This email was sent to you by: Anonymous |
|
Mortgage News Daily
|
Message: YOUR MESSAGE HERE |
Email alerts, such as this one, are a
free service provided by Mortgage News Daily. If you would like to receive an alert when important news breaks please
register to join our community.
Register with Mortgage News Daily - Registration is free and offers many benefits.
Manage your Email Alerts - Once you're registered, you can manage all MND email alerts on one page, turning subscriptions on or off with one click.
About MND:
Mortgage News Daily combines the expertise of some of the housing industry's leading minds with the power of social media to offer an always lively, constantly evolving web community. MND communicates breaking news, streams video, and provides expert opinion and commentary to a community of interested market professionals and curious consumers.
FHFA Proposal to Effectively End Private Transfer Fees
The Federal Housing
Finance Agency (FHFA) took a step last week that may effectively end private
transfer fees before the end of the year.
The agency announced a public comment period on new regulations that
would restrict Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks)
from investing in mortgages with private transfer fee covenants. The proposed "Guidance" would
extend to mortgages and securities purchased by FHLBanks or acquired by them as
collateral for advances, and to mortgages and securities purchased or
guaranteed by the Enterprises.
Transfer fees are
enabled by covenants on a deed which require a payment to a third party every
time property ownership is transferred and are typically 1 percent of the
amount of the sale. For example: a developer of a condominium complex might
put a covenants on each unit deed that would require the initial buyer and
every consecutive buyer to pay such a fee to him regardless of the number of times
the condo changes hands. This would
provide the developer with a stream of income long after he cashed out of the development
with no accompanying requirement to provide any further benefit to that
development. In fact, some of these
income streams have actually been securitized by Wall Street.
In another scenario,
the fee might accrue to the homeowners association or the guarantee of such
fees could be used as an inducement to persuade an opponent - an environmental
group for instance - to cooperate with the project.
Establishing such a
private fee is not necessarily limited to the developer of the property. A local government could make it a condition
of a zoning change; the owner of land could insist on such future income as
part of the purchase price of his land.
Theoretically you could attach a one percent transfer fee covenant to
your three bedroom Colonial before you sell it.
And so could the next seller and the seller after that so that each
subsequent buyer is increasingly clobbered.
Many transfer fees are set up to endure for 99 years.
FHFA said its
concerns with the private transfer fees include that they:
-
Increase the costs of homeownership and reduce
liquidity in both primary and secondary mortgage markets;
-
limit property transfers or render them legally
uncertain;
-
detract from the stability of the secondary
mortgage market, particularly if such fees will be securitized;
-
expose lenders, title companies, and secondary
market participants to risks from unknown potential liens and title defects;
-
contribute to reduced transparency for consumers
because the fees often are not disclosed by sellers and are difficult to
discover through customary title searches, especially after repeated purchases;
-
represent dramatic, last-minute, non-financeable
out-of-pocket costs for consumers;
-
deprive subsequent homeowners of equity value;
and
-
complicate residential real-estate transactions
and introduce confusion and uncertainty for homebuyers.
Acting FHA Director Edward J. DeMarco said "The private
transfer fee covenants appear to run counter to the important mission of the
housing GSEs (government sponsored enterprises) to increase liquidity,
affordability, and stability in the nation's housing finance system. Encumbering housing transactions with fees
that may not be property disclosed may impede the marketability and the valuation
of properties and adversely affect the liquidity of securities backed by
mortgages on those properties.
The agency said it recognizes that there are a range of
actions it can take, including requiring reports on the extent regulated
entities are exposed to transfer fee investments, changing seller/servicer
guides to identify restrictions on the purchase of transfer fee-encumbered
mortgages, creating and enforcing additional representations and warranties or
to prohibit the purchase of investment in the mortgages or the revenue
generated by the fees. It appears that
FHFA is rejecting all but the final alternative.
The proposed guidance
would bring the GSEs and the FHLBanks into line with the Federal Housing
Administration (FHA). HUD's regulations
at 24 CFR 203.41 have been interpreted as prohibiting FHA insurance on
properties with transfer fees which it defines as "legal restrictions on
conveyance." A number of states have also banned the fees and such legislation
is under consideration by others.
Advocates of private
transfer fees argue that the fees are beneficial when they are used to fund
project developments or to enhance community investments through homeowners
associations, affordable housing groups, environmental organizations or
charitable organizations. FHFA counters
with a concern that such fees are used to fund purely private continuous
streams of income and that the fees, even if dedicated to homeowners
associations, may not be proportional or related to the purposes for which they
were collected. The draft FHFA guidance
does not distinguish between a private transfer fee covenant which supposedly
renders a benefit to the property and one which accrues value to unrelated
third parties.
The agency also
expressed concern that encumbering housing sales with fees that may not be
properly disclosed could adversely affect the liquidity of securities backed by
mortgages on those properties, a concern that is particularly strong in today's
fragile housing market. There is also concern
that disclosures may be insufficient and add costs not fully understood by
consumers. The proposed Guidance also
states that "FHFA has found that the typical one percent fee at the time
of resale is neither a minimal nor a reasonable mount; further such fees may be
excess of one percent. Such fees
increase by a meaningful amount the seller's and potentially the buyer's burden
at the time of a property sale. Expanded
use of private transfer fee covenants poses serious risks to the stability and
liquidity of the housing finance markets."
The comment period
will extend for 60 days after the proposed guidance is published in The
Federal Register. Parties wishing to
make comments can get further information at the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www,.regulations.gov. Reference "Guidance on Private Transfer
Fee Covenants (No. 2010-N-11).
More from MND:
If you would like to opt-out of receiving email forwards from this person please click here to remove your email address.
This email was sent to you by:
|
Mortgage News Daily
|
|
Anonymous Anonymous |
|
Message:
YOUR MESSAGE HERE
FHFA Proposal to Effectively End Private Transfer Fees
The Federal Housing
Finance Agency (FHFA) took a step last week that may effectively end private
transfer fees before the end of the year.
The agency announced a public comment period on new regulations that
would restrict Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks)
from investing in mortgages with private transfer fee covenants. The proposed "Guidance" would
extend to mortgages and securities purchased by FHLBanks or acquired by them as
collateral for advances, and to mortgages and securities purchased or
guaranteed by the Enterprises.
Transfer fees are
enabled by covenants on a deed which require a payment to a third party every
time property ownership is transferred and are typically 1 percent of the
amount of the sale. For example: a developer of a condominium complex might
put a covenants on each unit deed that would require the initial buyer and
every consecutive buyer to pay such a fee to him regardless of the number of times
the condo changes hands. This would
provide the developer with a stream of income long after he cashed out of the development
with no accompanying requirement to provide any further benefit to that
development. In fact, some of these
income streams have actually been securitized by Wall Street.
In another scenario,
the fee might accrue to the homeowners association or the guarantee of such
fees could be used as an inducement to persuade an opponent - an environmental
group for instance - to cooperate with the project.
Establishing such a
private fee is not necessarily limited to the developer of the property. A local government could make it a condition
of a zoning change; the owner of land could insist on such future income as
part of the purchase price of his land.
Theoretically you could attach a one percent transfer fee covenant to
your three bedroom Colonial before you sell it.
And so could the next seller and the seller after that so that each
subsequent buyer is increasingly clobbered.
Many transfer fees are set up to endure for 99 years.
FHFA said its
concerns with the private transfer fees include that they:
-
Increase the costs of homeownership and reduce
liquidity in both primary and secondary mortgage markets;
-
limit property transfers or render them legally
uncertain;
-
detract from the stability of the secondary
mortgage market, particularly if such fees will be securitized;
-
expose lenders, title companies, and secondary
market participants to risks from unknown potential liens and title defects;
-
contribute to reduced transparency for consumers
because the fees often are not disclosed by sellers and are difficult to
discover through customary title searches, especially after repeated purchases;
-
represent dramatic, last-minute, non-financeable
out-of-pocket costs for consumers;
-
deprive subsequent homeowners of equity value;
and
-
complicate residential real-estate transactions
and introduce confusion and uncertainty for homebuyers.
Acting FHA Director Edward J. DeMarco said "The private
transfer fee covenants appear to run counter to the important mission of the
housing GSEs (government sponsored enterprises) to increase liquidity,
affordability, and stability in the nation's housing finance system. Encumbering housing transactions with fees
that may not be property disclosed may impede the marketability and the valuation
of properties and adversely affect the liquidity of securities backed by
mortgages on those properties.
The agency said it recognizes that there are a range of
actions it can take, including requiring reports on the extent regulated
entities are exposed to transfer fee investments, changing seller/servicer
guides to identify restrictions on the purchase of transfer fee-encumbered
mortgages, creating and enforcing additional representations and warranties or
to prohibit the purchase of investment in the mortgages or the revenue
generated by the fees. It appears that
FHFA is rejecting all but the final alternative.
The proposed guidance
would bring the GSEs and the FHLBanks into line with the Federal Housing
Administration (FHA). HUD's regulations
at 24 CFR 203.41 have been interpreted as prohibiting FHA insurance on
properties with transfer fees which it defines as "legal restrictions on
conveyance." A number of states have also banned the fees and such legislation
is under consideration by others.
Advocates of private
transfer fees argue that the fees are beneficial when they are used to fund
project developments or to enhance community investments through homeowners
associations, affordable housing groups, environmental organizations or
charitable organizations. FHFA counters
with a concern that such fees are used to fund purely private continuous
streams of income and that the fees, even if dedicated to homeowners
associations, may not be proportional or related to the purposes for which they
were collected. The draft FHFA guidance
does not distinguish between a private transfer fee covenant which supposedly
renders a benefit to the property and one which accrues value to unrelated
third parties.
The agency also
expressed concern that encumbering housing sales with fees that may not be
properly disclosed could adversely affect the liquidity of securities backed by
mortgages on those properties, a concern that is particularly strong in today's
fragile housing market. There is also concern
that disclosures may be insufficient and add costs not fully understood by
consumers. The proposed Guidance also
states that "FHFA has found that the typical one percent fee at the time
of resale is neither a minimal nor a reasonable mount; further such fees may be
excess of one percent. Such fees
increase by a meaningful amount the seller's and potentially the buyer's burden
at the time of a property sale. Expanded
use of private transfer fee covenants poses serious risks to the stability and
liquidity of the housing finance markets."
The comment period
will extend for 60 days after the proposed guidance is published in The
Federal Register. Parties wishing to
make comments can get further information at the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www,.regulations.gov. Reference "Guidance on Private Transfer
Fee Covenants (No. 2010-N-11).
If you would like to opt-out of receiving email forwards from this person please click here to remove your email address.