|
Eakinomics: The
Coming Housing Risks
The big economic issues of the day are inflation and recession risks. But
beneath the sturm und drang about these issues, a host of other pressing
policy issues remain concerning pharmaceutical pricing reform that retains
innovation incentives, international tax rules that support growth and not
confiscatory taxes, and…taxpayer risks from the housing market.
That’s right. The greatest hits of 2007–2008 are back: Fannie Mae, Freddie
Mac (the government-sponsored enterprises or GSEs), housing market risks,
inadequate capital, and the risk of taxpayer bailouts. The starting point is
that the outlook for both residential and rental housing shades negative, in
large part because the strategy employed by the Federal Reserve will have a disproportionate impact on housing.
But the regulatory environment is layering on new risks. Despite 14 years
under the conservatorship of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) “each Enterprise remains undercapitalized.”
Despite this, the FHFA just moved to relax the capital requirements. Worse,
the FHFA announced it would require Fannie and Freddie to put in place
Equitable Housing Finance Plans that would (shocker) aim at advancing
equality in housing markets. For example, they would deploy a "special
purpose credit program" that would assist African American borrowers
with down payments. Typically, the 20 percent down payment is the
responsibility of the homebuyer, or some of the capital risk is taken by
private mortgage insurance. This approach takes capital that is supposed to
protect taxpayers to subsidize home purchases by borrowers who simply don’t
have the financial preparation to do so.
This is the classic GSEs-FHFA two-step. Stretch the risks that the GSEs can
take and they make more money – until things go bad and the taxpayers pick up
the tab. At the same time, this would steal the market share of
private-sector housing finance firms. Fortunately, at least some members of
Congress are paying attention. As reported by Politico’s Morning Money, 10 members of the
House wrote to FHFA Director Thompson, noting
“The Enterprises have a history of venturing into new activities and product
offerings that go well beyond their congressionally approved roles in the
secondary market. The FHFA must do more to ensure there is appropriate
transparency regarding any new products or activities that the Enterprises
undertake and that these activities do not displace private firms or crowd
out private capital.” To call this mission creep at the GSEs is an
understatement - not only would this expand the role, involvement, and risk
of the GSEs, but it would mean billions of taxpayer dollars going to
subsidize housing demand in a supply crisis without the involvement of
Congress.
Fortunately, there is something that can be done. As the congressmen note,
Thompson could “finalize the long overdue rulemaking on Prior Approval of Enterprise
Products, which was proposed in October 2020 and would ensure there is
adequate oversight and transparency around new products and activities the
Enterprises bring into the market. This is a statutory requirement under
Section 1123 of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and has yet to
be met over a decade later.”
Nobody is opposed to greater equity in economic activities. But to pursue
them by deliberately disregarding the lessons of recent history, doing a
U-turn on regulatory stringency, and inviting another tranche of taxpayer
bailouts is likely to make everyone
worse off.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment