours), and residential report writing and case studies (15 hours), alongside 1,000 hours of experience over at least six months and passing a national exam. Certified residential appraisers must accumulate 200 hours of education, incorporating advanced residential applications and case studies (15 hours) plus additional modules on statistics, modeling, and finance (15 hours), a bachelor's degree or equivalent, 1,500 hours of experience over at least 12 months, and the certification exam. For certified general appraisers, who handle complex commercial properties, requirements escalate to 300 hours of education—including general appraiser market analysis (30 hours), site valuation (15 hours), cost approach (15 hours), sales comparison (30 hours), income approach (60 hours), advanced applications (75 hours), and general report writing (15 hours)—a bachelor's degree, 3,000 hours of experience (with at least 1,500 in nonresidential properties) over a minimum of 18 months, and the exam. Effective January 1, 2026, new applicants at all levels must complete an 8-hour course on valuation bias and analyzing bias in appraisal, reflecting AQB efforts to address perceived inconsistencies in property assessments, though empirical evidence on bias prevalence remains debated in peer-reviewed studies. Continuing education ensures appraisers remain current with evolving standards, market dynamics, and regulatory changes, with most U.S. states mandating 28 hours biennially for renewal, including a compulsory 7-hour National USPAP Update course to maintain compliance with ethical and performance standards. This requirement stems from AQB criteria, which states may exceed; for instance, trainees often need 14 hours annually, while certified appraisers fulfill the full 28 hours every two years, with credits available for teaching approved courses (up to half the total) or equivalent activities like . The 7-hour USPAP component must reflect the most recent edition, renewed every two years, and failure to complete it invalidates other credits. Starting in 2026, first-time continuing education cycles will include a new 7-hour valuation course for existing licensees, aimed at standardizing awareness of potential influences on valuation judgments, though critics argue it may overemphasize subjective factors without robust causal data linking bias to systematic errors in appraisals. Professional organizations such as the Appraisal Institute provide approved CE programs, including webinars, seminars, and self-study options on topics like advanced income capitalization, analysis, and regulatory updates, often tailored to state-specific needs. Internationally, requirements vary; for example, in , provinces like mandate 24-35 hours biennially through bodies like the Appraisal Institute of Canada, emphasizing similar USPAP-equivalent standards, while [European Union](/page/European Union) countries under the European Group of Valuers' Associations promote harmonized training via the TEGoVA criteria, requiring initial qualifications equivalent to a bachelor's level plus ongoing professional development without uniform CE hours. Empirical data from state boards indicate high compliance rates, with non-renewal primarily due to incomplete USPAP updates rather than substantive knowledge gaps.

Technological and Mass Appraisal Innovations

Automated Valuation Models (AVMs)

Automated Valuation Models (AVMs) are statistical algorithms that estimate property values by analyzing large datasets including recent sales of comparable properties, property characteristics such as square and age, location factors, and market trends, without requiring physical inspections. These models typically employ , hedonic pricing, or techniques to generate value predictions rapidly. AVMs emerged in the late as tools for mass appraisal, with early applications in and lending, evolving significantly with advances in computing power and data availability by the 1990s. In real estate appraisal contexts, AVMs serve as supplements to traditional human-led appraisals, particularly for low-risk residential properties or preliminary valuations in and portfolio monitoring. Publicly accessible examples include online tools such as Redfin Estimate, Zillow Zestimate, Realtor.com estimates, and AI-enhanced options like Homesage.ai, which offer quick and free valuations but exhibit lower precision for unique property features compared to professional methods. They enable lenders to assess collateral value quickly, often within seconds, reducing costs compared to full appraisals which can take days and cost hundreds of dollars. Empirical testing indicates that basic AVMs can achieve accuracy where approximately 70% of estimates fall within ±15% of actual sale prices, though performance varies by market conditions and property type. More advanced models incorporating multi-source data, such as visual imagery from photos, have shown improvements in precision, with absolute errors reduced by up to 10-20% in some studies. Despite these benefits, AVMs face limitations stemming from their reliance on historical data, which may not capture unique property conditions like structural defects or recent renovations not reflected in . Accuracy degrades in volatile markets or for properties, where models can exhibit systematic errors; for instance, analyses of urban datasets reveal geographic and property-type biases, with over- or under-valuations exceeding 10% in certain neighborhoods. Some studies suggest AVMs may amplify existing market disparities in valuations across demographic groups, though causal attribution to model flaws versus underlying economic factors remains debated, as discrepancies often align with observed sale price variations rather than independent algorithmic prejudice. Regulatory oversight in the United States has intensified to address these risks, culminating in a June 2024 interagency final rule by the , FDIC, OCC, CFPB, FHFA, and NCUA, effective October 1, 2025, mandating quality control standards for AVMs used in federally regulated transactions. These standards require institutions to establish policies ensuring accuracy and completeness, internal validation of model outputs against independent benchmarks, and to mitigate risks of or manipulation, while prohibiting AVM use if it results in violations of fair lending laws. The rule does not supplant appraisals for high-risk loans but aims to enhance AVM reliability as a cost-efficient alternative where appropriate. Professional bodies like the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) further recommend AVM optimization for specific classes and ongoing performance monitoring to maintain equitable estimates.

Mass Appraisal Systems

Mass appraisal systems enable the valuation of large numbers of properties as of a specific date, utilizing standardized methodologies, shared data sources, and statistical validation to promote equity and uniformity, particularly in assessments. This contrasts with single-property appraisals, which involve analysis tailored to one parcel's unique characteristics, often for lending or litigation; mass systems prioritize group-level patterns of over individualized details to handle volumes infeasible for manual review. Central to these systems is the development of valuation models calibrated via or similar techniques on aggregated , including , costs, and indicators segmented by strata such as neighborhoods or building types. Property characteristics—like square footage, age, location, and improvements—are compiled into databases for model application, with periodic cycles (often every 4-6 years in U.S. jurisdictions) to reflect market shifts. Statistical tests, such as measures of dispersion (e.g., coefficient of dispersion under 15% for uniformity) and (e.g., assessment near 100%), validate model performance against actual . Computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) software dominates implementation, automating data storage, model deployment, owner notifications, and compliance reporting; for instance, systems like those from or Harris Govern integrate geographic information systems (GIS) for and predictive modeling, including with Real Property Information Systems (RPIS). The rationale for GIS-integrated CAMA and RPIS stems from limitations of manual processes, which cause delays, inconsistencies in valuations, and challenges in discovering untaxed properties; such integration aligns with reforms to improve accuracy, transparency, and revenue collection efficiency. Adopted widely since the , CAMA reduces and scales to millions of parcels, as seen in U.S. counties processing over 500,000 properties annually. However, reliance on historical data can lag rapid market changes, necessitating manual overrides for outliers. The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) sets benchmarks for mass appraisal, requiring documented procedures for , model calibration, and performance auditing to ensure defensible, non-discriminatory outcomes. In practice, jurisdictions must balance efficiency with accuracy, as suboptimal models risk legal challenges under uniformity clauses in state constitutions, prompting ongoing refinements like hybrid CAMA-AVM integrations.

Integration of AI and Data Analytics

Artificial intelligence (AI) and data analytics have increasingly supplemented traditional real estate appraisal methods by processing vast datasets, including historical sales, property characteristics, economic indicators, and geospatial information, to generate predictive valuations. Machine learning algorithms, such as boosted tree ensembles, enable automated valuation models (AVMs) to forecast property prices with greater precision than manual comparables in data-rich environments, as demonstrated in studies where AI-AVMs outperformed linear regression baselines by reducing mean absolute percentage errors to under 10% in urban markets. Integration often involves combining AI with building information modeling (BIM) for enhanced accuracy in commercial appraisals, where models incorporate structural data alongside market trends to automate up to 37% of valuation tasks by 2030 projections. Data analytics platforms aggregate real-time signals like interest rates, demographic shifts, and imagery-derived property conditions to identify patterns imperceptible to human appraisers, thereby mitigating subjective biases in comparable selections. For instance, AI-driven tools analyze millions of transaction records to refine hedonic pricing models, improving valuation reliability in volatile markets; empirical assessments confirm that high-quality input and algorithmic tuning can elevate accuracy by 15-20% over conventional approaches. However, efficacy hinges on , as flawed inputs propagate errors, underscoring the necessity of hybrid systems where appraisers validate AI outputs against on-site inspections. Regulatory and ethical hurdles persist, with concerns over algorithmic opacity—"" decision-making—complicating accountability and compliance with standards like the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which mandate transparent reasoning. AI systems risk perpetuating historical biases if trained on skewed datasets, potentially violating fair housing laws, as evidenced by cases where unmonitored models undervalued minority-owned properties. Jurisdictions such as New York have adapted laws to address AI-specific liabilities, requiring disclosures of automated influences in appraisals, while industry adoption lags due to skepticism over reliability in non-standard properties like unique rural estates. Despite these challenges, proponents argue that rigorous auditing and human oversight can harness AI's speed—reducing appraisal timelines from weeks to hours—without compromising causal fidelity to market fundamentals.

Regulatory Frameworks

United States Regulations

Real estate appraisal in the is regulated primarily at the state level, with federal oversight to ensure uniformity and competence in appraisals for federally related transactions, defined as those involving federally insured financial institutions or backed by federal agencies. Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989 established this framework, mandating that states develop licensing and certification programs for appraisers and creating the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) within the (FFIEC) to monitor state compliance. The ASC conducts risk-based compliance reviews of state appraiser and appraisal management company (AMC) programs, with authority to impose sanctions for deficiencies, including under enhancements from the Dodd-Frank Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. States must adhere to minimum qualifications for appraiser licensure and certification as set by the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) of The Appraisal Foundation, a congressionally authorized nonprofit designated under FIRREA to establish standards. These include education, experience, and examination requirements varying by credential level, such as licensed residential (for properties up to $1 million), certified residential (up to $1 million non-complex), and certified general (no value limit). Compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), also promulgated by The Appraisal Foundation, is mandatory for state-licensed and certified appraisers performing federally related appraisals, covering , competency, scope of work, and reporting to promote public trust and consistency. State regulatory agencies enforce USPAP through disciplinary actions, while the ASC oversees this process without direct enforcement over individual appraisers. The Dodd-Frank Act strengthened appraiser by prohibiting lender coercion, bribery, or influence over appraisals in covered transactions, requiring lenders to provide borrowers with appraisal copies at least three days before closing, and establishing a national registry for AMCs with state oversight requirements. AMCs managing appraisals for federally related transactions must register with the ASC, ensure appraisers are state-licensed or certified, and maintain protocols. Federal agencies issue interagency guidelines, such as those updated in 2018 and 2020, specifying when appraisals are required—typically for transactions exceeding $250,000 (with exemptions for certain renewals or business loans)—and allowing evaluations for lower-risk cases to reduce costs while preserving safety and soundness. Additionally, agencies such as the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) under the Department of Housing and Urban Development enforce specific Minimum Property Requirements in appraisals for insured mortgages; if an appraiser identifies roof problems such as curling shingles, leaks, or signs of near end-of-life, they may require repairs, full replacement, or a professional certification confirming at least two years of remaining useful life. These regulations collectively address risks exposed in the , prioritizing accurate valuations to mitigate systemic threats from inflated or biased appraisals, though enforcement relies on state execution under federal minimums. Variations exist across states in implementation, such as fee structures and mandates (typically 28 hours biennially, including USPAP updates), but all must meet ASC standards to avoid federal intervention.

European Union Standards

In the , real estate appraisal standards are shaped by financial regulations aimed at ensuring prudent lending and market stability, rather than a single harmonized directive mandating uniform valuation practices across all contexts. Key frameworks include the Capital Requirements (CRR), which defines under Article 229 as "the estimated amount for which the property would exchange on the date of valuation between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm's-length transaction after proper marketing wherein the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently and without compulsion". This definition underpins appraisals for collateral in banking, requiring independent valuers for exposures exceeding €3 million or 5% of an institution's own funds, with reviews at least every three years. The revised CRR emphasizes "prudently conservative" criteria in property valuation to mitigate risks from speculative price assumptions. Complementing these are the European Valuation Standards (EVS), published by The European Group of Valuers' Associations (TEGoVA) since the , with the tenth edition effective from January 1, 2025. EVS provide non-binding but widely adopted guidelines for valuation processes, bases (e.g., market value, investment value), and reporting, explicitly aligned with law such as the CRR and Credit Directive (2014/17/EU). The 2025 edition incorporates updates for residential property reports, including detailed physical characteristics, health and safety features, and environmental risks, reflecting post-2020 regulatory shifts toward and . TEGoVA, representing over 70,000 valuers across 30+ countries, promotes EVS as a tool for consistency amid national variations in licensing and enforcement. For banking supervision, the and national authorities enforce prudential valuations requiring independence from lending institutions, exclusion of deferred taxes or transaction costs in certain cases, and avoidance of upward price trend projections. The European Banking Authority's Regulatory Technical Standards further specify principles for valuers in resolution scenarios, emphasizing methodological consistency without prescribing detailed rules. In non-financial appraisals, such as taxation or expropriation, member states retain primary authority, often incorporating EVS voluntarily, though EU-wide statistical valuation standards exist for residential properties to support data harmonization under the . This decentralized approach prioritizes over rigid uniformity, with TEGoVA standards filling gaps through empirical alignment with market evidence and causal factors like and condition.

Variations in Other Jurisdictions

In , appraisals are governed by the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (CUSPAP), established by the Appraisal Institute of Canada in 2001, which mandates standards for , competency, and reporting similar to international norms but tailored to provincial regulations. Only designated appraisers certified by the AIC or equivalent bodies can conduct official valuations for lending or taxation, with agents prohibited from providing formal appraisals to ensure independence. Provincial bodies, such as British Columbia's Financial Services Authority, offer exemptions for ancillary services like inspections but enforce licensing for core appraisal functions. Australia relies on the (API) for oversight, which enforces a code of , professional standards, and adoption of International Valuation Standards (IVS) for consistency in assessments. Valuers must hold API , involving , , and adherence to protocols for residential and commercial properties, with no mandatory government licensing but voluntary registration encouraged for credibility in lending and disputes. This self-regulatory model contrasts with stricter state interventions elsewhere, emphasizing professional conduct over uniform licensing. In the , the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) provides valuation standards, including guidance on and licensed leisure properties, without a national licensing regime akin to the U.S. Appraisers, often chartered surveyors, qualify through RICS pathways requiring academic credentials, practical training, and assessments for competency in methods like comparable sales or capitalization. The Valuation Office Agency handles valuations for taxation, operating under HM Revenue & Customs directives, while private practice focuses on market-driven ethics rather than prescriptive federal rules. Post-Brexit, UK standards align closely with IVS but diverge from harmonization efforts by prioritizing surveyor autonomy. India's framework, shaped by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016 (RERA), requires state-level certification for appraisers involved in mortgage lending, overseen by the (RBI) and (NHB) through standardized procedures for banks. Valuations emphasize circle rates, comparable sales, and income approaches per RBI guidelines, with a focus on transparency to curb underreporting amid informal markets, though enforcement varies by state RERA authorities. The Indian Handbook on Policy, Standards, and Procedures for Real Estate Valuation by Banks and Housing Finance Institutions outlines mandatory reporting for financial institutions, prioritizing risk mitigation over pure market valuation. China employs a state-influenced system with mass appraisal models for urban taxation, as explored in feasibility studies for computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) nationwide, integrating GIS and automated valuation models (AVMs) in cities like since the early 2000s. Licensed firms, such as China Enterprise Appraisals Real Estate Appraisal Co., Ltd., conduct valuations under regulations, but practices blend market methods with government land-use controls, differing from Western fee-simple approaches due to of land. Limited private licensing exists, with emphasis on state-approved standards for lending and expropriation, reflecting centralized over decentralized professional bodies.

Controversies and Criticisms

Allegations of Bias and Discrimination

Allegations of racial in appraisals have centered on claims that properties owned or occupied by homeowners, or located in predominantly neighborhoods, receive systematically lower valuations compared to similar properties associated with owners or in neighborhoods. A 2022 study by researchers at the , and analyzed over 6 million appraisals and found that homes in majority- neighborhoods were undervalued by 23% on average when appraised for mortgages, even after controlling for property characteristics, though the gap narrowed to 5-10% in some models accounting for additional neighborhood factors. Similarly, a analysis of 2012-2018 data estimated that appraisal accounted for 9-19% of the devaluation in Black-majority neighborhoods, attributing the remainder to broader market dynamics like segregation and economic disparities. These findings have been cited in advocacy for reforms, though critics argue they conflate correlation with causation, as unmeasured variables such as local crime rates, school quality, and property maintenance—often correlated with racial composition due to historical policies—may drive valuation differences without implying intentional by appraisers. Government agencies have pursued investigations and enforcement actions based on such allegations. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) charged in July 2024 with appraisal bias in a refinance case involving a homeowner in , alleging the appraisal undervalued the property by $110,000 compared to a subsequent white-owner appraisal, leading to a settlement requiring policy changes and training. The (CFPB) and Department of Justice (DOJ) have issued guidance and filed statements of interest in lawsuits, emphasizing that in appraisals can violate the Fair Housing Act even absent proof of intent. In October 2024, DOJ sued and affiliated appraisers for allegedly against a borrower by using a low appraisal that denied loan approval. However, evidentiary challenges persist; a 2025 federal court dismissal of a high-profile appraisal discrimination case highlighted insufficient proof linking racial factors to valuation discrepancies after controlling for objective comparables. countersued HUD in January 2025, contesting the agency's claims under the Fair Housing Act. Peer-reviewed research presents mixed results on direct discrimination. A 2025 study in the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics examined private-label mortgage-backed securities data from 2010-2019 and found no statistically significant lower valuations for minority homeowners relative to white owners after adjusting for property and location variables, suggesting that observed gaps may stem from systemic market factors rather than appraiser prejudice. An review of multiple datasets, including The Markup's 2022 analysis, concluded that allegations often lack robust evidence of , as appraisal gaps frequently align with sales price differences and AVM predictions when rigorous controls are applied. Methodological critiques note that many bias claims rely on second appraisals or sales comparisons without full randomization, potentially introducing , while appraisers adhere to Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which mandate objective, market-based analysis. Local initiatives, such as Philadelphia's 2025 reforms requiring training and , aim to address perceptions of , but empirical validation of their impact remains pending.

Challenges to Accuracy and Methodology

Real estate appraisals encounter significant challenges to accuracy stemming from the subjective elements inherent in traditional valuation methodologies, including the sales comparison, , and approaches. These methods rely on appraisers' professional judgment for data selection, adjustments, and , which can introduce variability even among qualified professionals. For instance, inconsistencies arise when appraisers apply differing treatments to streams, rights, or analyses, leading to divergent value conclusions for identical properties. Such methodological inconsistencies undermine reliability, as evidenced by failures to explain adjustments or reconcile disparate data sources, which reduce the credibility of final valuations. The sales comparison approach, the most common for residential properties, faces limitations due to its dependence on recent, truly comparable sales data, which may be scarce in inactive markets, for unique properties, or during rapid fluctuations. Subjective adjustments for differences in , condition, , or time are required, but without verifiable market evidence, these can result in inconsistencies; for example, mismatched measurement techniques or unadjusted dissimilar features skew outcomes. In sparse data environments, appraisers may extrapolate from limited samples, amplifying errors, as seen in cases where only a handful of sales lead to undervaluation by hundreds of thousands of dollars. Additionally, non-arm's-length transactions or distant comparables further compromise accuracy by failing to reflect local market dynamics. The cost approach struggles with precise estimation of replacement or costs and , particularly for older or specialized properties where physical wear, functional , or economic factors defy objective quantification. calculations—encompassing physical deterioration, outdated designs, and external influences—are inherently subjective and sensitive to assumptions about history or market conditions, often failing to align with actual buyer . For historic or uniquely featured buildings, using modern materials for cost estimates introduces further inaccuracies, as does overlooking entrepreneurial profit or land value derived from few comps. The approach, more suited to commercial properties, exhibits high sensitivity to projections of net operating , vacancy rates, and capitalization rates, where minor variations—such as a 0.5% shift in the cap rate—can alter values by 10% or more. For residential applications, it is less reliable due to limited data for owner-occupied homes and challenges in forecasting neighborhood-driven changes or expenses. Data unreliability exacerbates issues, as historical rents may not predict future performance amid economic shifts. Overarching methodological hurdles include from non-traceable sources, measurement errors from environmental factors like , and lags in capturing volatile markets, all of which compound when hybrid methods are employed for non-standard . Professional standards like USPAP provide frameworks but lack granular guidance for sparse-data scenarios, leaving room for interpretive variance that affects overall appraisal precision.

Economic and Market Influences

Economic conditions, including rates, , levels, and (GDP) growth, directly shape appraisals by influencing buyer demand, financing costs, and expected future cash flows from properties. Appraisers incorporate these factors into valuation models, such as the income approach, where capitalization rates adjust based on prevailing economic indicators; for instance, rising rates typically compress property values by elevating discount rates and reducing affordability. Market influences like supply-demand imbalances further amplify these effects, with low inventory in high-growth economies driving upward pressure on appraisals. Interest rates exert a primary influence through their impact on mortgage affordability and capitalization rates. When the U.S. raised rates from near-zero levels in early 2022 to over 5% by mid-2023, commercial cap rates expanded by 100-200 basis points in many sectors, leading to valuation declines of 10-20% in affected markets. Lower rates, conversely, stimulate borrowing and , as seen in the post-2008 recovery period when rates below 4% correlated with annualized home price appreciation exceeding 5% nationally. Appraisers must adjust comparable sales data to reflect these dynamics, ensuring valuations align with current financing environments rather than historical norms. Inflation affects appraisals by altering replacement costs, rental income projections, and overall . During periods of elevated , such as the 7.8% U.S. peak in June 2022, construction material costs rose 20-30%, boosting replacement cost estimates in the cost approach and supporting higher nominal property values as a . However, persistent often coincides with central bank rate hikes, which can suppress transaction volumes and depress short-term appraisals, though long-term returns have historically outpaced in 85% of five-year periods since 1985. Appraisers differentiate between nominal and real value changes, applying adjustments for inflationary pressures on operating expenses versus growth. Employment rates and GDP growth drive demand-side influences on and commercial appraisals. Strong GDP expansion, which reached 2.5% annualized growth in the U.S. during Q4 2023, typically correlates with rising wages and consumer confidence, elevating residential and median home values by 5-7% annually in expanding economies. High , as during the 14.8% rate in April 2020, reduces buyer pools and leads to appraisal discounts of 10-15% in oversupplied markets, while low rates below 4% bolster multifamily and retail valuations through sustained . Local data, such as sector-specific job growth in tech hubs, often overrides national trends in site-specific appraisals. Market cycles introduce volatility, with booms inflating appraisals via speculative demand and busts requiring conservative adjustments. For example, the 2007-2009 downturn saw U.S. home prices fall 30% on average, prompting appraisers to emphasize fundamental economic indicators over recent comps to avoid overvaluation. policies, including fiscal stimuli, interact with these factors; the CARES Act's interventions stabilized appraisals amid pandemic-induced GDP contraction of 3.4%. Overall, appraisers rely on empirical data from sources like the for GDP and the for employment to ensure valuations reflect causal economic realities rather than transient sentiment.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.