Saving to Inve$t

Smart Personal Finance and Effective Money Management in Today's Economy

Why you should be angry with the 2008 Housing Relief Bill  

Over the weekend, Congress gave final approval to the housing relief bill that is aimed at helping thousands of struggling homeowners avoid foreclosure and to temper falling home prices. It also includes provisions to assist institutions that operate in the mortgage market, namely the Government sponsored enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The cost of this bill, despite other proposed funding options, will be funded primarily by the American taxpayer over the long term and in particular those of us who are financially fit. That is people who have not got in over their heads and are effectively managing the debt they have. It also covers people who have taken the efforts, sometimes sacrificing other wants and luxuries, in order to be timely on their income tax payments, debt obligations and to ensure they enter loans they can afford. So if you are in the "financially fit" category, like I am, you should be annoyed at having to bail out the rest of broke America. I understand that some people are genuinely distressed, but the vast majority got themselves into this mess through financial ignorance or mismanagement.

Here are the main financing elements of the housing relief bill where I see a lot of potential for failure and fallout:

- $300 Billion towards refinancing of mortgages for 400,000 distressed borrowers. The reason a lot of these families got into these "sub prime" loans that they couldn't afford was because they didn't quality for the regular 30 year loans in the first place. It also places a lot of pressure on already struggling lenders who have to take a lower loan value and share profits with the government. The cost from these losses will be passed onto to the "good" financially fit borrowers who will see their taxes and cost of their financing go up. Also, even if 400,000 homeowners can avoid foreclosure — a figure that a few critics dispute — some estimates put the number of potential foreclosures from 2007 through 2012 at up to 6 million. So this bill is like creating a fishing safety net, when you trying to catch sharks in the ocean.

- $25 Billion for the GSE's. This makes their government backing explicit, rather than implicit, and gives them support in the eyes of Wall street that they have a funding source to get through the housing crisis. They currently do not need this $25 billion line of credit, but if they do (in the event of a worsening of the housing market) and because they are too big to fail, we will then have a real taxpayer funded bailout of a major financial institution and the cost will be much more than $25 billion over the long term. Some critics say the legislation goes too far in propping up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and shielding lenders."The new law will actually encourage lenders to be even more reckless," argues Peter Schiff of Euro Pacific Capital. "The government is telling lenders not to worry about the loans they make, because if borrowers do not repay, the government will."

- Raise the federal debt limit from $9.8 Trillion to $10.6 Trillion, an $800 billion increase. Bascically giving the treasury a green light to freely spend (waste) tax payer funds to save sinking ships. This will raise our national debt and continue to weaken the US dollar. We all know how good (not) the government is at spending tax payer money in times of crisis (Katrina hurricanes, Iraq War, lack of a energy plan etc)

- Provides $180 million for financial counseling and legal assistance to help families stay in their homes (to be distributed in grants by NeighborWorks, a national non-profit). I thought this counseling had been going on for the past year, yet the crisis continues to worsen with more people caught up in it. The problem is falling house prices and past predatory lending practices where loans where given to people who could not afford them. Counseling will make people aware of their options, not forestall foreclosure. Unless the loan servicing companies participate in assisting distressed home owners, this is just wasted money by the government.

- Refundable tax credit for first time home buyers (10% of the purchase price, up to a $7,500 credit). This is good for those prudent folk who waited to buy a house or bought a house in the last few years that they could afford. However, if it is just used by people as a deposit or collateral to buy a house that can't really afford, then you know where we will be back to! Up to 3 million buyers could be eligible for the tax credit, according to the National Association of Realtors. "It's something that will help, but I'm not sure it will make a substantial difference," says Joel Greenberg, CEO of Novadebt, a non-profit consumer credit counselor. "A lot of people are sitting on the side, unable to move, because there are so many obstacles, such as not having sufficient credit. You have the obstacle of the concern that something you buy now will lose value. A $7,500 tax credit isn't going to do it."

- $500/$1000 Standard Deduction in Property taxes, for joint/single filers. This will probably end up resulting in higher property and local taxes down the line to recoup the costs.

- $4 Billion grant to states to buy foreclosed properties. States will be allowed to buy and rehabilitate foreclosed properties. The funding had been opposed by the White House, which said it would benefit lenders, property vultures and not homeowners. I agree as these rehabilitated people will be sold to astute property investors for a substantial discount and not to people that really need the housing. The "states" are basically playing "flip that house".

The bill is also looking to raise $18.5 billion in revenues by requiring credit card companies to report more information to the IRS about credit card transactions, a move designed to force merchants to more accurately report their income. This will result in added costs to credit companies and merchants, which they will of course pass onto consumers in some form like higher fees or credit transaction costs. Another source of funding the bill is from the GSE's - but they are going to have enough monetary challenges of their own to really provide much funding in the short to medium term, which leaves the American taxpayer as the main source of funding. Why isn't there an additional tax or penalty on the financial institutions that got many homeowners into this mess through their financial trickery in the first place?

Apart from a short term slowing of the current housing market crisis and credit crunch, the bill will only delay the inevitable downward spiral. Unfortunately the American and global economy is heading into a recession, not out of one. So the housing bill, like the stimulus checks, will only have a temporary affect. The government again is trying to spend us out of an economic crisis, which is unlikely to work and only add to our national debt and the continued devaluation of the US dollar.

Quotes from USA today

Related Posts
>
Is now the time to buy your dream home
>
The Rental Squeeze
> Repay your Mortgage up to 7 years earlier

Liked this article? Then consider subscribing by
clicking here to receive regular updates

Liked what you read? Then consider subscribing (free) to get the latest articles delivered directly via RSS or Email

Post a Comment

12 comments

  • Curt  
    July 28, 2008 10:15 AM

    Sounds like the time to out of dollar bases assets and get some Gold and Silver.

  • Matt H  
    July 28, 2008 12:40 PM

    Great article and info, I am in the market for my first house purchase in the next 6-12 months and have waited the past years as I saw tons of people jumping into the market on houses they couldnt afford. I didnt let the "easy money" loan speeches talk me into buying when I wasnt ready, thankfully. I hope house prices come down more (not good for most people and the economy, I realize) but around me they are way to high still.

    I have been following your blog the past few weeks and really enjoy it...keep up the good posts!

  • Andy  
    July 28, 2008 5:15 PM

    Curt, you could be right. Espically given the budget forecasts (see my post on this)

    Matt -Thanks for the kind words. Its those kind of comments that keep me going. Smart moves with waiting to buy and not falling for the gimmicks. I think towards the end of the year will be a good time to buy. When the next administration comes in, a lot of uncertainty and poor management by the current administration will be removed. This should give people confidence to buy houses and you should see house prices appreciate.

  • Robert Doggett  
    July 29, 2008 7:21 AM

    This post is off on the facts and shifts blame. Sure some homeowners should have known better, but most of the foreclosures are refinances, thus, they owed the home until they were put into an adjustable rate mortgage with abusive terms. Homeowners trusted their mortgage brokers who were paid up front -- and paid more for putting them into that ARM with prepayment penalties. The housing bill is a disappointment to be sure, but simply blaming the borrowers is irresponsible and incorrect. See my post on the bill -- http://foreclosurebuzz.org/2008/07/07/housing-bill-rescues-banks-more-than-borrowers/

    Robert Doggett
    www.foreclosurebuzz.org

  • sirbeef  
    July 29, 2008 11:13 AM

    You're quite correct Robert. Blaming the borrower is off base. The moment the industry got away from requiring 20 percent down on home purchases, was the moment we crossed the Rubicon.
    That coupled with artificially low interest rates (thanks to Greenspan, et. al.) which fueled borrowing, which in turn led to extremely overpriced property, which will hopefully fall and fall the next 24 months to normal levels.

  • Bill in NC  
    July 29, 2008 1:54 PM

    Requiring ALL credit card transactions be reported to the IRS is counterproductive for the government.

    If they suspect a merchant of underreporting income, they can simply ask for their credit card receipts, or issue an administrative summons to the card processor if needed.

    Historically, the IRS has had poorly designed and implemented computer systems.

    It's often difficult for an auditor to get more than the most recently filed tax return from their current system.

    Which is why the audit notice requests you bring back returns to the audit, even if those tax years are not part of the audit (make sure to "forget" to do that)

    Cramming more data into those systems won't help improve their already dismal reliability.

  • robert  
    July 29, 2008 4:56 PM

    [I agree as these rehabilitated people will be sold to astute property investors for a substantial discount and not to people that really need the housing. The "states" are basically playing "flip that house"]

    You may be right. Or, maybe they won't be able to sell them at all. Typically, these community-reinvestment arms try to target first-time homebuyers, so they can sell homes to them that nobody else wants to buy.

    http://foreclosureresolutioncenter.com/blog/2008/07/19/avoid-foreclosure/government-to-help-homeowners-stop-foreclosure-wink-wink/

  • Andy  
    July 30, 2008 1:12 PM

    @ Robert D. I have seen many homeowners take loans 10 to 20 times their annual income. Because they get a teaser rate (via ARM mortgages) they buy the house. Yes they can complain they were fooled, but they need to take some responsibility for signing the mortgage. Did someone force them to do it? Not likely. Also, when folks get a house they keep spending on improvements and getting "HD-TV's", which adds to their (credit card) debts. Suddenly when their house goes down or they lose their job there debts become too much. Come on, do you really think people (adults) can claim ignorance as a reason for getting into their position. As I said, I agree some people were truly fooled or external circumstances caused their downfall. However a majority could have avoided their situation by being more careful upfront and knowing what they were getting into with what was probably the biggest purchase in thier life. Now they walk away from their houses because the house value is less than the loan value - what message is that sending to others and future generations - "Get into debt because you can just walk away from it one day when it gets too big".

    I did also mention that institutions and the brokers representing them should be fined heavily. But don't see that anywhere in the housing bill. When things get better, all these brokers will be back peddling the same false dreams to make money for themselves.

    The housing bill was needed to show the government/treasury was doing something. However I think it was more political than substantial. Only time will cleanse the economic system of the excess from the last few years.

    @ SB - See my above point. Interest rates were low and loan standards lax, and yet they did not qualify for the 30yr loan. So that's how they got suckered into an ARM and are now paying the price.

    @ Bill - Agree with you and you make a good point. If the process is bad the systems won't help/work.

    @ Robert. You said it. I think they will sell the homes, just not to the people who need them.

  • Tim  
    August 1, 2008 3:18 AM

    Yes, the people who took out the loans should have known better. Yes, the mortgage brokers were greedy, and in some cases may have misled some of their customers. But the majority of the blame lies with the banks that made the loans. (I put less blame on the mortgage brokers, because their role in this is that of a sales department - they don't make the yes or no funding decision - that is done by the bank's underwriting departments.)

    The banks are the entities that decided to lower downpayment requirements, relax credit score requirements, and take loans with low or no documentation. They had the responsibility to examine and say yes or no to every single loan application, and they chose to say yes to many that were clearly too risky from a historical perspective. Essentially none of the subprime loans of the past few years would have been made at any time previously - they would have all been viewed as way too risky by the banks' underwriting departments.

    So what was different this time? Primarily two things: The banks got greedy, and saw their competitors getting more and more feees from doing more and more loans, so most of them couldn't resist doing more themselves (I'd call it the herd mentality, but it ended up being more like lemmings.) Second, they were now reselling more of the loans, as opposed to keeping them in their own portfolios, so they didn't care as much about the absolute risk of the loans they were underwriting and selling. Some Wall Street financial engineering geniuses bundled batches of these mortgages together and resold them to people who didn't really understand what they were buying. The purchasers (investors) were told since lots of loans were bundled together, the risk was minimized. Of course the people who told the investors this either clearly didn't understand that the risk was in no way diversified, or they just plain lied.

    And the worst part is there is no real penalty to the banks who screwed up so badly by being greedy and stupid. As a result, something similar will happen again. After all, how long has it been since the S&L crisis, where hundreds of S&Ls made bad loans and the government (I.e. the taxpayers) had to step in and fix the situation. Not to mention the billions and billions of bad loans to South American countries in the eighties that had to be written off.

  • Shadox  
    August 6, 2008 1:29 AM

    I agree that the Housing Bill is a horrible idea - but my main concern is that it essentially pays off the wrong people and creates the wrong incentives.

    The responsible folk who sat out the housing bubble are being forced to pay for the folly of those who tried to get rich quick. I have my own post on the subject.

  • Andy  
    August 6, 2008 12:42 PM

    This article was also republished at Seeking Aplha and had 27 comments, some which were quite interesting and people clearly feel strongly about this bill. Check it out at http://seekingalpha.com/article/87565-why-the-2008-housing-relief-bill-is-no-relief?ref=patrick.net#comment-224136


    @ Tim - Thanks for your detailed comment. You make a good argument for placing more blame on the banks and they drove this crisis as well. However it takes a number of parties, one of which is the homeowner, to get to the state we are in today.

    @ Thanks Shadox, I'll check out your article.

  • The Political Stray  
    August 22, 2008 12:18 AM

    You all should be angry because the housing crisis was completely avoidable. Our fair-haired congress deregulated the banking industry knowing full well what could happen. When it did happen, they ignored it.

    Deregulation is also responsible for our gas prices too.

    Big holes are being torn into existing law so that what is illegal on citizen's level is just fine for these hit and run profiteers.

    Check it out at
    http://thepoliticalstray.com

Post a Comment

Recent Posts