How to Fix the Underwater Mortgage Problem

January 27, 2012 RSS Feed Print

John Vogel is an adjunct professor at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business.

Housing continues to be a major drag on the U.S. economy. Many factors prevent this problem from being solved, but a key obstacle has been arguments based on moral hazard. From the outset of this crisis, politicians and angry citizens have railed against rewarding the "bad behavior" of homeowners who took on mortgage debt that they could not afford.

More than three years into the housing crisis, with foreclosures and underwater mortgages casting a dark cloud over the housing market and the economy, it is time to chart a new course. The best place to begin is by recognizing that while homeowners made mistakes so did the lenders. Based on the assumption that houses would never go down in value, lenders made bad loans. In addition, the largely unregulated mortgage market allowed most players to earn their full fees for underwriting and selling loans regardless of how the loans performed.

[Check out the U.S. News housing market blog The Home Front.]

Looking back over the last three years, millions of innocent people have been hurt by our "punish the home buyer" mentality. First we have the millions of children who have lost their homes or been under the constant threat of losing their home. Communities have suffered as neighborhoods deteriorate and the tax base erodes. And then there are the rest of us, who are victimized by the weak economy and high unemployment. What I cannot figure out is who has benefited as billions of dollars of housing wealth has been destroyed.

There is a potential solution that, I believe, is worth trying. While it will not solve all of the current housing problems, it could make a significant difference. Common sense and a number of academic studies show that the most effective way to deal with people who owe more than their house is worth is a permanent reduction in the mortgage principle. If my house is worth $200,000 and the mortgage is $300,000 it makes little financial sense to stretch each month to make the payment, especially when the alternative is to pay nothing for the next two or three years while the lender pursues foreclosure. While I am not advocating that people ignore their legal and moral obligation to pay their debts, three years of data clearly proves that in this situation a lot of people stop paying.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

So what is the alternative? One potential solution is shared appreciation mortgages. Essentially, in exchange for a reduction in their mortgage principal, homeowners would give up some percentage (I recommend 50 percent) of the future appreciation on their house when it is sold. This is a complex instrument, but I believe it could be simplified and standardized. The loan reduction could be based on a simple appraisal and the lenders share of future appreciation would be 50 percent of the difference between the future sales price and the appraisal.

One advantage of this "shared appreciation" approach is that not everyone will want one. If your house is only slightly underwater or not underwater at all, most of us would not be willing to give up 50 percent of future appreciation. Similarly to be eligible, a homeowner would have to prove that with a lower mortgage and perhaps a lower interest rate, they have sufficient income to afford the new mortgage. Finally, this program would only be for a homeowner's primary residence and not for investors.

[See a slide show of 6 ways to fix the housing market.]

Shared appreciation mortgages are not new. Community development corporations have been using them successfully for years to ensure that affordable housing stays affordable. Institutional investors have also used this structure for years in financing commercial properties. Recently, Boston Community Capital has been using this technique as a foreclosure prevention mechanism, enabling families to avoid foreclosure. Lenders have found that working with Boston Community Capital, they receive more money than they would get through the foreclosure process.

For this program to work at a scale that will make a significant difference, we need to unleash the private market. To do that, the rules must be simple and clear so that mortgage brokers can quickly determine if a particular family is eligible for a shared appreciation mortgage. This program cannot be "voluntary to the lender," which has been the downfall of every foreclosure mitigation program over the last three years. Lenders have had enough time to deal with their bad loans. Rather than allowing them to continue to "delay and pray" we need to reset millions of mortgages and jump start the economy.

Tags:
economy,
housing,
housing market

Reader Comments Read all comments (5)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Author,

You (or your editor who writes the headlines) are assuming the "fix" to the "underwater mortgage problem" is to reduce the water level. This is deflationary = recession = even more unemployment. It's a vicious cycle.

You haven't explained how the shared appreciation is any better logical incentive for the underwater mortgagee than stop payment + foreclosure option. Besides questionable legality, it is complex and would be difficult to administer. Home value appreciation would be based on - what? The appraisal? You must know, or have read about the questionable appraisal practices that were (and still are) part of the mortgage process. This deal does not sound attractive to a logical borrower, given the available alternatives.

What you are describing is lucrative for banks, not good for the resident.

A better option is what is already happening across US - owner-occupied homes are converting to rentals in areas where people choose to live (= where the jobs are). Even people who can afford to buy homes are choosing to rent. Why buy an asset that has a high probability of decreasing in value in the near term?

The best solution is get people back to work, reduce unemployment, reduce debt. Market values will work themselves out. Banking will decline, but not cease to exist.

Fielder of CA 3:26PM February 09, 2012

They were not "mistakes". They were criminal acts...fraud. They should be prosecuted rather than rewarded with OUR money. Banks that committed these frauds and/or failed in their fiduciary responsibilities should suffer the fate they created for themselves. If that means they go bankrupt, that means they go bankrupt. Others will buy the pieces and go on. This socialism for the rich MUST END!!!

Paying MY Mortgage of CT 12:42PM February 09, 2012

John I understand what you are trying to accomplish with your article, and I do agree that there may be some forgiveness in some heavily distressed areas. What I believe you may have missed is what Fannie and Freddie are so very concerned about - if you open the door for mass forgiveness, when will it stop.

I have been working on a project that is starting to get some federal attention and it greatly minimizes forgiveness, reduces payments, and is financially beneficial to banks. It also requires that we eliminate the distressed properties from entering the marketplace with their highly discounted prices. That's right - the floor would be set, and the banks would be solvent. You can see an overview of what I have done at homevaluecrisis.blogspot.com

The goal of the blog is to have citizens contact their elected officials to start the conversation with us.

David DeBois of WA 5:35PM January 27, 2012

Economic Intelligence

Insights, perspectives, and commentary on the economy.

advertisement

On Energy

Refinery Maintenance Season Means Gas Hikes

BP's refinery fire is a reminder of the gas price hikes to come as refinery maintenance season approaches.

Latest Video

advertisement