A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From Darkseid's workspace   

A Blast From The Past

Business/Financial Desk; Section C

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

By STEVEN A. HOLMES

831 words

30 September 1999

The New York Times

Page 2, Column 5

English

© 1999 New York Times Company

WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 -- In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders. The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans. ''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.'' Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's. ''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent. In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent. Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings. In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups. The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

END OF STORY

created by Darkseid on Oct 06, 2008 at 02:39:01 am     Comments: 3

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

Do YOU qualify for a Fannie/Freddie loan? Let's check, are you breathing? YES! you qualify!

Yet another example of politicians pandering for votes. This time it was mainly the Democrats who were guilty.

posted by JeepMaker on Oct 06, 2008 at 08:53:19 am     #



Don't like saying this but I could benefit a little from this. I'd like to get a home but I tanked my credit history in college.

I refuse to get a house if it means taking out a huge loan that uses predatory tactics.

If I can get a loan even at 1% higher than average that sounds fair to me.

Especially with the market being so low right now, it would be a good time to get one cheaper.

shrug, trying to make lemonade out of lemons :)

posted by jshriver on Oct 06, 2008 at 09:19:50 am     #



let's see - the last year of the clinton administration with a republican house and senate. seven years of bush running the administration, two years with both houses of congress - 2 with the senate, 6 with the house, and always enough votes in the senate to kill any legislation. extensive deregulation (as opposed to writing more appropriate new regs) during reagan/bush/bush of the financial services industry. and you want to call this a DEMOCRATIC PARTY PROBLEM?

fannie and freddie can only encourage loans; the industry needed to use their "expertise" to actually makes loans - fannie & freddie are after market consumers/guarantor of loans.

if you want to play partisian politics and let these types of problems continue to plague the US every decade or so go ahead. if you want to stop these problems from occurring, you ought to look at the actual root problems and recognize where blame actually belongs and find solutions based on that.

once again we have the regulated promulgating the regulations - self-interest is not the best place to start writing rules and legislation.

imo, this is why both R's and D's really ought to see the root cause of all of these sub-prime problems as "campaign reform" - vast sums have been given by the ABA and other banking lobbyist groups to a wide variety of members of congress and the parties (contributions to obama from fannie/freddie is a pitance relatively speaking).

posted by enjoyeverysandwich on Oct 06, 2008 at 12:17:14 pm     #