Housing Doom

“He who defends everything defends nothing.” – Frederick the Great

March 19th, 2010

The Homebuyer Tax Credit And The IRS

If you are thinking of purchasing a home soon and are planning on using the homebuyer tax credit, here's some information you should know:

Like most government legislation, the Nov 6, 2009 homebuyer tax credit extension created more questions than answers. However, according to Doug Geissler, a certified public accountant, the Internal Revenue Service is literally writing the "refund rules" as they go along.

 

Unbeknown to homebuyers, real estate agents and the mortgage industry, the IRS is giving behind-the-scenes instructions (that are not available to the general public) to CPAs and tax advisors on how to file for the homebuyer tax credit after Nov. 6, 2009. It will be completely different than what you might have advised your clients previously-and your clients are not going to like these changes!

 

The first shocker? Your clients cannot file a 1040 EZ to claim the tax credit. Nor can they file tax returns electronically if claiming the tax credit.

Why no electronic filing or 1040 EZ forms? It's the first step in stopping fraudulent tax credit refunds. Believe it or not, the IRS never had a way to determine if a person owned a home-no auditing software in place-to determine if they previously claimed a "mortgage interest" deduction within a three-year time period. The IRS is building auditing software now to "catch" previous homeowners who are trying to claim a FTHB tax credit.

 

Secondly, the IRS now requires that the HUD-1 or closing statement be attached to the 5405 form (and that cannot be attached electronically).

And to give them time to audit the document, the IRS is telling tax advisors to expect an average of a 16-week turn around time-which means that it could either be the refund or a request for additional documentation. Mr. Geissler says that one of his clients recently received an IRS notice, requesting a letter from a landlord, a copy of a driver's license and the closing statement on an amended tax return where the client was claiming the FTHB tax credit. Yes, the new law allows them to ask for additional info on amended returns.

 

So, what means, that if your clients is expecting an income tax refund and a homebuyer tax credit refund, both refunds could be held up for several months.

 

We all know what adjusted gross income is, right? But did you know that there are over 20 different "modified adjusted gross income" interpretations for different tax forms and credit tax claims? Read the rest of this entry »

March 18th, 2010

Ben Goes Bare Naked on Agency Debt Guarantee — Explicit Enough for You Yet, Ms OMB?

"My assumption is the mortgage backed securities which are already outstanding will be grandfathered and will retain the U.S. government backing that they currently have," Bernanke told lawmakers on the U.S. House Financial Services Committee. // "At some point there will be a change in the structure and there will be no more of the current type of MBS created. But the existing MBS I assume will be protected until such time as they either expire or are purchased back," Bernanke said in response to a question about the future of Fannie and Freddie. – Reuters1

Sounds like it's time for these obligations to get grandfathered right onto Uncle Sam's balance sheet.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 16th, 2010

Las Vegas Homes Renting In Record Numbers

It has been awhile since we've dug into the Las Vegas home sale numbers.  Of note this month is that the most interesting number is not a sale statistic at all- it's the number of single family homes that have rented.

The Greater Las Vegas Association of Realtors (GLVAR) has only been tracking the number of homes leased since 2006.  In January 2006, 1113 homes were rented. [This number only includes homes leased through the MLS.] That number has steadily increased.  In February 2010, a record 2102 homes were leased:

Note the difference in trend between the number of homes rented and the number of homes sold.  2390 homes sold in February, up slightly YOY from last year's 2288, but dropping from January's 2608, an unusual trend for this time of year:

Could it be that the thrill of homeownership is cooling off, or are fewer potential buyers qualifying?  It might be a combination of both.  With more homeowners walking away, people might be thinking twice about walking toward homeownership.

While sales have been headed down, listings are moving up.  Only 19,707 homes were listed for sale in December, a level not seen since February 2007.  However, listings have risen for the past two months.  There were 22,142 homes listed at the end of February.  Consequently the 5.8 months supply that we saw in December has increased markedly to a 9.3 months supply in February.

So where are home prices?  February's $135,694 is down 12.8% YOY, and 56.9% off of the June 2006 peak of $315,000.

So where are home prices headed?  Long time Doom nemesis Larry Murphy said last month: Read the rest of this entry »

March 12th, 2010

Credit Union Doesn’t Want Your Money, Isn’t Making Loans

The MSM keeps spreading the message that in spite of the fact that billions have been provided to banks, they are not making loans. Here's one of the reasons why: [Hat tip Economic Populist!]

Nevada Federal Credit Union has a deal for big savers: Withdraw your money and you'll get a bonus.

The credit union, one of the largest in Nevada, figures that deposits from members who don't have a checking account, mortgage loan or any other products are expensive.

Brad Beal, chief executive officer of Nevada Federal Credit Union, estimates that about 1,600 of Nevada Federal's 85,000 members only use the credit union for savings.

The financial institution typically uses member deposits, including certificates of deposit and money market accounts, to make loans, which typically bear higher rates than deposits.

Beal figures those interest-bearing accounts are a money-losing proposition in Nevada's current depressed economy.

"We don't have any loan demand right now," Beal said.

The credit union is investing in short-term Treasurys and earns about one-quarter of 1 percent on those government securities on average, but it was paying 0.4 percent to customers with savings.

In addition, the credit union expects the National Credit Union Administration to boost deposit insurance premiums by 0.15 percent to 0.4 percent this year.

For each $100 million in deposits, that premium increase will increase Nevada Federal's costs up to $400,000 yearly, Beal said.

While Nevada Federal is well capitalized, reducing deposits also will increase its net worth as a percent of assets. Beal said that is a secondary reason for reducing total deposits.

It's an unusual strategy. Another credit union manager said the strategy makes good sense in the short term but Nevada Federal also may be unable to get the members back again when demand for loans resumes.

Starting Monday, the credit union has cut the variable interest rates on deposits held by members that only save money to zero.

"We're losing money, and they are not making money," Beal said.

The government needs to rethink that Give money to banks and they will make loans strategy.  Banks are finding it more profitable to do something else. Read the rest of this entry »

March 12th, 2010

Foreign Cenbank Holdings of US Obligations Weekly Update — to March 10, 2010

The Fed's own MBS holdings advanced $2.344 billion last week, basically treading water, and total holdings of US obligations by foreign central banks showed modest positive growth. The numbers are still teasingly close to a breakout.

This week's rather comforting Reuters report1 was, as usual, based on the weekly update from the NY Fed's H.4.1 table site.2 Here is Doom's updated CSV version3 of the agencies and treasuries foreign central bank holdings data set.

The flatlines are creeping ever closer to the limits of Flatland. The combined holdings are now $20.615 billion above the benchmark Dec 16th '09 figure, with most of that accounted for by a rise in Treasury Debt (the agencies number presently lies almost exactly $2 billion under the standard).

Treasury Debt holdings are up for a sixth straight week, but the $3.326 buy was less than half of last week's

Agencies rose $2.059 billion, almost matching last week's figure. Its stability over the last half year has bordered on the comic; its net move over the last 25 weeks is now a bit less than $1 billion.

*Agen-FM: continuing thanks go to Chris Puplava whose version of the Fed MBS holdings graph led me to conclude that those holdings may be masking a more marked drop in cenbank agencies holdings than the official dataset was admitting to.  Indeed, reducing the agencies number by the amount of the Fed's MBS holdings seems to give a more plausible narrative through the first part of '09 than the red line does.

This week the total US obligations number rose by $5.385 billion. While that's the forth sound positive result in a row, it's only slightly more than half last week's value.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 10th, 2010

Bank of America takes wrong house- and the parrot

Bank of America has done it again.  They have foreclosed on a homeowner that wasn't in default- and this time they kidnapped the parrot:

A Hampton woman is suing Bank of America, saying one of its contractors wrongly repossessed her home, padlocked the doors, shut off the utilities, damaged the furniture and confiscated a pet parrot, though her mortgage payments were on time.

Angela M. Iannelli, 46, suffered "severe emotional distress, embarrassment and ridicule" as a result of the company's "de facto foreclosure process and seizure proceedings," attorney Michael Rosenzweig wrote in the suit, filed Monday in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court.

The suit accuses Bank of America and its contractor, Ebensburg-based Snyder Property Services, of trespass, unfair business practices, defamation, libel and other offenses during the October foreclosure of Ms. Iannelli's home in the 5000 block of Fountainwood Drive. She is seeking an unspecified amount in compensatory and punitive damages.

Bank of America instructed Snyder Property Services to "enter, seize, padlock, 'winterize' and take possession" of Ms. Iannelli's house, the lawsuit said, cutting water lines and electrical wiring, pouring anti-freeze down her drains and "stealing" her pet parrot, Luke.

She returned home to find her locks had been changed, her furniture and carpets had been damaged, her belongings had been scattered and the bird missing. A notice on her door told her to contact Bank of America, which "initially falsely denied responsibility or knowledge of the invasion and refused" to help her, the suit said. The bank also acknowledged they knew the parrot's whereabouts, it said.

In further calls, Bank of America representatives told Ms. Iannelli they couldn't help her, told her to stop calling, said they were "tired of hearing from her" and put her on hold, told her to call back later and hung up on her, the suit said.

About a week later, Bank of America told her it had "made a mistake" and told her where she could find her parrot, but said she would have to travel to Ebensburg to retrieve it.

She eventually drove to Ebensburg to get her parrot back.

Mr. Rosenzweig said that, with the exception of one payment, Ms. Iannelli's mortgage payments had been on time. Bank of America had not sent her a notice of a 60-day deficiency nor given her 30 days to fix it, as state law requires, he said.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 10th, 2010

Government Intervention In Housing Often A Mistake For Communities And Taxpayers

So what happens when government steps in to revitalize neighborhoods and make more people homeowners? Sometimes neighborhoods are hurt and homeowners go into foreclosure. Example number one is from Buffalo, NY where the city decided to subsidize new homes:

"Foreclosures weakened the effort, but overall, not all the housing that was put up was well thought out," said Michael K. Clarke, head of the Buffalo office for Local Initiatives Support Corp., a nonprofit agency that promotes community development. "There was insufficient coordination with the need for rental housing, and not enough emphasis on target areas that might demonstrate a more stable return. You can't sell new homes next to vacant ones, or sell houses to people who only qualify for financing by the skin of their teeth, and expect to have much success."

 

"We played musical houses with the housing in Buffalo," added Joseph E. Ryan, the former strategic planning director under former Mayor Anthony M. Masiello. "We have more houses than we need. People are coming from existing neighborhoods. It's not like they've been coming from out of town. It helps to destabilize neighborhoods."

It's not only communities that are hurt, but the taxpayers that end up paying for these mistakes: [Thanks John!]

Home ownership in the United States ranks up there with motherhood and apple pie. The government has championed it for decades through tax breaks, mortgage guarantees and, most recently, the herculean task of keeping Americans in their homes after the housing market collapse. But government subsidies of the American Dream also have a darker side: when things head south, taxpayers end up stuck with the costs.

The government-run mortgage finance agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned more than 131,000 properties between them at the end of 2009, according to recent annual filings. That’s roughly the equivalent of San Francisco’s owner-occupied housing stock. The two companies sold off nearly 200,000 units last year that they took over after owners defaulted. But despite those efforts, Fannie and Freddie owned substantially more units at the end of 2009 than they did a year earlier.

And things are set to get worse. Barclays Capital estimates the pipeline of severely troubled loans at around five million across the United States. Modification programs, which should help some borrowers stay in their homes, have also delayed the inevitable forfeiture of many others.

Fannie and Freddie end up owning properties because they provided guarantees for the benefit of mortgage investors. Between them, they back around $5 trillion of American home loans. Such support — once implicitly and now explicitly backstopped by the Treasury — has handed borrowers relatively low financing costs for years.

Now, though, the result is that aside from the huge financial burden they place on taxpayers, the two companies have been amassing foreclosed properties and, in a few cases, have become landlords.

But the Treasury wants to intervene in the effects of all this intervention:

Today we are providing a program update, including additional details on Foreclosure Alternatives and Home Price Decline Protection Incentives. Foreclosure Alternatives will help to prevent costly foreclosures by providing incentives for servicers and borrowers to pursue short sales and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure in cases where a borrower is eligible for a MHA modification but unable to complete the modification process. This program will assist homeowners who cannot afford to stay in their homes by helping them to avoid foreclosure and relocate to a home they can afford. Building on insights developed by the FDIC, Home Price Decline Protection Incentives will provide additional payments based on recent home price declines, and therefore will incentivize additional modifications in areas where home prices have been falling. By increasing MHA modifications and the use of alternatives to foreclosure, we will reduce the negative impact of foreclosure, minimizing damaging costs for financial institutions, borrowers and communities.

This is to be accomplished by: Read the rest of this entry »

March 10th, 2010

Two-Tier Transparency Hits Agency Debt Market

March 9 (Bloomberg) — The Regional Bond Dealers Association asked the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Federal Reserve to end reporting of so-called agency debt trades until bank-affiliated brokers also must comply, saying some are seeking to avoid disclosures. – BL&BW1

I don't think anything straightforward has happened on this story arc in almost two years.  The GSEs themselves have been quasi-nationalized.  Their debt now enjoys a  semi-explicit guarantee, so that when the Chairman of the House Banking Committee suggests that bondholders may have to take a haircut anyway spreads tighten to a multi-year record, which is just a bit counter-intuitive.

Meanwhile Treasury apparently can't legally offer support to the debt, but what they can do is offer the Enterprises unlimited support to some classes of their equity until the end of '12, which is conveniently after the next presidential election so their next move won't have to take into account, like voters … but heck, it's a totally risk free strategy.  Why? Because they won't have to actually do anything more until 10 days after the world ends on Dec 21st ;)

But closer to home, the Fed's MBS purchase program is scheduled at the end of this month.  Now that sounds simple enough, right? Think again …

Reuters: "Fed to linger in agency MBS market after exit"


LATER: the cat said, "I never get involved in politics," and it's easy to see why. Hat tip to Implode-O-Land for this 3/9 MW-hosted press release from Judicial Watch:

"Obama Administration Tells Court Government-Run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Not Subject to Open Records FOIA Law"

"Apparently, American taxpayers are paying the tab for the collapse of Fannie and Freddie, but are not allowed to ask any questions about why it happened. When it comes to Fannie and Freddie, the Obama administration is saying, in effect, 'None of your business,'" said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Obama administration officials and their lawyers can argue until they are blue in the face that Fannie and Freddie are not federal agencies, but their reasoning is straight out of Alice in Wonderland. [hmmm... Igor thinks he's starting to see a trend here] There is nothing ambiguous about the government's absolute control of Fannie and Freddie. Which raises the question: What does the Obama administration have to hide?"


Read the rest of this entry »

March 9th, 2010

Memo to Barney Frank from a Retired Chief Fannie Mae Lobbyist

Fresh out of the oven …

Doom friend (and occasional antagonist) Bill is always worth a look, especially when he speaks to the GSEs and politics.  This is right in his wheelhouse.

.

.

.


"Barney?"

by Bill Maloni

What is Barney Frank (D-Mass) thinking?

I’m sure I’m not the first person to wonder what, beyond his legendary intelligence and quick wittedness, causes the cerebral and sometime volatile Chairman of the House Banking Committee to stake out the policy positions he takes.

Recently, as the world now knows, Frank called for “abolishing” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He soon will initiate congressional hearings to produce that desired legislative result.

The fact that the Obama Administration hasn’t reached the same fever pitched conclusion as Barney likely means that this atomization will not occur in an already volatile political year. Since moving forward in this regard—with no idea what to employ as a mortgage finance system replacement–is fraught with huge political and systemic mortgage business risk for the Democrats and the mortgage industry.

Last week, Barney’s took it upon himself to lob another grenade at the former GSEs and reminded investors that Fannie/Freddie debt and MBS securities were not the equal to Treasuries and that those who bought company securities could end up getting a financial “haircut,” or less money than they expected when they bought the bonds.

While legally and technically correct, what Barney said flies in the face of what the Treasury sales campaign to assure markets, i.e. that the former GSEs debt and securities are safe and the Treasury does stand with them, since the United States mortgage market—which right now is standing on Fannie’s and Freddie’s shoulders—relies on the two companies largely unfettered access to credit market.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 9th, 2010

What’s the FDIC Supposed To Do With This Stuff?

Banks have been going under at a rate not seen in years, leaving the FDIC short of funds and long on assets.  They are trying to alleviate the problem by auctioning off these assets, but that's leaving surviving banks unhappy: [Thanks L!]

March 8 (Bloomberg) — A Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. plan to auction more than $1 billion in assets seized from failed banks next month, including a loan to build a W Hotel in Atlanta, may trigger writedowns that weaken lenders nationwide.

Almost half of the loans were originated by Silverton Bank N.A., whose collapse last May was the biggest in Georgia history. Community banks that joined Silverton in providing $80 million for the 237-room hotel and condominium complex, as well as backing for 39 other projects, could be forced to write down their stakes to reflect sale prices.

The auctions may have wider repercussions. Of the $41 billion in assets seized from failed banks held by the FDIC as of the end of January, $15.6 billion are real estate loans and about 4 percent of those involve participations by other lenders, according to agency spokesman Andrew Gray.

“These banks can’t believe that the regulator they pay to protect them is going to sell these loans to someone who can flip them and cause them serious losses,” said Robert Reynolds, a lawyer at Reynolds Reynolds & Duncan LLC in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, who represents 25 lenders that took part in financing the W Hotel. “Our banks just cannot believe they’re being treated in a way that ultimately hurts the FDIC’s insurance fund, because some of them are right on the edge.”

It's easy to understand the position of the lenders, who've been fighting writedowns ever since the housing market started to fizzle.  Auctions in this market are unlikely to fetch top dollar.

Read the rest of this entry »