To make this clear (since I mentioned this change earlier): This change will have no impact on the number of unemployed or the unemployment rate . This will only impact the average duration of unemployment. From the BLS: Effective with data for January 2011, the Current Population Survey (CPS) will be modified to allow respondents to report longer durations of unemployment. Presently, the CPS accepts unemployment durations of up to 2 years; any response of unemployment duration greater than this is entered as 2 years. Starting with data for January 2011, respondents will be able to report unemployment durations of up to 5 years. This change will likely affect estimates of average (mean) duration of unemployment. The change will not affect the estimate of the number of unemployed persons and will not affect other data series on the duration of unemployment. Currently if someone says they have been unemployed longer than 2 years, they are listed at 2 years (the current maximum). This new change will allow for responses up to 5 years and will probably have a small impact on the average (mean) duration of unemployment, but will have no impact on the median duration - or on the number unemployed or the unemployment rate.

With no relief to their turmoil in sight, home builders will ring in the new year with poor sales, anemic traffic and weak financial results. That's bad news for investors who might have been excited earlier this year when optimistic builders spent wildly on land in preparation for a market upturn they felt was imminent.

The number of troubled U.S. homeowners receiving assistance with their mortgages fell in the third quarter as the government's foreclosure-prevention effort tapered off.

Here is a look at real-estate news in today's WSJ:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Retail sales fell 4.1 percent in the week ending on Christmas Day, according to research firm ShopperTrak, largely because December 26 fell on a Sunday this year and was not...

Christmas may have passed, but today many lottery players were still hoping for Santa to bring them one last gift: . The lucky winner(s) will have to pay tax on the winnings, but probably won't give any thought to the other type of lottery tax: The lottery revenue kept by state governments and used for services like publics education or parks is actually implicit tax revenue. In FY 2010 lotteries generated over $58 billion in consumer spending. This translated to a profit for state coffers of over $17 billion. (Lottery sales had dropped slightly in FY2009, probably due to the recession, but they're on the way back up in 2010.) Slightly over half the money spent is returned to players as prizes. Part of the remainder covers operating costs-including vendor commissions, equipment, administration and advertising-and the rest is transferred to state coffers. States call their portion "profit" but it is actually implicit tax revenue. Lottery proponents argue that a tax is a mandatory payment, and playing the lottery is voluntary, so lottery revenue cannot be tax revenue. But they're confusing the purchase of a product with the payment of the tax on the product. Purchasing a lottery ticket is voluntary, but the tax portion of the ticket price is not, just as a sales or excise tax is compulsory on a voluntary purchase of alcohol, clothing or books. . Policymakers, however, often fail to recognize or acknowledge that the revenue is a tax, preferring to label it "miscellaneous revenue." We can calculate a particular state's implicit lottery tax rate the same way an excise tax rate is calculated. The chart below presents total sales figures and implicit tax rates for most states' lotteries (states with video lottery terminals are omitted) in FY 2010. Lottery Finances, FY 2010 Lottery Jurisdiction FY 2010 Sales (millions) Implicit Tax Rate* Total U.S. $58,816.60 43.7% Arizona $551.50 34.6% Arkansas $383.70 27.5% California $3,086.16 52.0...

The excuses given for rampant, systemic, illegal foreclosure activity by banks is the overwhelming volume the local offices have to deal with. In housing disaster regions like South Florida or Vegas, that nonsense excuse at least has a basis in fact. The reality is the mass volume of foreclosures act to reveal the flaws in the banks processing systems. If they engage in small illegalities in New Hampshire, for instance, its doubtful anyone would notice. Hence, the assembly line perjury the banks have committed are harder to hide in mass foreclosure venues. Which is what makes this touching Christmas Eve story all the more peculiar: “In one of the more bizarre foreclosure cases, Bank of America is threatening to throw a West Hartford family out of their home even though the couple never missed a mortgage payment. The largest bank in the United States earlier this month notified Shock Baitch and his wife Lisa (Friedman) Baitch that foreclosure action will start today – Christmas eve – unless the couple agrees to put their home up for a forced sale. Why? Because another unit of Bank of America erroneously reported to credit agencies that the family was seeking a loan modification, ruining their credit rating and as the result putting their mortgage into default. All this is happening even though the bank – after admitting it erred and sent a letter of apology in September – handed this case to a special unit at Bank of America that is charged with dealing with severe customer issues. It promised to notify the credit reporting agencies that the couple were not deadbeats, but were good credit risks” Post bailout, the giant banks have become too large to manage themselves. It is not just housing sh%$ holes like South Florida where the banks are paperwork disasters, but apparently states such as Connecticut, also. How else can BoA threaten foreclosure proceeding with on a house that never missed a mortgage payment; indeed, the owners were NEVER late on any mortgage payments...

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Allstate Corp has sued Bank of America Corp, its Countrywide lending unit and 17 other defendants for allegedly misrepresenting the risks on more than $700 million of mortgage...

Inflation in Germany, Europe’s largest economy, unexpectedly accelerated in December as prices surged in the final month of the year.

More banks failed in the United States this year than in any year since 1992, during the savings-and-loan crisis, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

The recession is causing a surge in households where relatives and friends live together as a last resort.

submits: On Monday, Ally Financial (formerly GMAC ResCap) paid $462 million to settle claims on $292 billion in mortgages sold to government-sponsored Fannie Mae (), equal to a putback loss of 0.55% on $84 billion in unpaid principal balances. Last May, Ally settled with Freddie Mac (), but for an undisclosed amount. The agreements settle claims that its mortgages failed to meet GSE documentary and underwriting (also known as representation and warranty ) standards, though disputes with private purchasers of its mortgages remain unresolved. So, what does Ally Financial’s settlement with Fannie Mae suggest with regard to Bank of America’s () or JPMorgan’s () potential mortgage putback liabilities?

OPEC Not Likely to Stand in the Way of $100 Oil

On December 20, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that it had approved a read more