Mortgage Mania 18 - Can You Say Taxpayer Bailout?

September 9, 2008

What The Government Seizure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Means To You

Unless you have been hiding under a rock the past couple of days, you couldn’t miss the announcement that the U.S. Department of the Treasury has placed government backed mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into a conservatorship. Under the terms of the deal, the federal government is authorized to take up to an 80 percent stake in the companies, and, as part of its duties under the conservatorship, will review both Fannie’s and Freddie’s financial condition quarterly, as well as inject money into the operations as needed. 
Tommy Fehrenbach of Stern Mortgage in Palo Alto had this to say about the Treasury Department’s move.

To promote market stability, the companies will be allowed to buy more mortgages through the end of 2009. However, starting in 2010 the number of mortgages they own will gradually be reduced at a rate of 10% per year, eventually stabilizing at about $250 billion.”

 As part of this weekend’s action, both CEOs were relieved of their duties and Herbert Allison, former Merrill Lynch vice chairman, and David Moffett, former U.S. Bancorp CFO, were selected to lead Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, respectively.

The markets cheered the move with the NYSE and NASDAQ rallying on the news, and mortgages rates for conforming loans (under $650,000 in 2009) fell almost half a point.

 All great news, mortgage rates fall, and the housing slump is averted, right? Not so fast there partner . . .

In a statement released today by the California Association of Realtors (C.A.R.), concern over the long-term impact of the move was expressed with the following cautionary forecast:

Without an institutionalized mortgage-backed securities market, mortgage capital eventually will be less predictable and more expensive, and adjustable-rate mortgages could become the standard loan for home buyers, as could higher down payment requirements. The 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage as we know it will no longer be readily available for most home buyers and may effectively disappear. The result could be a dramatic decline in homeownership rates in California and across the nation.

C.A.R. is concerned that the Treasury, and Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s new CEOs, will overreact and change the mission and role of the GSEs. Wall Street and investors are understandably reluctant to buy mortgage backed securities (MBS) that are not either originated from or guaranteed by Fannie or Freddie.”

I added the underlining for emphasis because what nobody is talking about is JUMBO loans. Those mortgages above $729,000 (over $650,000 in 2009) that are part and parcel of almost ALL sales of single family homes here in Silicon Valley (the median home price in Palo Alto this week is: $1,921,214, courtesy of Altos Research).

In summary, while this is a good move for conforming loans, and the majority of potential homebuyers across the country, high-cost areas like Silicon Valley may once again be left out in the cold.

Stay tuned for our next edition of Mortgage Mania - The Jumbo Strikes Back

Thanks for reading . . .

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

2 Responses to “Mortgage Mania 18 - Can You Say Taxpayer Bailout?”

  1. Kevin Boer, Broker Owner, 3 Oceans Real Estate, Inc. (650.387.2860) on September 9th, 2008 11:21 am

    It does indeed look at taxpayer bailout of bad corporate decision-making, but was there really an alternative? If Fannie and Freddie had indeed been allowed to fail, wouldn’t that have led to a far worse catastrophe in the housing market?

  2. jarn on October 1st, 2008 1:26 pm

    $700 billion is peanuts compared to what Main St. has already lost in market capitalization and the resulting shrinkage in retirement accounts. $700 billion could make the whole foreclosure mess go away for years. It’s a bargain. Check the numbers at http://www.datacorner.com.

Got something to say?





« Back to text comment