Marshall Moody

With Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

I was just discussing with a colleague of mine all of the different rumors regarding housing and mortgage lending which are reported as fact, and what the real figures are. Ironically, he received an email today with links to both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 2009 2^nd quarter statements. They are full of information regarding profitability, loan portfolio allocation, delinquency rates, geographical housing depreciation/appreciation, modification info, and forecasts. I particularly like how Texas is positioned as one of the strongest housing markets in the country (see page 4 of Fannie Mae report and page 12 of Freddie Mac report)! It is also nice to see that both agencies are improving profitability. Delinquency rates also appear to be lower than they are frequently reported in the mainstream media. I encourage anyone wanting a deeper understanding of the current state of affairs within the agencies (which secure the majority of all residential mortgage loans) to thumb through the documents (links attached, below).

Fannie Mae: http://www.fanniemae.com/ir/pdf/sec/2009/q2credit_summary.pdf

Freddie Mac: http://www.freddiemac.com/investors/er/pdf/supplement_2q09.pdf

With the Federal Reserve and Interest Rates

I mentioned in yesterday's blog that the Federal Reserve is easing out of the Mortgage Backed Security Market by the end of March. The following is a link to a brief NASDAQ article which mentions the same:

http nasdaq://www..com/newscontent/20090923/Federal-Reserve-slowing-pace-of-mortgage-securities-program.aspx

Rates are still floating in the neighborhood of historic lows. There was a significant decline in MBS pricing this morning, but rates are still very strong, for the time being. Below is a graph of Mortgage Backed Security pricing over the last 30 days. A decrease in price (red) represents and increase in rates, while an increase in price (green) indicates a decrease in rates. (This graph is provided by www.mortgagemarketguide.com )

With Cash on the Sidelines

Yesterday, I mentioned that there was a large amount of capital sitting on the sidelines which could help boost demand for mortgage backed securities (and bonds/stocks, too). A fellow blogger filled me in on a Bloomberg article from September 28 by Lynn Thomasson and Michael Tsang which discusses the "enormous stockpile of liquidity" which is on the sidelines. To read the article in its entirety, please click on the following link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a98FvdWy6eLA

As always, thank you for taking the time to read this update...I look forward to your comments. -Marshall

1) First Time Homebuyer Tax Credit: Statements from Nancy Pelosi and other Congressional / Administration officials indicate that an extension to the first time homebuyer tax credit is in the works! Yeah! J There are also some great benefits being proposed for any military members which were/are deployed during the credit period. There is still discussion as to whether it should be extended to non first time homebuyers and if the amount will be increased. It is estimated that the program costs the US Government about $ 1 bil./month. Comparing that to the almost $25 billion spent by the Federal Reserve on Mortgage Backed Securities just last week, it seems like quite a lot of "bang for the buck"...especially in light of the current foreclosure overhang , the option ARM loans which have yet to go into foreclosure, and new foreclosures tied directly to a growing number of unemployed home owners. I wonder if anyone's considered opening up the tax credit to all homebuyers for a short period (3-6 months) to help cut inventory and then restricting the credit back to first time homebuyers in order to encourage move-up activity? Should lending standards continue to tighten, the number of first time homebuyers eligible for financing may shrink to a level which would not generate adequate demand on its own...so it seems to be a double edged sword. The tax incentives only work if you are capable of buying a home (in most cases requiring a loan)...

2) The Kiplinger Letter (vol 86, No. 40) published October 2, 2009 had some very interesting info I'd like to share with you.

a. In the economy section, San Antonio, TX and Austin, TX were listed along with Denver, Raleigh, and Boston as metro areas which are most "likely to lead the pack" during the economic recovery! (Houston was listed as a leader in energy sector recovery, too). Have I mentioned lately how much I love being a Texan! J

b. The Federal Reserve has extended the Mortgage Backed Security purchase program through March 31, 2010. This extension is being used to phase out the program. The Fed currently is purchasing "about 80%" of new home mortgages being written/secured. Your eyes aren't tricking you...the figure is 80%!! The Fed has also indicated that they will reduce purchases to every other week in the very near future. It is hard to believe that this will not cause much greater volatility in the mortgage rate market. There is still a very large amount of private money still sitting on the sidelines. It is also believed that these investors are risk averse (ie they are still on the sidelines), so it is hoped that when they come back into the market they are looking for Mortgage Backed Securities as a significant portion of their portfolios. I REALLY hope so, because finding buyers for 80% of the loans generated to replace Fed demand, seems a little daunting.

c. Kiplinger's letter also predicts rates to be in the 6+% range for a 30yr mortgage by the end of March 2010. Savvy buyers and owners would be well advised to take advantage of historically low rates while they are available.

3) Private Mortgage banks may get warehouse lending relief! Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal published an article by James R. Hagerty discussing a program where Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issue what appears to be forward purchasing agreements with pre-determined guidelines to independent mortgage banks in order to reduce warehousing risks and costs. Warehouse lines are essentially large revolving lines of credit where loans are funded and held until end investors or enterprises purchase them. Guideline changes have been coming fast and furiously which has resulted in some loans losing guideline eligibility for sale during the time they are on the warehouse line, which results in the originating mortgage bank either selling the loan at a steep discount or servicing the loan. With current mortgage interest rates lower than extended warehouse line rates, either option is a losing proposition for the originating lender and potentially the warehouse lending company. Due to this risk and a desire to consolidate mortgage lending into their retail channels, the big banks have greatly reduced or eliminated their warehouse funding operations to independent mortgage bankers. This program is designed to relieve some of the warehouse lending issues which currently affect the market. In the San Antonio area, if you need a loan to close in less than 30 days at very competitive terms, your best bet is a skilled and established independent mortgage bank. It is great to see steps being taken to help boost the ability of these providers to continue to fund good loans, quickly.

4) FHA Streamline Refinances are going through a lot of changes...on November 18, 2010 (Mortgagee Letter 2009-32)! Some highlights are as follows:

a. The borrower must have made at least 6 payments on the loan being refinanced

b. No more than 1 mortgage late within the last 12 months (and not within the last 90 days), unless owned less than 12 months, then no mortgage lates allowed, at all

c. Increased benefit to borrower requirements (good thing)

d. Credit scores will now be required

e. Borrower may NOT roll in discount points to lower the interest rate...must bring discount points from their own funds.

As always, thank you for taking the time to read my blog, I hope you found it helpful and I look forward to your comments! -Marshall

Go figure, the only constant in the mortgage world is still change...and plenty of it!

On that note, I'd like to mention some upcoming changes which we should all be aware of since they will change the way FHA business is done. Initially, it's no secret that FHA is being inundated with claims and is looking for ways to shore up their balance sheets. One of the more significant changes is that FHA will require a higher level of appraiser qualifications (fewer appraisers on the list) and will also ENFORCE HVCC (as of Jan 1). The HVCC (Home Valuation Code of Conduct which eliminates discussion between lender/other interested party with the appraiser and disallows any conversation with appraiser regarding value) portion of this is somewhat surprising; since most of the communication from HUD was that they were not adopting it. So be aware that longer turn times and increased value concerns are on the way for FHA. You can still provide a copy of the contract on purchase and construction deals. Although our office is prepared for the change and expect very little difference in our provider's turn-times, it will affect the market as a whole. Interesting question: If one of the bills proposed in Congress to put a moratorium on HVCC passes, will HUD/FHA/Fannie/Freddie drop the requirement? (http://www.housingwire.com/2009/09/18/fha-changes-credit-policy-ahead-of-reserve-ratio-drop)

Another change which is being made is to increase in the net worth requirement for lenders who do business with FHA from the $250,000 set in 1993 to approx $1mil. So, plan on seeing some loan officers from smaller, independent shops move around again to realign with companies who meet the new requirements.

A new bill was just introduced to Congress which would change the FHA minimum down payment from the current 3.5% up to 5% (http://www.thetruthaboutmortgage.com/bill-aims-to-increase-fha-down-payment-to-five-percent). This same bill will also prohibit the financing of closing costs. There are also some rumblings of higher credit score requirements, much stricter debt-to-income ratio limits, and revision of Reverse Mortgage products, but nothing concrete that I've seen.

The Federal Reserve is also discussing extending the mortgage backed security purchase program so that they can ease out of the market. I like the thought of an extension, but not for the sole purpose of phasing out the program (unless volumes pick up enough from other funding sources that it will not pose a strain on pricing or another liquidity crunch) ...it seems to be working and there's still another wave of foreclosures to hit the market (appx. 7 million units, nationwide). Time will tell the whole tale...things are still changing by the minute!

As always, thank you for taking the time to read my article and I look forward to your comments.

Today, I had the pleasure of speaking with yet another first time home buyer...I've noticed a significant increase in business from this segment due to the first time home buyer tax credit. It's arguably the best time in history to be a first time homebuyer, so it makes sense that we'd see more people making the switch from renting to owning. What I found refreshing about this buyer/borrower is that she is truly grateful for the sub 5% interest rate on a 30 yr fixed FHA loan, tickled that she could borrow the 3.5% down payment from her 401k (pay yourself interest), and thrilled that the IRS is willing to give her $8,000 about 2 months later...that she doesn't need to pay back if she stays in her house for 3 yrs. Why shouldn't she stay there for 3 or more years? Her $150,000 home will cost her less per month than her apartment! To top it off, she had been declined at a broker shop which didn't offer FHA, so she was floored to find out that she could get a competitive mortgage with a 631 credit score! I haven't yet told her that we can close in less than 2 weeks and that are were ongoing tax/appreciation benefits...wasn't sure she could take any more good news! :-)

I highlight this experience because it stands in sharp contrast to the clients I meet who wonder if they should wait for the government to "sweeten the pot" with a larger incentive in the future, or if something geopolitical will happen to temporarily drive rates below there already historic levels. They believe themselves to be entitled to something bigger and better than everyone else...although I'm never quite sure the reasoning behind it. I was taught that hard, conscientious work and treating others as you'd like to be treated were the pathways to success and that "a bird in the hand is worth two in a bush". I was also taught that customer service was paramount in any business...and still believe it whole-heartedly, but I now seem to be among a shrinking segment of service providers which hold true to this belief. Ok, I'll get off the soapbox and tie this up.

As service providers, we should do our clients the service of reminding them to take a close look at the short and long term benefits of homeownership during this historic period. When weighing the risks and benefits, most reasonable buyers (not trying to max out their house payment) will find the scale tipped heavily towards benefits and will hopefully realize that this is one occasion where the bird in the hand might be worth MUCH MORE than two in a bush!

Ok, so after a long sabbatical I'm back in the blog-o-sphere...and, go figure, I've got something on my mind which is eating at me....

The Federal Reserve has made a big deal about their program which purchases mortgage backed securities (MBS) in order to keep mortgage interest rates low (Fed Reserve MBS FAQ). I applaud the effort, and for those with credit scores over 720 and lower loan-to-value ratios, it's been great! What still bothers me is that at the same time the Fed is spending 100s of Billions (program allows for $500 billion) buying MBS to lower mortgage rates, the Treasury, through its receivership of the GSEs is allowing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to charge "adverse market delivery fees" which effectively increase the rate paid by actual borrowers. Here's an example: A non-first time homebuyer putting 20% down with low debt to income ratios and 100 months in asset reserves would pay 5.25% with a discount point due to a 697 credit score. Were he to have a 720+ score his rate would be at or under 5.00% with no discount points. What is so risky about that scenario that deserves such a dramatic increase in rate and cost? I thought that FICO only based pricing/risk analysis was disproven by the Sub-prime/stated income loan debacle? The adverse delivery charges keep increasing and most guidelines continue to tighten, even as our government says it's willing to do whatever's necessary to end the housing and financial crisis. The fees have increased to such a level that the National Association of Mortgage Brokers is encouraging all originators to include the adverse delivery charges on Good Faith Estimates to clarify that these fees do NOT go to the originating lender, but are passed through straight to Fannie/Freddie (see Broker Universe / Origination News).

I think that this government 2-step is counter-productive and that those affected (all US current and potential homeowners along with anyone in a real estate affiliated industry) should make it known to our representatives in Congress (whoismyrepresentaive.com) that the adverse market delivery fees charged by Fannie and Freddie are egregious and are penalizing many hard working, bill paying Americans with good credit (since when did a 697 Fico become risky credit?) for purchasing a home in this current climate.

I should also note that at the present time these fees do NOT affect government loans. However, most government lenders have found other ways to tighten these loan parameters, including setting a minimum credit score requirement of 620 for all government loans (including Streamline Refinances and VA Interest Rate Reduction Loans, which until just recently required only a mortgage history for credit qualification), and not allowing alternative tradelines to build a credit profile.

I understand that our economy is strained and that risk management is part of any enterprise, but the magnitude of the adverse market delivery fees along with who they apply to seem to me to be out of whack and counter-productive to a recovery in housing.

Thank you for taking the time to read my comments...please let me know your opinion.