It’s Time for Swaps to Lose Their Swagger

Gretchen Morgenson, New York Times

“USING these instruments in a way that intentionally destabilizes a company or a country is — is counterproductive, and I’m sure the S.E.C. will be looking into that.”

That’s what Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, said last week when lawmakers asked him about credit default swaps during his Congressional testimony. Concerns are growing about such swaps — securities that offer insurance-like protection and helped tip over the American International Group in 2008 when it couldn’t pay mounting claims on the contracts.

Now, there are fears that the use of these swaps may also help propel entire countries — think Greece — to the precipice.

First, Greece employed swaps to mask its true debt picture, with the help of Wall Street bankers, of course. And now it appears that some traders are using swaps to bet that Greece won’t be able to meet its debt payments and will face a possible default.

Mr. Bernanke is undoubtedly an intelligent man. But his view that it’s “counterproductive” to use credit default swaps to crash an institution or a nation exhibits a certain naïveté about how the titans of finance operate now.

High-octane trading may be counterproductive to taxpayers, for sure. But not to the speculators who win big when such transactions pay off. And in the case of A.I.G., the speculators got their winnings from the taxpayers.

The certainty that Mr. Bernanke expressed about the S.E.C.’s inquiry into credit default swaps is quaint as well. If the past is prologue, we might see a case or two emerge from that inquiry five years from now. The fact is that credit default swaps and other complex derivatives that have proved to be instruments of mass destruction still remain entrenched in our financial system three years after our economy was almost brought to its knees.

Read more here:   http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/business/economy/28gret.html?adxnnl=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1267367410-9Qjq8mi4bzL4sm0gAkDKCQ

Share

WSJ Says It May Be Okay To Walk Away From Your Mortgage.

Millions of Americans are now deeply underwater on their mortgage. If you’re among them, you need to stop living in a dream world and give serious thought to walking away from the debt.

No, you shouldn’t feel bad about it, and you shouldn’t feel guilty. The lenders would do the same to you—in a heartbeat. You need to put yourself and your family’s finances first.

How widespread is this? More than 11 million families are in “negative equity”—that is, they owe more on their home than it is worth—according to a report out this week by FirstAmerican Core Logic, a real-estate data firm. That’s a quarter of all families with mortgages. And for more than five million of those borrowers, the crisis is extreme: They are more than 25% underwater—the equivalent of having a $100,000 loan on a property now worth just $75,000 or less. That’s true for a fifth of mortgage holders in California, nearly a third in Florida and an incredible 50% in Nevada.

Are you in this situation? Are you still battling to pay the bills each month, even when it may make little financial sense to do so?

It’s time for some tough talk.

Stop trying to chase your lost equity. That money is gone. Don’t think like the gambler who blows more and more cash trying to win back his losses. That’s how a lot of people turn a small loss into a big one.

And do the math. Even if you hope the real estate market is near the bottom—it’s possible, but by no means certain—it may still take years to see any meaningful recovery. If you are 25% underwater, your home will have to rise by 33% just to get you back to even.

Is that likely? And over what time period? Even if home prices rose by 5% a year from here, that would still take six years. And during that time you could instead be building fresh savings elsewhere.

Read more here:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703795004575087843144657512.html

Share

Read the fine print in a short sale

Shannon Behnken, Tampa Tribune

TAMPA – With so many distressed homeowners owing more than their homes are worth, short sales have become lifelines.

These types of sales make up more than half of the homes on the market in the Tampa Bay area. Generally, this means the mortgage lender has agreed to allow the home to sell for market value. The lender writes off the rest of the debt, and the homeowner walks away.

But is it really this simple?

Lenders are increasingly adding language to the approval package, reserving the right to pursue the deficiency later – that is, the difference between what you owed on the house and what it sold for.

Some homeowners, so anxious to get out of a pending foreclosure, skip right over that part of the letter. Some understand but opt to take their chances, betting they won’t hear from the lender again.

For some lucky buyers, this has been the case – so far. They’ve sold their home as a short sale, moved on, and haven’t had any problems. But other lenders require the seller to agree upfront to pay back a set amount.

‘It seems fair’

Realtor Paul De La Torre, of Keller Williams, said lenders almost always ask his clients to agree to pay at least some of the debt back. Lenders’ requests, he said, range from 15 percent of the balance to agreeing to a payment plan – such as $80 a month for 15 years.

Read more here:  http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/feb/21/bz-read-the-fine-print-in-a-short-sale/

Share

Is Maxine Waters Really As Dumb As She Seems?

This post by Jill Schlesinger originally appeared on CBS’ MoneyWatch.com.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered his semi-annual testimony before the House Committee on Financial Services today. He pretty much said what was expected: the economy is recovering but still fragile; the job market is improving, but is still horrible; inflation is low now, but the Fed needs to keep an eye on it in the future. As a result, interest rates are likely to remain low for an “extended period.”

All on script. But there was an interchange between one lawmaker and Bernanke that deserves your attention. Please watch this video of Congresswoman Maxine Waters – in it, she demonstrates that there is obviously NO intelligence requirement necessary to be named to the House Financial Services Committee.

Watch the video here:  http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/25/business/econwatch/entry6241870.shtml

Share