According to the most recent data, as many as one in 10 mortgages in the U.S. are delinquent or in foreclosure. The continued decline in housing prices has been exacerbated by the decline in the economy. The housing sector is caught in a continued downward spiral.
Foreclosure is a slow and costly process and represents significant dead weight loss for the economy. Estimates are that the cost of foreclosure is 30% to 35% of the value of a house. Moreover, there are externalities that are associated with properties that do foreclose in that they contaminate the value of neighboring properties. This issue is also critical because reducing losses to default and foreclosure will help stabilize the financial system by reducing the actual losses--and the uncertainty about them--that are passed through the financial system to the holders of the mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. Default losses are concentrated in the "first loss" and mezzanine tranches of collateralized debt obligations, which has made them highly toxic to the financial institutions holding them.
Here is the question: Given the attention that has been devoted to the problem of troubled mortgages and the number of programs that have been put forward to address them, why so little impact? The simple answer is that the programs are badly designed.
Some examples: Hope for Homeowners is a Federal Housing Administration program designed to modify existing loans by writing down the principal, offering insurance against further default and introducing shared appreciation on the property. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac laid out plans for restructuring mortgages that lower payments but extend the term on the loan or involve balloon payments. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has proposed to restructure troubled mortgages by lowering payments, but with no write-down of principal and with a balloon payment due at the end. So far, the response to these programs has been minor. Why?
First, they start with lousy incentives. Both Hope for Homeowners and the FDIC programs are available to homeowners who are delinquent by several months in their payments. If you want to restructure your mortgage, what does this tell you? Stop making payments! Sensibly, most bank restructuring programs require borrowers to show good faith by keeping payments current before they will consider restructuring.
Another problem is that restructuring per se is not a great solution. For the most part, it simply kicks the can down the road. Lowering current payments but requiring either a balloon payment or an extended payback term postpones the problem without solving it. Moreover, since it does nothing to address the negative equity of the homeowner, it increases the probability of secondary default if prices or owners' incomes continue to fall. For all of these reasons, owners become essentially like renters, with all of the adverse incentives that may imply.
The existing approaches to loan modification do not balance the incentives of the borrowers and the lenders. Shared-appreciation mortgages (which are a component of the FHA plan) do this well. Shared-appreciation restructurings offer a debt for equity swap whereby, in return for modifying the loan, the borrower must give up some of the future appreciation in the value of the property. Designed properly, this would discourage borrowers from seeking modifications if they can continue to pay their mortgage.
'Business' 카테고리의 다른 글
It's A Dirty Job, And I Love It! (0) | 2008.12.11 |
---|---|
Slimmer Rio Leads The Way (0) | 2008.12.11 |
Chrysler's Hidden Coffers (0) | 2008.12.11 |
The U.S. Economy's Best Bet: The Intangible Sector (0) | 2008.12.10 |
How To Survive A Workaholic Spouse (0) | 2008.12.10 |