International experts from industry, academia, the financial community, and government share lessons learned from their efforts to objectively measure housing risk.
Covering a housing or banking story today? Here’s the latest from the experts on the AEI financial services team.
The Dodd-Frank Act delegated far more discretionary power to financial regulators than had ever been granted before and undermined the checks and balances that had historically marked the process.
Disparate impact — it’s a legal doctrine that may be coming soon to your suburb (if you’re part of the national majority living in suburbs).
For housing finance, as house prices rise above their trend, reduce the allowable loan-to-value ratios and increase required down payments, and put heavier capital requirements on the mortgage loans of lenders, writes AEI Scholar Alex J. Pollock in Housing Finance International: the Quarterly Journal of the International Union for Housing Finance.
As the federal government searches for ways to reduce segregation, it should start by examining its own tax credit policies and considering that some federal housing policies promote economic and racial segregation.
A decade after the peak of the US housing bubble, 15% of owners owe more on their mortgages than their properties are worth.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s profits utterly depend on having their obligations backed by the US Treasury — and thus by taxpayers.
The claim that mortgage credit is very tight for all but pristine borrowers has been repeated so often by respected policymakers and economists that it is now taken as fact. This characterization of today’s mortgage market, however, is misleading.
Senator Richard Shelby’s reforms look like a positive and balanced start at fixing the negative economic fallout created by the Dodd-Frank Act.
Congress directed the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) how to set the g-fees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge for guaranteeing mortgage-backed securities, but the FHFA didn’t follow the directions.