Aug. 17, 2012: Builder market share; CFPB jobs pay how much? eminent domain setback; Treasury to revamp Fannie & Freddie backing? Why rates have risen
Rob Chrisman
Psssst!
Want a cool sounding job, where you "will conduct
comprehensive investigations that may involve delicate
matters, issues, and investigative problems for which there
are few, if any, established criteria" and earn $98-148k? Then
the CFPB is for you: https://careerconnector.jobs.treas.gov/cfpb/vacancy/preview.hms?orgIdT4&jnums873.
And
while we're on lists, each year Builder Magazine publishes
local market share data for the leading builders in the top
50 markets, which represent approximately 70% of
closings for the top builders. It appears that market share of
new home sales for the top 20 builders slightly decreased to
32.6% in 2011 from 34.4% in 2010. (One wonders why, given
modern technology, we’re in the middle of August looking at
2011 numbers!?) The largest U.S. homebuilder in 2011 was
D.R. Horton with unit market share of 5.6%, followed by
Pulte Group at 5.0%, and Lennar at 3.6%. The top five
permitting markets in 2011 were Houston, Dallas/Fort
Worth, New York, Washington, D.C., and Phoenix. Of these
markets, top 10 builder market share was lowest in New York at
19.8% and highest in Phoenix at 58.2% versus a 56% average for
the major MSAs. Other major markets for the large homebuilders
included San Antonio, Miami, Austin, Las Vegas, Orlando, and
Atlanta.
Eminent
domain
news continues to simmer. While the legal challenges of
using eminent domain appear to be significant, investment
banker KBW believes "that the main flaw with the plan
is the fact that the holder of the loan has to be paid fair
value. If the trust is actually paid fair value, there would
be no loss to the trust but also no gain to the buyers. So, we
believe this plan hinges on paying a below-market price and
argue that it equates to fair value.” I mention this because
local residents and mortgage finance experts lined up at a San
Bernardino County hearing yesterday to push back against the
idea of seizing underwater mortgages through eminent domain.
This is similar to the result in Chicago. This approach is not
dead by any means, but is faced some warranted setbacks.
(As
a quick reminder, Mortgage Resolution Partners, led by
Graham Williams, is pushing to use private capital to
acquire current and underwater mortgages for less than fair
market value, write down principal and refinance them into a
Federal Housing Administration loan.)
San
Bernardino County CEO Greg Devereaux said they would consider
many options, and signaled how unlikely the use of eminent
domain could be. "I am certain this board would not approve a
proposal that singles out eminent domain as an approach,"
Devereaux said. "We are not here to look for any one approach.
We are here to look for ideas." It was reported that residents
in the area are suspicious of the eminent domain
proposal and the investor group pitching it. After all, isn’t
eminent domain a public action, not an action led by a
private, for-profit firm? Here is the complete story from the
local newspaper: http://www.sbsun.com/ci_21328501/san-bernardino-county-foreclosure-prevention-agency-officially-accept.
Yesterday
the commentary mentioned some startling banking stats (no
new banks were formed in the U.S. last year), and I
received this note from Deb Avdelotte, president of Titan
Capital Solutions. “See my entry on FDIC statistics and
bank declines since the 1980's: http://titanlenderscorp.com/blog/2012/08/03/cfpb-bank-examinations-anniversary/#more-355.
Also, I’ve heard that the latest word from Raj Date/CFPB was
that Risk Retention/QM/QRM won't be discussed/taken up again
until ‘sometime after the election.’ This translates to late
January at the earliest since the congress (and the
President?) doesn't get sworn in and working until then.”
Thank you Deb.
This
morning the Wall Street Journal reported that, “The
Treasury Department is preparing to revamp the terms of its
nearly four-year-old financial backing of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac in a bid to allay investor concerns that the
companies could one day exhaust their federal lifelines,
according to government officials familiar with the plans. The
renegotiated agreements, which could be announced as soon as
Friday, would change the way the firms pay the government for
its support, these people said. Currently, the
government-controlled mortgage-finance companies make 10%
dividend payments to the Treasury every quarter, an
arrangement that has forced them to borrow money from the
government during periods where they don't turn a large
profit. Under the new arrangement between Treasury and the
companies' federal regulator, all the firms' quarterly profits
would be turned over to the government as a dividend payment;
the government wouldn't require such payments in periods when
the firms are unprofitable.”
The
story continued. “The revised terms would also accelerate
the reduction of the firms' mortgage portfolios, these
people said. The firms will have to shrink those portfolios by
15% annually beginning next year—a change from the currently
required 10% annual reduction. That means the portfolios,
which can be no larger than $650 billion for each firm at the
end of the year, will fall to the final cap of $250 billion by
2018, four years earlier than previously scheduled…The changes
are designed to avoid the prospect that Fannie and Freddie
could one day exhaust their Treasury support simply because
they might not generate enough profits to pay back those
dividends. They will also prevent the companies from
rebuilding capital, which should tamp down any hopes—or
fears—that the firms would one day re-emerge from
conservatorship in their old forms.”
“While
the companies have made profits in recent quarters, they have
had to pay such large dividend payments to the Treasury every
year—nearly $19 billion between them—that they continue to
borrow money from the Treasury in certain periods, even when
running a small profit. Requiring larger injections from the
Treasury, in turn, increases future dividends.” But, per the
WSJ’s story, “The revised agreements don't suggest any broad
shift in the government's approach to the companies. While the
Obama administration hasn't made any major effort to overhaul
the companies, it has said the companies would have whatever
support was needed to ensure they could repay bondholders.”
I
don’t know how this ties in, if at all, with the recent
controversy between the FHFA (F&F’s overseer) and the
Treasury over debt forgiveness. A while back an
analysis by Fannie and Freddie that suggests taxpayers could
benefit from the implementation of a debt-forgiveness program.
The current loss-mitigation approach revolved around reducing
balances for some borrowers who owe much more than their homes
are worth. The Federal Housing Finance Agency has maintained
that the current housing-rescue programs offered by the
taxpayer-supported mortgage companies are less-expensive
options, with Mr. DeMarco, head of the FHFA, saying the
agencies would not participate. The Obama administration, most
notably through Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s letter, has
argued strongly in favor of the FHFA adopting the
principal-reduction program for Fannie and Freddie, saying it
would provide more sustainable loan modifications. In April,
the agency said that loan forgiveness would save about $1.7
billion for the companies, relative to other types of relief.
Fears exist that more borrowers, upon hearing that Fannie and
Freddie are instituting a debt-forgiveness program, might
default to seek more generous terms. The Treasury Department
rolled out the debt-forgiveness program in 2010 for homeowners
who have missed their mortgage payments or face imminent
hardship and who owe more than their homes are worth. Fannie
and Freddie opted against participating, but the program has
been increasingly adopted by mortgage servicers that handle
deeply underwater loans which aren't guaranteed by Fannie and
Freddie. Freddie currently allows its borrowers who are
underwater or who have less than 20% equity to refinance with
reduced documentation and fees under the Home Affordable
Refinance Program. The coming change will allow all borrowers
with loans backed by the company, regardless of their
loan-to-value ratio, to benefit from the streamlined program.
And as we all know, Fannie had already extended the HARP
program to all borrowers, regardless of their equity position.
Darned
rates – will they ever go back down and help the folks who
didn’t lock a few weeks ago? Probably, but let’s figure
out three reasons why rates have moved up in the last few
weeks (1.40% to 1.80% on the 10-yr, and MBS prices
moving lower/worse a couple points). First, the sentiment
towards Europe continues to brighten – this risk is
easing out of Europe. Granted, much of the population is on
vacation, but there were three critical speeches/communiqués
published in the last 1.5 months out of the EU (6/29 ESM
direct bank capital injections, words on July 26 from Mario
Draghi, President of the European Central Bank, and an August
2nd press conference also from Draghi) that have
led analysts to believe that the prospect of a material
monetary response to the European debt crisis is very
possible, something that has never occurred since Greece first
became an issue back in 2009.
The
second is the impression that the U.S. economy is not
falling off a ledge. It has been over a year since
S&P downgraded this country, and rates have done nothing
but go down – hardly the mark of a country in serious trouble.
Housing appears to have stabilized, the jobs market is not
strong, but it is not weak either, and many individual
statistics show that things are slowly growing.
And
the third is that given U.S. inflation is low, and job market
is stable, the odds of the third round of Quantitative
Easing (QE3) are declining. In other words, things
aren’t great, but they are not bad enough for further Fed
easing and another push for lower rates. That being said, the
“looming fiscal cliff” is an issue – politicians created it,
so politicians very well may postpone it.
Obviously
this uptick in rates causes an initial push in rate locks and
refinances, but after that the refi market has the
potential for really being knocked down. Investors know
this, and may very well bid up agency mortgage-backed
securities, with overseas investors continuing to want MBS
backed by the U.S. Government.
For
market activity on Thursday, in the late afternoon 10-year
notes were down/worse about .250 (1.84%), and we continued to
see price changes from lenders as MBS prices finished the day
worse by .125-.250. The Fed reported it was still buying over
$1 billion a day in agency MBS’s – over 50% of the perceived
supply from originators. And that certainly helps mortgage
rates.
Today
we’ll have the preliminary August Consumer Sentiment reading
at 9:55AM EDT, and Leading Economic Indicators for July at 7AM
EDT. After those minor numbers, there is no scheduled news
until the middle of next week so look for markets to move
based on any news from Europe or Asia, or anything unexpected.
In the early going the 10-yr is back to 1.80% and MBS have
improved slightly.
After
a very busy day, a commuter settled down in her seat and
closed her eyes as the train departed Montreal for Hudson.
As the train rolled out of the station, the guy sitting next
to her pulled out his cell phone and started talking in a loud
voice: “Hi sweetheart, it’s Eric, I’m on the train – yes, I
know it’s the six thirty train and not the four thirty but I
had a long meeting – no, honey, not with that floozy from the
accounts office, with the boss. No sweetheart, you’re the only
one in my life – yes, I’m sure, cross my heart” etc., etc.
Fifteen minutes later, he was still talking loudly, when the
young woman sitting next to him, who was obviously angered by
his continuous diatribe, yelled at the top of her voice:
“Hey, Eric, turn that stupid phone off and come back to bed!”
Eric doesn’t use his cell phone in public any longer.
If
you're interested, visit my twice-a-month blog at the STRATMOR
Group web site located at www.stratmorgroup.com.
The current blog discusses the CFPB’s servicing proposals, for
better or worse. If you have both the time and
inclination, make a comment on what I have written, or on
other comments so that folks can learn what's going on out
there from the other readers.