FBI Reportedly Investigating Fannie and Freddie

, Huffington Post

It’s been a bad month for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced last week that it was suing half a dozen former executives from the mortgage giants, including the ex-CEOs of both companies. Now, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is reportedly asking questions about Fannie and Freddie’s behavior in the months preceding the financial crisis, according to The Daily.

At issue is whether Fannie and Freddie — two of the largest mortgage companies in the country, and the recipients of a major government bailout in September 2008 – misled the public and investors about the relative risk of their loans in the lead up to the financial crisis, the Daily reports. The matter has serious implications, since many allege that mortgage lenders’ enthusiasm for making loans to homeowners with shoddy credit, and banks’ penchant for using those loans as financial instruments, are among the principal reasons for the housing crash and financial crisis.

The SEC’s lawsuit probes much the same question, hitting six former executives at the two companies with charges of security fraud, and accusing them of continuing to hold onto questionable loans even after the magnitude of the risk became clear. Neither company is directly named as a defendant in the SEC’s suit.

The SEC appears to be framing that suit as a response to critics who have accused the agency of going easy on the major banks and financial institutions who played a central role in the financial meltdown, according to The New York Times.

However, it’s unclear whether the SEC’s pursuit of Fannie and Freddie alumni will assuage taxpayer ire or merely inflame it further, since, as CNBC recently pointed out, it’s taxpayers who may end uppaying the legal fees for the six defendants named in the suit, as Fannie and Freddie are now owned by the government.

Read more here

Share

Candidates on housing crisis: A deafening silence

Forclosure mortgage auditsJohn W. Schoen, MSNBC

They’ve debated over how to create jobs. They’ve argued over how to cut spending. They’ve battled over whether to raise taxes. But five years into the worst housing crisis since the Great Depression, there’s been very little discussion from the presidential candidates on the real estate crisis that’s battering millions of American families.

Nearly 3 in 10 U.S. homeowners with mortgages are now underwater

owing more on their loan than their home is worth. Now that house prices have apparently resumed their downward trend, that number will continue to rise, putting millions more Americans just one job loss away from foreclosure. Despite those numbers, the issue so far seems to be getting little traction on the campaign trail.

Fresh data released Tuesday brought the problem into sharper focus. Of the roughly 50 million U.S. homeowners with mortgages, more than 28 percent owed more than the house was worth, according the real estate data provider Zillow.com. That works out to about 14 million homes.

In the hardest-hit areas, including Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Detroit, Phoenix and Sacramento, more than half of homeowners with mortgages owe more than their home is worth, according to the data

Since the housing market imploded in 2007, more than 5 million homes have been lost to foreclosure. Though the pace has slowed somewhat, the delay has been largely the result of a backlog of cases and a glut of unsold homes on banks’ books.  Another 4.3 million houses are sitting vacant or headed for the foreclosure pipeline, according the Capital Economics housing economist Paul Diggle.

After leveling off this summer, house prices appear to be falling again, which will force even more homeowners underwater. Those new foreclosures bring “distressed” sales, as bankers unload properties or homeowners work out a pre-foreclosure “short sale” with their lender. Those distressed sales, in turn, forces prices even lower. Unless that cycle is broken, the housing market could remain locked in a downward spiral for some time.

Read more here

Share

The U.S. Needs a Meaningful Mortgage Settlement

Simon Johnson, Bloomberg

Discussions around this weekend’s International Monetary Fund annual meetings in Washington made it clear that the standard macroeconomic toolkit has little more to offer the U.S. It’s time to try something else.

Monetary policy has reached its limits, and further fiscal stimulus isn’t in the cards. Three years into the financial crisis, the U.S. economy is still held back by weak consumer confidence. Meanwhile, the global financial system continues to face instability, most notably because of the persistent sovereign-debt crisis in Europe.

With roughly a quarter of all U.S. households with mortgages owing more on their loans than their homes are worth, it’s no surprise that consumption, which accounts for 70 percent of gross domestic product, is restrained.

The consequent lack of demand discourages business investment, which means job creation remains weak. People are afraid of losing their homes and that fear keeps spending down and thus prevents them — and their neighbors — from getting jobs.

What can be done to break this vicious circle? One suggestion from some officials this weekend — and of course many banks — is to accept a relatively small amount of money to settle the various robo-signing and other mortgage document cases that state attorneys general are pursuing. The claim is that this would put the banks back on their feet and spur lending. This is a complete illusion.

TARP Props

The biggest banks were propped up during the crisis by the Treasury Department using Troubled Asset Relief Program funds and by the Federal Reserve with huge loans in various forms. Some institutions, including Citigroup and Bank of America, were put back on their feet several times.

But this approach has proved insufficient to spur an economic recovery. Left to their devices, banks will always fail to restructure loans on a scale sufficient to make a macroeconomic difference. Negative equity or near negative equity weighs on consumers and depresses confidence, but no single private firm will ever take into account those broader consequences.

To date, the government’s efforts on mortgages have been lame — and much less than was done to save the biggest and worst managed banks. There’s also zero chance that this Congress would authorize the use of any public money to support mortgage relief. At the same time, it’s only fair and reasonable that there should be redress for homeowners who were tricked into mortgages they couldn’t afford, evicted without due process or otherwise mistreated by banks.

Read more here

Share

Danger Will Robinson: Moody’s downgrades BofA, Wells Fargo & Citi

Moody’s Corp on Wednesday cut the debt ratings of Bank of America Corp, Wells Fargo & Co and Citigroup Inc, three of the largest U.S. banks, on worries the government would be less likely to support a large lender if it got into trouble.

The government is “more likely now than during the financial crisis to allow a large bank to fail should it become financially troubled, as the risks of contagion become less acute,” the ratings agency said.

The action concludes a three month review that began in June when the ratings agency said the banks faced a potential downgrade.

Moody’s downgraded Bank of America’s long-term senior debt rating to “Baa1″ from “A2″ and its short-term debt rating to “Prime 2″ from “Prime 1.”

Read more here

Share