Tax Payer ALERT! The Gov't Wants To Bail Out Troubled Homeowners
Is there a tax-payer funded (err... "government sponsored") bailout coming for honeowners? Momentum appears to be building for a broad-based program to bail out folks that bought homes in the boom times and can no longer afford to make their payments (e.g. are approaching or are already in foreclosure proceedings). This has been a topic of much debate. For those that made smart, sound financial decisions (e.g. didn't borrow more than they could afford to pay back, and read the fine print on their mortgage documents, etc.), this seems like it might be unfair since the taxpayers will potentially be bailing out these folks. But, as the outline below reflects, the current debate in Congress revolves around structuring a compromise that enables any eventual program to pay for itself. P2P-Loans.com is encouraged by some of the provisions being discussed (especially the payment of insurance premiums to the FHA and a sharing in any equity gains to homeowners upon a sale). We would hope that the equity gain sharing is substantial and not a pittance given any gain will be made entirely on the backs of tax payers (errr...the "government-sponsored" program). Generally speaking, the government has a terrible track record on projects like this (they underestimate the total costs, botch the execution and mess up a market-based system that works pretty well in the long run).
Here is a summary (from an article at Money.com) of what's being debated (P2P-Loans.com will report back on this issue once a program is passed):
While critics worry that an FHA rescue plan could amount to a bailout, supporters say it's not since everyone involved - lenders, borrowers and mortgage investors - would make a sacrifice.
Lenders get 100% backing from the FHA if a loan goes south. In exchange, the lender takes a "haircut" - reducing the principal owed and converting adjustable-rate loans to fixed-rate mortgages.
Borrowers get to keep their homes, but they would pay a premium to the FHA for the mortgage insurance and they would have to give a small portion of their equity to the FHA when the house is sold. They would also have to show they can afford the newly refinanced loan.
Mortgage investors - while they would sacrifice some future income from loans that have been reduced - would have more confidence investing in the new loans since the refinanced loans will be affordable and the borrower therefore will be more likely to pay them back.
Here is a summary (from an article at Money.com) of what's being debated (P2P-Loans.com will report back on this issue once a program is passed):
While critics worry that an FHA rescue plan could amount to a bailout, supporters say it's not since everyone involved - lenders, borrowers and mortgage investors - would make a sacrifice.
Lenders get 100% backing from the FHA if a loan goes south. In exchange, the lender takes a "haircut" - reducing the principal owed and converting adjustable-rate loans to fixed-rate mortgages.
Borrowers get to keep their homes, but they would pay a premium to the FHA for the mortgage insurance and they would have to give a small portion of their equity to the FHA when the house is sold. They would also have to show they can afford the newly refinanced loan.
Mortgage investors - while they would sacrifice some future income from loans that have been reduced - would have more confidence investing in the new loans since the refinanced loans will be affordable and the borrower therefore will be more likely to pay them back.
Labels: foreclosure, Home Equity, income tax, loan, mortgage, real estate, Sub-prime Agreement, taxes

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home