REFinBlog

Editor: David Reiss
Cornell Law School

September 28, 2015

Monday’s Adjudication Roundup

By Shea Cunningham

September 28, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments

September 25, 2015

CFPB Mortgage Market Rules

By David Reiss

woodleywonderworks

Law360 quoted me in Questions Remain Over CFPB Mortgage Rules’ Market Effects (behind a paywall). The story highlights the fact that the jury is still out on exactly what a mature, post-Dodd-Frank mortgage market will look like. As I blogged yesterday, it seems like the new regulatory regime is working, but we need more time to determine whether it is providing the optimal amount of sustainable credit to households of all income-levels. The story opens,

Despite fears that a set of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau mortgage rules that went into effect last year would cut off many black, Hispanic and other borrowers from the mortgage market, a recent government report showed that has not been the case.

Indeed, the numbers from the Federal Financial Institutions Examinations Council’s annual Home Mortgage Disclosure Act annual report showed that the percentage of black and Hispanic borrowers within the overall mortgage market actually ticked up in 2014, even as the percentage of loans those two communities got from government sources went down.

However, it may be too early to say how the CFPB’s ability-to-repay and qualified-mortgage rules are influencing decisions by lenders and potential borrowers as the housing market continues to recover from the 2008 financial crisis, experts say. 

“Clearly, there’s a story here, and clearly there’s a story from this 2014 data,” said David Reiss, a professor at Brooklyn Law School. “But I don’t know that it’s that QM and [ability to repay] work.”

The CFPB was tasked with writing rules to reshape the mortgage market and stop the subprime mortgage lending — including no-doc loans and other shoddy underwriting practices — that marked the period running up to the financial crisis.

Those rules included new ability-to-repay standards, governing the types of information lenders would have to collect to have a reasonable certainty that a borrower could repay, and the qualified mortgage standard, a class of mortgages with strict underwriting standards that would be considered the highest quality.

The rules took effect in 2014, after the CFPB made changes aimed at easing lenders’ worries over potential litigation by borrowers should their QMs falter.

Even with those changes, there were worries that black, Hispanic and low-income borrowers could be shut out of the market, as lenders focused only on making loans that met the QM standard or large loans, known as jumbo mortgages, issued primarily to the most affluent borrowers.

According to the HMDA report, that did not happen in the first year the rules were in effect.

Both black and Hispanic borrowers saw a small uptick in the percentage of overall mortgages issued in 2014.

Black borrowers made up 5.2 percent of the overall market in 2014 compared with 4.8 percent in 2013, when lenders were preparing to comply with the rule, and 5.1 percent in 2012, the report said. Latino borrowers made up 7.9 percent of the overall market in 2014 compared with 7.3 percent in 2013 and 7.7 percent in 2012, the federal statistics show.

And the percentage of the loans those borrowers got from government-backed sources like the Federal Housing Administration, a program run by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development targeting first-time and low- to middle-income borrowers, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and other agencies fell.

Overall, 68 percent of the loans issued to black borrowers came with that direct government support in 2014, down from 70.6 percent in 2013 and 77.2 percent in 2012, the HMDA report found. For Hispanic borrowers, 59.5 percent of the mortgages issued in 2014 had direct government support, down from 62.8 percent in 2013 and 70.7 percent in 2012.

For backers of the CFPB’s mortgage rules, those numbers came as a relief.

“We were definitely waiting with bated breath for this,” said Yana Miles, a policy counsel at the Center for Responsible Lending.

To supporters of the rules, the mortgage origination numbers reported by the federal government showed that black and Hispanic borrowers were not being shut out of the mortgage market.

“Not only did we not see lending from those groups go to zero, we’re seeing a very, very small baby step in the right direction,” Miles said. “We’re seeing opposite evidence as to what was predicted.”

And in some ways, the CFPB has written rules that met the goal of promoting safe lending following the poor practices of the housing bubble era while still giving space to lenders to get credit in the market.

“We have a functioning mortgage market,” Reiss said.

September 25, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments

Friday’s Government Reports Roundup

By Shea Cunningham

September 25, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments

September 24, 2015

Mortgage Market, Hiding in Plain Sight

By David Reiss

David Jackmanson

I blogged about the Center for Responsible Lending’s take on the 2014 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data yesterday.  The mere act of aggregating this data reveals so much about the state of the mortgage market. Today I am digging into it a bit on my own.

There is a lot of good stuff in the analysis of the HMDA data released by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC). I found the discussion of the effects of the Qualified Mortgage and Ability to Repay rules most interesting:

The HMDA data provide little indication that the new ATR and QM rules significantly curtailed mortgage credit availability in 2014 relative to 2013. For example, despite the QM rule that caps borrowers’ DTI ratio for many loans, the fraction of high-DTI loans does not appear to have declined in 2014 from 2013. However, as discussed in more detail later, there are significant challenges in determining the extent to which the new rules have influenced the mortgage market, and the results here do not necessarily rule out significant effects or the possibility that effects may arise in the future. (4)

This analysis is apparently reacting to those who have claimed that the new regulatory environment is restricting lending too much. The mortgage market is generally too complicated for simple assertions like “new regulations have restricted credit too heavily” or “not enough” There are so many relevant factors, such as changes in the interest rate environment, the unemployment rate and the change in the cost of housing, to be confident about the effect of the change in regulations, particularly over a short time span. But the FFIEC analysis seems to have it right that the new regs did not have such a great impact when they went into effect on January 1, 2014, given the similarities in the 2013 and 2014 data. This reflects well on the rule-writing process for the QM and ATR rules. Time will tell whether and how they will need to be tweaked.

While the discussion of the new rules was comforting, I found the discussion of FHA mortgages disturbing: “The higher-priced fraction of FHA home-purchase loans spiked from about 5 percent in early 2013 to about 40 percent after May 2013 and continued at monthly rates between 35 and 52 percent through 2014, for an annual average incidence of about 44 percent in 2014.” (15) Higher-priced first-lien loans are those with an APR that is at least one and a half percentage points higher than the average prime offer rate for loans of a similar type.

The FHA often provides the only route to homeownership for first-time, minority and lower-income homebuyers, but it must be monitored to make sure that it is insuring mortgages that homeowners can pay month in and month out. If FHA mortgages are not sustainable for the long run, they are likely to do homebuyers more harm than good.

September 24, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments

Thursday’s Advocacy & Think Tank Round-up

By Serenna McCloud

  • A joint study by Enterprise Community Partners and the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, Projecting Trends in Severely Cost Burdened Renters: 2015 – 2025 predicted that, in the coming decade, little would change with respect to 1 in 4 renters being severely rent burdened. The researchers examined a number of factors, including: a predicted 10% population increase, declining homeownership rates, and a predicted rise in demand for rental housing.  They also looked at a number of possible scenarios to determine how salary gain and population growth would affect the percentage of severely rent burdened households.  Even the most optimistic of scenarios would only result in a 1.4% decrease.
  • According to analysis by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) Existing Home sales fell by 4.8% from July to August despite slowing price growth and a slightly lower interest rate.  On the other hand NAR points out that Existing Home sales are 11% higher than August of last year.
  • The Turner Center for Housing innovation at U.C. Berkley has released analysis entitled Housing Highlights from the 2014 American Community Survey (ACS) which culls the housing related data from the ACS which is released by the Census Bureau and provides statistical trend charts relating to homeownership, cost and vacancy rates.  The Turner Center’s analysis finds, among other things  homeownership continuing to slide it is now at 63.1% following its peak in 2006 when it was at 67.3%. But it also finds that the overall housing cost burden is at its lowest point following the bubble.
  • According to a recent study by Zillow student debt only reduces chances of homeownership for non-graduates.

September 24, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments

September 23, 2015

Homeowners Keeping the Wolf at Bay

By David Reiss

Wolf at the Door by Gidi

The Center for Responsible Lending has released a policy brief with the lengthy title, 2014 HMDA data shows that Federal rules did not have a chilling effect on lending, despite lender predictions. Borrowers of color continue to be under-served by the mortgage market. While it is not a pithy title, it does say it all. The brief opens with some finer detail:

The 2014 mortgage data submitted by lenders under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) reflects a slowly recovering mortgage market, but one that troublingly continues to under-serve important market segments. The implementation of federal mortgage underwriting standards (known as Ability-to-Repay or “ATR” and the Qualified Mortgage rule or “QM”) in early 2014 did not cause a departure from mortgage lending trends in recent years. However, access to credit remains tight; people of color and low and moderate-income families continue to receive a far lower share of home purchase loans than they have historically and than would be expected based on their share of the population. These borrowers also are much more likely to be served by government-backed loan programs than by the conventional market, and are increasingly paying more for mortgages than other borrowers. (1, footnote omitted)

The brief closes, arguing that

recent mortgage lending reforms support sustainable homeownership and wealth building opportunities for lower-wealth households. However, continued problems with access to credit stem from the constrained lending of the post crisis market. Since the crisis, mortgage lending has been mostly limited to borrowers with the most pristine credit history. This constrained lending environment is reflected in the 2014 HMDA data. This environment is most harmful to lower-wealth households as well as to borrowers of color. (5)

The missing piece in this analysis is a proposal for to how to loosen mortgage underwriting so that homeownership can be achieved by more households while also making sure that they can keep making their mortgage payments over the long term.

The key to a sustainable homeownership policy is a plan to keep the wolf at bay while households deal with the unemployment, sickness and divorce that is predictably going to affect some of them all of the time. This policy brief does not chart a path forward to that goal. There is more work to be done.

September 23, 2015 | Permalink | No Comments