We’re paying price for easy home-equity loans
Terry Savage email@example.com June 12, 2011 11:16PM
Fannie Mae on Wisconsin Avenue, in northwest Washington, Friday, July 11, 2008. Shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sank, then recovered somewhat, on a gut-wrenching Friday as investors tried to ascertain whether the government will soon intervene to shore up confidence in the troubled mortgage finance companies. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
Updated: May 3, 2013 12:15PM
Former football quarterback Dan Marino must have a heavy conscience these days. If you’re a sports fan, you remember his legendary prowess on the field, leading the Miami Dolphins. If you’re a
homeowner, you may remember him better as the guy who pitched you on that “easy home-equity loan . . . so you can remodel your kitchen, pay off your bills, or take a vacation.”
The commercial ran ad nauseam. I even wrote a column at the time, predicting Marino would regret lending his name to this venture. And who can forget those DiTech Funding television commercials, enticing you into a home-equity loan?
DiTech was a subsidiary of General Motors back then. How bad could they be? That was in the days of “what’s good for General Motors is good for America!” We all know how that turned out.
Now comes a report from real estate data firm CoreLogic Inc. showing that those who took cash out of their homes a decade ago are “underwater” on their homes at twice the rate of those who didn’t borrow against their home equity.
And caveat: These statistics are based only on home-equity loans or second mortgages. They don’t include homeowners who completely refinanced and likely took some cash out in the process.
You had help getting into trouble
When I recently wrote about the dangers of simply “walking away” from your mortgage loan, several readers commented that in effect, the banks were allowed to walk away from the packages of mortgage loans they guaranteed. These readers noted that the taxpayers bailed out Freddie and Fannie — the “quasi” government agencies that had guaranteed the mortgages. So if the taxpayer could rescue the banks, why not help the individual homeowner?
Good point. And, I’d leave it there, because the murky world of high finance can rightly bore you to tears. But I can’t resist pointing out that the mortgage packages “insured” by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had the implicit backing of the U.S. government — a promise to make good if the borrowers defaulted.
And who gave substance to this guarantee? You. You elected representatives in Washington who wanted to keep their voters happy by subsidizing housing with low interest rates.
Few remember Rep. Barney Frank opposing the proposal to transfer control of Fannie and Freddie to the Treasury department instead of keeping them under Congressional oversight. At the time, Frank declared that the agencies were not in danger of any financial crisis and needed to keep making loans to encourage “affordable housing.” Then there was Sen. Chris Dodd, who funded, then defended the agencies’ solvency until the very end.
(OK, forestalling the next argument, I agree that then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was also culpable, keeping interest rates low and memorably urging people to take out more debt through these low-rate, adjustable-loan mortgage deals. I was astounded at the time and wrote about it.)
Next: Debt bubble will burst
OK, once we’re past blaming the former Fed chairman, Congress, TV pitchmen and your own undeniable greed, can’t we just forget about the whole thing and start over?
Unfortunately the answer is a resounding NO. Because that debt is still out there, hanging over the United States like a huge cloud — even though it doesn’t appear on the books of the government.
For that explanation, here’s an excerpt of testimony that was recently given to Congress by Alex Pollock of the American Enterprise Institute. Pollock is worried that all this mortgage debt is your responsibility as a taxpayer but not even acknowledged in the official national debt figures:
“The huge debt of the non-budget agencies and government-sponsored enterprises (‘agency debt’) fully relies on the credit of the United States, which means by definition exposure of the taxpayers to losses, but it is not accounted for as government debt. [The Federal Reserves notes such debt] is not ‘considered officially to be part of the total debt of the federal government.’
“Not ‘considered officially,’ but what is it really? It puts the federal budget at risk, or more precisely, subjects it to major uncertainties of credit losses. It represents a kind of off-balance sheet financing for the government.”
In other words, the government is hiding its true debt — the debt that we taxpayers are on the hook for — through this “off-balance sheet financing.” That’s how the website TruthinAccounting.org gets its estimate of the real U.S. debt of $77 trillion!
If you applied for a new loan (which the government does every time it sells new Treasury bills, notes, and bonds) and hid the true nature and amount of your debt, they’d call it bank fraud. When the government does that, they call it Treasury refinancing.
Remember how good it originally felt when you took out that home-equity loan to remodel your kitchen, figuring you’d worry about repayment someday down the road. Well, we’re “down that road” now — whether it’s home-equity loans or government mortgage guarantees. And that’s The Savage Truth!
Terry Savage is a registered investment adviser