Yesterday, the Federal Reserve issued a set of proposals for mortgages, including a measure that would require lenders to disclose to borrowers about what changes can occur to their mortgage payments over time.
The measure, which is an interim provision that would take effect on Jan. 30, 2011, hopes to make that borrowers are alerted to the risks of mortgage payment increases before they take out loans with variable rates or payments, such as adjustable-rate mortgages.
Lenders would be required to provide details to borrowers about what the maximum interest rate and payment would be during the first five years of their adjustable-rate mortgage, as well as a “worst case” example showing what the maximum rate and payment they could be required to pay. The lenders would also have to explain to potential borrowers that they cannot avoid these increases by refinancing their mortgage loans.
The Federal Reserve also proposed new consumer-protection regulations make sure that consumers receive new disclosures when they agree with their lender to modify key terms of a closed-end mortgage or in a reverse mortgage. This new proposal would ensure that homebuyers have time to review their loan disclosures before they pay any fees. Lenders would be required to refund the fees if they then decided to withdraw the application within three days of receiving disclosures.
Another rule seeking was present to protect mortgage borrowers from deceptive lending practices. For example, the rule prohibits a loan originator that receives compensation from the buyer to also receive compensation from the lender or another group involved. The Fed also has adopted final rules to ensure that borrowers receive a notice when their mortgage loan has been sold or transferred to another lender. This requirement has actually been effective since May 2009, when the Fed published interim rules based on the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act.
The new Federal Reserve measures come as the Obama administration prepares to address changes to the U.S. housing-finance system, with lawmakers on Capitol Hill arguing with each other and lobbyists over the future of mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The idea is to scale down the government’s involvement with the mortgage market. Today these issues were addressed at a Treasury Department conference, but an exit strategy will not be presented until early next year.
The conference is the first of many steps toward restructuring the mortgage market worth nearly $11 trillion. Mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have cost the government more than $148 billion and rising so far. The mortgage giants profited billions during the housing market boom, only to burden the taxpayers with losses through bailouts when the housing market collapsed.
“We will not support a return to the system where private gains are subsidized by taxpayer losses,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a statement prepared for the conference.
Executives and mortgage experts are telling the Obama administration that that the government must stay in the business of backing U.S. mortgages even if Fannie and Freddie disappear someday.
“At the end of the day, the government will still have a very large role to play,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics and a panelist at the event. Others include mortgage executives from Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co, plus Bill Gross, managing director of bond giant Pimco and Lewis Ranieri, one of the creators of mortgage bonds.
“A government guarantee is both a desirable and necessary component of the country’s housing finance system,” John Gibbons, a Wells Fargo & Co. executive vice president, wrote in a letter last month to the Treasury Department.
The new system could have Fannie and Freddie returned to private ownership or phased out completely. Them or their replacements would pay the government to insure their loans. So far, they have ensured that millions of Americans can get home loans even after the housing market collapse. Combined with the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Administration, they have backed about 90 percent of the loans made in the first half of this year, according to Inside Mortgage Finance magazine.
The concern is that for years these companies operated on their own, making billions in the housing market, although also while backing faulty loans. When the market collapsed, the taxpayers bailed them out. If they are saying they cannot survive on their own without the government providing the investors who have mortgage-back securities a guarantee to receive their money even if the borrowers default on their loans. It would appear that the desire by the bankers at this conference want the government to continue to coddle them well into the future.
The verbage may change, but the story remains the same: Fannie and Freddie backed by taxpayer’s dollars.