From Housing
Wire
Private mortgage market sidelined by housing
agency dominance
Thursday, February 07, 2013 08:41 am
Christina mlynski
A lack of clarity about the future of federal housing
agencies has kept private capital on the sidelines of
the mortgage finance system, U.S. lawmakers warned
Wednesday.
Congressional leaders and housing analysts expressed
those fears during a hearing, examining the role of the
Federal Housing Administration and private insurers,
before the House Committee on Financial Services.
Committee Chair Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, called forging
a sustainable housing market for both families and the
economy a high priority, but lamented the size and scope
of the Federal Housing Administration.
"I'm concerned that what were once extraordinary
measures taken have now become ordinary measures,"
Hensarling said when discussing the government's role in
shoring up the housing market through further reliance
on the housing agencies.
As a result, Hensarling and panelists attending the
hearing suggested the FHA return to its pre-crisis
role.
Resident Fellow Edward Pinto at the American
Enterprise Institute suggested
the FHA’s mission allows for the continuation of
practices that result in "a high proportion of families
losing their homes and represents a disservice to
American families and communities."
"By unfairly competing with private capital, housing
finance reform is blocked," Pinto said.
Managing Director Basil Petrou at the Federal
Financial Analytics noted
that even if FHA reform is speedily enacted in a
meaningful fashion, the transformation may still lack
the impetus to fully create a mortgage-finance system
functioning mostly on private capital.
Petrou suggested Congress work to ensure that an array
of pending prudential rules for banks do not favor
government-backed mortgages, which is a barrier to
re-entry for private capital. Furthermore, he advised
lawmakers to push for constructive reforms for Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac.
"Although many pending rules would exempt the GSEs in
conservatorship, treating them essentially the same as
FHA, the conservatorships should end as quickly as
possible," Petrou said.
In November, the Department
of Housing and Urban Development released
the FHA actuarial assumptions,
showing further decline in the Mutual Mortgage Insurance
Fund (MMIF), with the capital reserve ratio falling to
negative 1.44%. Additionally, the MMIF’s economic value
was negative $16.3 billion.
As a result, the FHA does not have sufficient reserves
to cover its expected losses and furthermore, the agency
is vulnerable to further defaults, according to a
memorandum released by the House Financial Services
Committee.
While no definite consensus was agreed upon, many noted
their concerns that the FHA will likely draw funds from
the Treasury when the Obama Administration releases its
full-year 2013 budget proposal some time this month.
While Director Julia Gordon of Housing Finance and
Policy at the Center
for American Progress agreed
that the actuarial report is not in ‘good shape,’ she
noted the finances are not a reflection of a flawed
business model, but rather losses due to post-crisis
business and seller-financed down payment programs.
Though the losses from loans originated between 2005 and
2009 will continue to appear on the agency’s books for
several years, the FHA’s more recent book of business is
expected to be very profitable, Gordon said.
Additionally, Gordon said the government-sponsored
enterprises cannot stay in conservatorship indefinitely.
Similarly, real estate professor Anthony Sanders with
George Mason University said there needs to be a
shrinkage of the government's footprint in housing.
With the FHA’s share of mortgage originations at more
than 25%, it’s time for the agency to shrink back to its
previous size, such as in 2003 when it's market share
stood at 10%, Sanders said.
Thus, to protect households and taxpayers Sanders
encouraged a FICO-score floor of 660 for FHA-insured
loans. Additionally, the FHA should adjust to a minimum
down payment of 5% and also lower the loan limit to
$625,000 and eventually to $350,000, Sanders asserted.
Finally, the agency should lower the insurance coverage
to 80%, the professor suggested.
"All these measures can serve to reduce the FHA’s
substantial, high-risk footprint in the mortgage
market," Sanders told the Committee.
cmlynski@housingwire.com
|