Can we really see negative mortgage rates?

Some speculate that it is possible for the Fed to set negative rates to stave off deflation; something that happened in Europe earlier this year.

Can you believe that 30-year fixed rate conventional mortgage rates have been below 5% for about five years? Rates have essentially been hovering around 4% (plus/minus) for the last three years. To put it in perspective, you’d probably have to go back to the 1940’s to get a lower rate. To contrast, rates from 1979 through the 1980’s were in double digits; and according to Freddie Mac’s Monthly Average Commitment Rate And Points On 30-Year Fixed-Rate Mortgages Since 1971 (freddiemac.com), the average mortgage commitment rate reached a peak of 18.45% during October of 1981.

With such low rates, it’s hard to imagine signing up for a mortgage at 18%, or 10%, or even 7% interest. Keep in mind that the consensus is that the average mortgage rate over the last forty years has been about 8.75%. And as economists have anticipated rising rates since 2011, rates have actually decreased.

Many thought that Fed would finally begin to raise the federal funds rate towards the end of this year. However, an interesting thing happened last week from probably the most anticipated Fed meeting ever. On September 17^th, the Fed’s Open Market Committee issued a statement on the economy and monetary policy, and left the federal funds rate unchanged at a target rate of 0% to 1/4%. Although mortgage rates are not directly influenced by the federal funds rate, they are indirectly affected because the federal funds rate is the rate in which banks borrow money.

Initially it appears to be good news from the Fed’s September 17^th press release, housing was described as improving, and it is felt that mortgage rates will likely to remain relatively low for the short term. However, in a press conference following the Fed statement, Fed Chair Janet Yellen referred to housing as “depressed.” Depressed is certainly not the description that anyone was expecting of a housing market that has seen slow improvement. Yet, it’s not the first time Yellen expressed concern for housing; she raised concerns about a housing market slowdown last year.

Should we also be concerned when others are optimistic? Maybe Yellen sees something that we do not. An August 16^th 2013 Washington Post piece by Neil Irwin and Ylan Q. Mui details Yellen’s background and how she predicted the housing crisis and forecasted the following financial crisis (Janet Yellen called the housing bust and has been mostly right on jobs. Does she have what it takes to lead the Fed?). It’s not that Yellen is clairvoyant, as far as anyone knows, but rather her ability to connect the correct data points. In last week’s press conference she cited that housing was basically not improving in step with other economic indicators, such as employment.

So when will interest rates go up? Some speculate that it is possible for the Fed to set negative rates to stave off deflation; something that happened in Europe earlier this year. And in a couple of European counties, such as Spain, you could get a negative interest mortgage! CNN-Money reported on European negative interest rates, quoting Luca Bertalot (secretary general of the European Mortgage Federation) to say “We are in uncharted waters.” And described Spain’s Bankinter’s negative interest rate dilemma, saying that “they could not pay interest to borrowers, but instead reduced the principal for some customers (The crazy world of negative rates: Banks pay your mortgage for you?; money.cnn.com, April 22, 2015).”

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

September 10, 2015November 23, 2021

TRID implementation remakes the home buying process

Earlier this year I informed you about the upcoming Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CPFB) TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID) rule that was to begin in August. The implementation date was moved to October 3^rd for a number of reasons, including feedback from the lender community indicating that they needed more time for compliance.

Fast forward to the present, and we are several weeks away from implementation. Overall, lenders are ready to comply with new disclosures and procedures. Realtor® Associations have also been busy getting members up to speed on expected changes and how to cope with potential issues that may arise. However, many are bracing themselves for the initial implementation to see how transactions will be affected.

Some have offered a different perspective on how the initial implementation may happen. For instance, the CFPB requires lenders to provide new disclosures three days prior to closing; however, some lenders may superimpose a longer waiting period (such as five or seven days) so as to ensure their compliance with the new rule. So any delay would tack on those extra days. Additionally, I have been told by loan officers that the 30 to 45 day mortgage closing process will go by the wayside, and that home sale contracts should allow for at least 60 days to go to closing; as well as allowing for flexibility if glitches arise to ensure compliance with the new rule.

The settlement process will be different. Closing documents will no longer emanate from the title company, but instead will be prepared by the lender and sent to the buyer and seller. Closing will occur at least three days later. Lenders are vetting title companies to ensure compliance with the new rule. As a result, an unintended consequence may be that home buyers will not be able to choose their title attorney like they are used to (as provided by RESPA and state law); and will have to choose from a list of lender “approved” title companies. Hopefully the lenders are not steering buyers to title companies where affiliated business arrangements exist, as that is an entirely another issue that the CFPB is pursuing.

If you’ve bought or sold a home in the past, the current contracts may seem somewhat familiar. However, as of October 3^rd, new contracts and addenda will be in use to address the new rule; making it a new experience for everyone. If you’re planning a sale or purchase after October 3^rd, make sure your agent is familiar with the new contracts and addenda so as to ensure they are managing timelines properly and understand how contingencies are affected.

The lingo will change too. If you’re borrowing money from a lender, you will no longer be a borrower; but instead you’ll be called a “consumer;” and your lender will be referred to as the “creditor.” Your good faith estimate will be a “loan estimate.” The time tested HUD1 with which we are familiar seeing at closing, will no longer be in use; and in its place will be the “closing disclosure” sent to the buyer and seller. You will no longer look forward to your settlement day, but instead you will look forward to the “consummation.”

If you are planning to be in the market, you can familiarize yourself with expected changes to the buying/selling process by visiting CFPB’s “Know Before You Owe” (consumerfinance.gov/knowbeforeyouowe).

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

February 25, 2015July 6, 2019

Stumbling housing market reignites housing policy debate

Surely 2015 is to be the year when the housing market would bounce back from its recent disappointing performance; at least that’s what I wrote back in November. But as January’s news from the National Association of Realtors® (NAR) is not as rosy as we expected; a housing policy debate, that has been subdued since 2010, gets heated.

The NAR revealed in a February 23^rd press release (nar.realtor) that although the pace of home sales increased compared to the same time last year, existing homes sales have declined to the lowest rate in nine months. The typically optimistic Lawrence Yun (NAR Chief Economist) was cited as saying “the housing market got off to a somewhat disappointing start to begin the year with January closings down throughout the country.” Adding that “seasonal influences” can make January data erratic, the combination of low inventory and home price gains over the pace of inflation seems to have slowed home sales – notwithstanding low mortgage interest rates.

Keeping mortgage interest rates low is not the sole solution; however, if it was, the housing market may have bounced back several years ago. Although a myriad of causes have been blamed for a lackluster housing market that has been trying to make a comeback for six years, most are correlational and incidental.

However, Richard X. Bove (Equity Research Analyst at Rafferty Capital Markets) recently made a case for a sole cause in his February 23^rd commentary (There’s a new mortgage crisis brewing; cnbc.com/id/102447414). Bove described how mortgage markets are in trouble; rules and regulations put into place to strengthen the market by increasing borrower standards have dried up a lot of the funding. And not necessarily in the way you might expect; besides shrinking the pool of qualified buyers, Bove suggested that the rules and regulations have made mortgage lending unprofitable and unpalatable for some lenders (leading them to walk away from the business).

As a response, it would seem as if the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) took steps to make mortgages increasingly available (returning to 3% down payment loans, and increasing the number of loans on Fannie and Freddie’s balance sheets). These actions, along with recorded losses in Q4 2014, Bove described, is making some nervous.

If you don’t remember, the FHFA was created in 2008 as a temporary conservator to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; whose original goals included: ensuring a positive net worth for Fannie and Freddie; reducing Fannie and Freddie’s mortgage portfolios; and facilitating a streamlined and profitable model for Fannie and Freddie.

Bove’s catch-22 conclusion, of either hindering the housing market by stopping Fannie and Freddie’s growth or increasing Fannie and Freddie’s debt obligations with continued growth, is not a new dilemma. The debate has been ongoing since 2008.

Having faded somewhat since 2010, the housing policy debate heated up during testimony given by FHFA Director Mel Watt on January 27^th during the congressional hearing, “Sustainable Housing Finance: An Update from the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.” Trey Garrison of HousingWire succinctly portrayed opposing views (January 27, 2014; FHFA hearing: GOP fear housing policy headed for Crash 2.0; housingwire.com): “Democrats said policies in the past year are necessary to expand housing opportunities to lower income and challenged borrowers…” while, “…Republicans…said the administration is adopting dangerous policies that risk another housing crash that will put taxpayers on the hook for billions.”

By Dan Krell
© 2015

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector

November 20, 2014December 13, 2022

Why real estate and home sales will rebound in 2015

The recent stumble of the housing market recovery has been a head scratcher for many. Surely low interest rates and an abundant number of homes for sale should have been incentive for any home buyer. But alas, many have been disappointed by the 2014 housing trends; even with sparse anecdotes of quick sales and bidding wars. However, many are optimistic about the housing market for 2015 because of the combination of low mortgage interest rates, increased access to credit, and moderating home prices – which could transform reluctant “looky loos” into eager home buyers.

Don’t count on low mortgage interest rates, per se, to incentivize home buyers. Although interest rates have been historically low since shortly after the financial crisis, it seems to not have been an incentive on its own to purchase homes. Industry experts have tried to pinpoint the timing of rate increases since rates first dipped below 5% in 2010. And even though rates were anticipated to have jumped when the Fed tapered its asset purchasing program this year, rates continue to be relative to historical lows. The average mortgage interest rate according to the Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey (freddiemac.com) is 4.01% (as of November 13^th); yet home sale volume continues to lag behind 2013 figures.

Very low interest rates may continue into 2015. Back in 2012, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee indicated that interest rates would remain “exceptionally” low through 2014. Fast forward to September’s Federal Reserve Open Market Committee meeting; the October Fed press release (federalreserve.gov) reported the FOMC maintaining the 0 to ¼ percent target rate, even for a “considerable time following the end of its asset purchase program…”

On the other hand, loosening mortgage credit underwriting could help some would-be home buyers; but it is unclear who would take advantage of such programs, and how it will help them. Tightened credit and underwriting standards that resulted from the financial crisis, along with government intervention in the form of the Dodd – Frank legislation, created regulation and stringent lending standards (such as comprehensive validation of financial standing and strict adherence to debt to income ratios); which critics point to as having hampered lenders from making loans. However, some lenders are beginning to introduce less restrictive mortgage programs, which may accommodate the self employed and those with high student loan debt.

Of course, home prices have been a point of contention between home buyers and sellers for a number of years. Home sellers seeking higher prices are sometimes thwarted by home buyers looking for affordability and value. The seeming home price tug-of-war that favored home sellers in 2013, appeared to turn back in favor of home buyers during late summer of 2014. The October 28^th release of the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices (housingviews.com) reported further deceleration of home price appreciation. The National Index showed a 5.1% annual gain, which is lower than the 5.6% annual gain reported in July. The Washington DC region saw a 3.1% annual increase; but a 0% change in August, compared to the 0.1% change in July.

Additionally, the 15% increase in national foreclosure activity, as reported by RealtyTrac (realtytrac.com), could be a wildcard for home prices. It remains to be seen if the 26% increase in foreclosure activity in the D.C. metropolitan area from the previous year is a trend, or just a result of lenders clearing “shadow” inventory.

March 20, 2014July 3, 2019

A new housing finance system is one step closer

The end is near for Fannie and Freddie. The next step to remaking the housing finance system.

Like FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were also financially battered during the financial and housing crises. While FHA became the mortgage to rescue many distressed home owners, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) was created in 2008 as conservator for the hemorrhaging Fannie and Freddie. Although the writing was on the wall about necessitating change in the conventional mortgage sector, there could only be speculation about what that change would entail.

Fast forward to June 2013, and the bipartisan bill S.1217 Housing Finance Reform and Taxpayer Protection Act of 2013 was introduced as the groundwork for replacing Fannie and Freddie with the (to be created) Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation (FMIC). Moving along to last week, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-SD) and Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-ID) released a draft for “A New Housing Financing System” (banking.senate.gov).

Building upon S.1217, the Bipartisan Housing Reform Draft’s intention is stated to “…protect taxpayers from bearing the cost of a housing downturn; promote stable, liquid, and efficient mortgage markets for single-family and multifamily housing; ensure that affordable, 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages continue to be available, and that affordability remains a key consideration; provide equal access for lenders of all sizes to the secondary market; and facilitate broad availability of mortgage credit for all eligible borrowers in all areas and for single-family and multifamily housing types.”

In addition to supervision and enforcement authority, the purpose of the FMIC is to maintain a re-insurance fund that will insure mortgage backed securities meeting FMIC guidelines. The re-insurance fund is to be modeled after the Deposit Insurance Fund (maintained by the FDIC), and to be funded by private companies. Additionally, the new system is meant to protect taxpayers by requiring future mortgage backed security guarantors to be private and hold a minimum of 10% private capital as a first loss position; bailouts of these private institutions are to be prohibited.

The FMIC will also institute underwriting guidelines that are to “mirror” the Qualified Mortgage (QM). The recent definition and rules for the QM announced by the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFBP) were effective January 10^th. The QM is characterized to be a safer loan compared to some loans originated prior to the crises because the lender must assess and the borrower must demonstrate the ability to repay the loan; the ability to repay is based on typical factors that include the borrower’s income, assets, and debts. Additionally, the borrower cannot exceed a total monthly debt-to-income ratio (all monthly obligations including mortgage payments) of 43%.

Conforming loan limits will be maintained, so as to provide the additional credit needed to purchase homes in “high-cost” areas. If you’re a first time home buyer, you will need a minimum down payment of 3.5%; however if you’re not a first time home buyer you will need at least a 5% down payment for your home purchase.

The transition period is expected to be at least 5 years, however possible extensions may be required to prevent market disruptions and cost spikes to borrowers. The plan is to simultaneously wind down Fannie and Freddie’s operations while increasing expansion of the new system. The FMIC will take over the functions and duties of FHFA; and as of the FMIC’s certification date, Fannie and Freddie won’t be able to conduct new business.

by Dan Krell
© 2014