In his State of the Union speech, the President said:
Millions of innocent Americans have seen their home values decline. And while government can’t fix the problem on its own, responsible homeowners shouldn’t have to sit and wait for the housing market to hit bottom to get some relief.
And that’s why I’m sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low rates. No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks. A small fee on the largest financial institutions will ensure that it won’t add to the deficit and will give those banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust.
I found this interesting, and can’t wait to see the legislation that the Prez is going to offer up.
I have written four articles on the topic of a Mega ReFi (here, here, here and here). The first one was back in August. At first I thought there might be something behind all this talk. Now, five months later, I think it's all gas. We’re not going to see any big ReFi plan until after the next election. These are the issues as I see it:
The Administration has been trying to come up with programs that would aid underwater homeowners. This problem is, by far, the biggest domestic drag on the economy. So it makes sense that the Obama team is looking for ways to deal with it. There is one enormous impediment that they face in achieving this lofty objective. They don’t have the money to fill this very big bucket. If they tried to pass a bill that would raise the odd $200-300 billion needed, they'd fall flat on their face.
The Administration's thinking has been that underwater borrowers should get the benefit of today’s lower interest rates, and it should not matter if the borrowers are underwater by 25% or more. The White House would like the unrealized losses to be rolled over at a low enough interest rate to let those borrowers dig their way out of the negative equity hole in five or ten years.
To achieve all this, the President’s men leaned hard on the one guy who had to sign off on the plan. The President had to ask the permission of Edward DeMarco, the Acting Director of FHFA. DeMarco is ultimately responsible for what happens with our dear friends, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I have followed DeMarco’s words since he was appointed Acting Director. He repeats the same thing every time he has a chance to describe the goal of his job:
As FHFA has noted on numerous occasions, with taxpayers providing the capital supporting the Enterprises’ operations, this “preserve and conserve” mandate directs us to minimize losses on behalf of taxpayers.
In my opinion DeMarco has lived up to that. He has taken steps that have reduced the risks and the ultimate costs that the taxpayers face with Fannie and Freddie (F/F) . It’s for that same reason that he has not allowed F/F to be the agencies of the Administration’s economic plans.
These plans would force F/F to reduce interest rates on outstanding mortgages. As some of those mortgages are in inventory at F/F, the ReFi will result in additional losses. More importantly, the ReFi’s will require a waiver of many existing representations, and warranties of existing borrowers. In the end, there would have been a cost to all of this. The plan was for F/F to absorb the costs over time, and therefore kick the can down the road. (Why the President said there would be no cost)
DeMarco has nixed those plans. I’m amazed by this. DeMarco has been beaten up by the likes of Elijal Cummings (the new wanna-be Barney Frank of housing, ....only in America…)
The President can send powerful forces wherever he likes.
He has very tough guys available to do the really hard jobs when needed.
But even the President can’t bend Ed DeMarco. The reason, I believe, is that Mr. DeMarco has “protection”.
A year ago, the Administration tried to junk DeMarco. It wanted its own guy in charge of the old Agencies. It wanted Ed out of the way so that they could conduct economic policy (quietly) using F/F's $6 trillion of power.
I thought the appointment was a shoo-in at the time. That was not the case. The appointment was squashed by one of the strongest hands in D.C. - Senator Richard Shelby (R. Al) put his thumbs down. Without Shelby's support in the Senate, no appointment was going through. So DeMarco kept his job, and the Administration's plans got checked by powerful forces. The question is, “Is this check mate?”
The legislation that the President promised in his SOTU address can’t be a rehash of what was previously tried with Fannie and Freddie. That door is closed, at least until the next election. Therefore, I anticipate that the President will attempt to use the other big D.C. player in the mortgage business, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA). This entity could, in theory, be used to achieve Obama’s objectives. It could guarantee the payment of the new mortgages that would be required. In the process, it would transfer risk (both credit and interest rate) from F/F to FHA. That would make DeMarco happy.
While this plan is a possibility, it will never happen. The FHA is already in financial jeopardy (link). It needs a capital injection into its reserve fund for the existing book of business ($1T).
FHA would need a very big slug of additional capital to handle the ReFis that the President wants. (There are approximately 10mm homeowners, all underwater who would be eligible.) There is no way in hell that the FHA could get that much money this year. To do so would require the blessings of Senator Shelby. He has already tipped his hand; he won't back off in 2012.
I think we will see some legislation on this from the WH. It will get talked about on TV, but it’s dead on arrival. The President will claim that he tried, and he will blame Republicans for the failed effort. I wonder if the upcoming failed effort is not a "planned failure". One that has been put "out there" purely for the political theater that will come with it.
President Clinton
Bully for Ed DeMarco for standing up on behalf of the folks that will foot this bill, the poor taxpayers.
.










"I'm amazed that after all of the history with the Agencies that this Administration is repeating the sins mistakes of the past."
ReplyDeleteBut there wasn't any mistake from the politicians' point of view. After all didn't Bill and George get re-elected? If anything, this is just another example of our necessity for short term results over long term sustainability.
Bruce,
ReplyDeleteGreat article! Thanks for your many insights.
In the last paragraph you mentioned Mike DeMarco. Did you mean to say Edward? Thanks.
Thanks A. I fixed that before it got published outside of the blog.
DeleteI went to high school with a Mike Demarco. He liked trout fishing, so did I.
I typed in "Mike" a few times putting this together. Fixed them all, so I thought....
b
One aspect of this is rarely covered. If these programs do not come through, or if banks give up and flush foreclosure inventory onto the market lots of appraised value would be lost.
ReplyDeleteAt a time when state and locals are stressed, property tax revenues would drop.
Should we be worried or is that not significant?
Great article. I've been impressed with Demarco's unwavering approach to F/F despite the political pressure.
ReplyDeleteWe've had policies that lower mortgage rates and encouraged modifications for years now. The result is losses on the part of investors from seeing their bonds called early. Most borrowers have either seen only a marginal benefit or re defaulted. Fannie & Freddie have become the poster child for bad lending and Demarco does not wish to continue that model and is unwilling to take on bad risk. The question is why Does Obama continue to push this, and the answer is he wants to transfer as much mortgage risk away from the troubled banks and onto Fannie & Freddie or the FHA. This is just another bank bail out.
ReplyDeleteJimMtnViewCaUSA
ReplyDeleteMy Congressman is pushing Obama to waste@^@^@^@^@^ invest more taxpayer dollars to bail out people whose loans have gone bad.
Wait.
Is this an election year?
Rep Honda: "...leading economists are in agreement that mandatory principal reduction is necessary.
...
While I applaud the President for bringing attention to the continued plight of struggling homeowners, his Administration must do a better job of standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the American people as they fight the banks..."
My oh my; the games people play...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/2012/01/30/145995636/freddie-mac-betting-against-struggling-homeowners
Sick of the continued issue of "cost" being kicked around. It doesn't "cost" anything.
ReplyDeleteThe losses on these loans are fact. When they want to realize the loss is what is being fought over.
How does "cost" fit into any of this?
Govmint buys a 1980 yugo for 2 million dollars in 2006. Govmint goes to sell yugo and can't get a bid over 1k. They decide to hold it, at it's purchase price.
5 years later, they finally sell it for $500.
When did the govmint "lose" the 2 million dollars? Where and when did the "cost" come?
Jim,MtnViewCa,USA
ReplyDeletewhat is about to happen:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/foreclosures-draw-private-equity-u-150127753.html
Private equity firms are jumping into distressed housing as the U.S. government plans to market 200,000 foreclosed homes as rentals to speed up the economic recovery.
why it is a bad idea [just a snip, read the whole thing]:
mhanson.com/archives/606
a) Foreclosures and distressed sales INCREASE neighborhood house values and create a positive economic benefit when investors buy low, rehab and resell higher. Moreover, rehabs create jobs and the resale makes for TWO existing home sales transactions, commissions etc in a short period of time. Lastly, they make for an increase in property tax revenue on final resale.
b) Foreclosures and distresses sales BENEFIT the neighborhood and local area economy when they are sold to an owner-occupant who purchased in the open market and then rehabs, maintains and occupies.
c) Foreclosures and distressed sales LOWER neighborhood house values and create little economic benefit when they are sold to professional investors at below market prices who turn around and rent them. Moreover, rental houses are always the worst maintained in the neighborhood and decrease the values of houses in their immediate area. Lastly, these transactions are a huge drag on property tax revenue.
d) Lastly, there is more than enough demand for distressed real estate by 1st timers and investors to absorb multiples of the supply presently on the market. The back log in REO resales is not about demand, its more about financial institutions willingness to accept losses.
Excellent analysis.
ReplyDeleteIs this new info released by the administration, or the same as you last knew it?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/obama-lays-out-his-latest-mortgage-plan
Any thought on it?
It is the “cow” that produces the milk that helps them to win elections. You call it an “engine” but a cow is probably closer, as a cow has a life cycle that ends and cannot produce milk anymore. Freddie and Fannie when it milks the taxpayer will eventually be dried up. It is like a big leak in the engine of America.
ReplyDelete