If you are vacating a residence that will remain occupied by the co-borrower, he/she is required to obtain a NEW FHA mortgage loan.
Acceptable situations are:
1.) Instances of divorce, after which the vacating spouse will buy a new home, or
2.) One of the co-borrowers will vacate the existing property
-
Just this morning, I was reading an article that I came across regarding a couple things that are going on with the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)….and it wasn’t pretty.
Basically what’s going on right now is that there are justifiable rumors that the FHA’s reserves (capital) are hovering around dangerous levels.
Congress requires that the magic number FHA needs to be at is 2%. At the moment, its speculated to be down to about 3% (down from 6.5% in 2007) and if it falls below that mark, Uncle Sam has to come in and save the day once again. (Is it just me, or is this a never-ending cycle? Has anyone seen AIG’s stock quote recently?)
At the moment, FHA’s defaults (90 days+) are nearing 8% and depleting a good portion of FHA’s reserves. While that number may not seem that HUGE, you have to see how all this links together.
Several high-cost areas in the US got hit pretty hard the past couple of years. What goes up, must come down, right?
Well because of those declining markets, FHA decided to increase their loan limits and availability to accommodate the supply/demand in those areas. Who has $140,000 stashed under their mattress in CA to buy that $700,000 home? Not too many people. Well, who has around $25,000? Get the point? 
And while this WAS needed to help stimulate buyers, you have to think of what happens on the flip-side. When that $5,000 (est) payment can’t be made anymore, and its time to jump ship, and who gets stuck with the bill? FHA.
FHA then has to tap into their reserves to make good on this.
Think about this for a moment:
In Texas, about 4-5 homes have to foreclose to match that ONE home in California. The odds of 4-5 consumers simultaneously defaulting is not that likely, unless they’re Madoff’s advisors.
The point I’m trying to make is that the high-cost areas are affecting FHA a little bit more than other more stable areas. While I am not saying that FHA lending shouldn’t be available here, I think it would be a good idea (especially now) to implement some more stringent measures before approving every Tom, Dick, and Harry that apply. Last thing we ALL want is to wave bye bye to FHA.
The remainder of the year will be quite interesting. An important incentive is coming to an end ($8k Tax Credit), and as for interest rates, well, let’s just hope they keep steady. Too many good things coming to an end is not a good thing.
Tommy’s 2 Cents
I would safely venture to say that FHA credit score requirements will be going up here in the upcoming months, as well as a larger down payments later down the line. While FHA loans have been the hot product, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Conventional loans start to SLOWLY creep back in and create a “2nd hand FHA loan” if capital continues to diminish as it has.
Remember what happened with Sub-Prime loans? High Demand, High Supply, POOF- they’re gone! History always repeats itself, let’s just hope we’ve learned our lesson the first time, and we don’t screw up FHA, especially for Dawson’s sake.
Just this morning, I was reading an article that I came across regarding a couple things that are going on with the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)….and it wasn’t pretty.
Basically what’s going on right now is that there are justifiable rumors that the FHA’s reserves (capital) are hovering around dangerous levels.
Congress requires that the magic number FHA needs to be at is 2%. At the moment, its speculated to be down to about 3% (down from 6.5% in 2007) and if it falls below that mark, Uncle Sam has to come in and save the day once again. (Is it just me, or is this a never-ending cycle? Has anyone seen AIG’s stock quote recently?)
At the moment, FHA’s defaults (90 days+) are nearing 8% and depleting a good portion of FHA’s reserves. While that number may not seem that HUGE, you have to see how all this links together.
Several high-cost areas in the US got hit pretty hard the past couple of years. What goes up, must come down, right?
Well because of those declining markets, FHA decided to increase their loan limits and availability to accommodate the supply/demand in those areas. Who has $140,000 stashed under their mattress in CA to buy that $700,000 home? Not too many people. Well, who has around $25,000? Get the point?
And while this WAS needed to help stimulate buyers, you have to think of what happens on the flip-side. When that $5,000 (est) payment can’t be made anymore, and its time to jump ship, and who gets stuck with the bill? FHA.
FHA then has to tap into their reserves to make good on this.
Think about this for a moment:
In Texas, about 4-5 homes have to foreclose to match that ONE home in California. The odds of 4-5 consumers simultaneously defaulting is not that likely, unless they’re Madoff’s advisors.
The point I’m trying to make is that the high-cost areas are affecting FHA a little bit more than other more stable areas. While I am not saying that FHA lending shouldn’t be available here, I think it would be a good idea (especially now) to implement some more stringent measures before approving every Tom, Dick, and Harry that apply. Last thing we ALL want is to wave bye bye to FHA.
The remainder of the year will be quite interesting. An important incentive is coming to an end ($8k Tax Credit), and as for interest rates, well, let’s just hope they keep steady. Too many good things coming to an end is not a good thing.
Tommy’s 2 Cents
I would safely venture to say that FHA credit score requirements will be going up here in the upcoming months, as well as a larger down payments later down the line. While FHA loans have been the hot product, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Conventional loans start to SLOWLY creep back in and create a “2nd hand FHA loan” if capital continues to diminish as it has.
Remember what happened with Sub-Prime loans? High Demand, High Supply, POOF- they’re gone! History always repeats itself, let’s just hope we’ve learned our lesson the first time, and we don’t screw up FHA, especially for Dawson’s sake.
The IRS has an urgent message for would-be home purchasers: Make the most of the $8,000 first-time-buyer tax credit before it disappears Dec. 1 — if you qualify.
But if you don’t truly qualify, don’t try to play games with the credit. The IRS already has 24 criminal investigations of suspected fraud underway around the country. It has executed seven search warrants, and last month a tax preparer in Florida entered a guilty plea on federal charges of fraud in connection with the first-time-buyer credit. He’s awaiting sentencing and faces up to three years in prison, a $250,000 fine or both.
Congress’s two versions of the first-time-buyer credit — a repayable $7,500 credit in 2008, and this year’s more generous $8,000 credit that does not have to be repaid — have stimulated home sales nationwide. But they’ve also become irresistible temptations for dishonest taxpayers to cash in and claim bogus refunds.
Claiming the credit looks so easy: You just fill out IRS form 5405, list the address of the house you bought, mail it in and wait a month or two for your money. Who’s going to check on whether you really qualify under the definition of first-time buyer — someone who hasn’t owned a principal residence in the previous three years — and that you’re eligible on income and other factors?
With thousands of people buying houses and claiming tax credits, who’s going to be able to check all those filings? The answer from the IRS: We are. The agency said it uses “sophisticated computer screening tools to quickly identify returns that may contain fraudulent claims for the first-time homebuyer credit.”
The IRS won’t discuss the nature of its screening, but it’s clear from the number of ongoing investigations that claims for the credit are getting special scrutiny.
According to a summary of the facts agreed to by Price as part of his plea agreement, he admitted that in February he met with a client who told Price that she didn’t want to buy a house. But Price insisted that she qualified for the credit because “she had two jobs.” He then wrote in a house address on the form 5405, claiming the client closed on the purchase Jan. 5. When she received her $7,500 credit, Price took $1,000 of it for himself.
In the plea agreement, Price admitted following a similar pattern in 14 other tax returns.
IRS spokesman Terry Lemons declined to discuss the ongoing criminal investigations of taxpayers claiming the home-buyer credit. He said the investigations involve individuals as well as tax-return preparers.
The IRS doesn’t “want to discourage people from taking advantage of the credit,” Lemons said, but it wants them to be certain that they’ve read through the eligibility rules so they don’t end up with audits, back taxes and late penalties. On the list of things that can disqualify buyers:
– Purchasing your house from a “related person.” That’s a broad category of people and entities, ranging from immediate family members — a spouse, parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren — to a corporation or partnership in which you have more than a 50 percent ownership stake.
– Buying a home with a spouse who is ineligible, even if you are eligible individually.
– Acquiring a house through an inheritance or gift.
– Financing the house through a tax-exempt mortgage bond program.
– Making too much money — in excess of $95,000 of modified adjusted gross income for singles, $170,000 or more for married joint filers.
What are the downsides if you claim the credit erroneously and do not intentionally defraud the government? If you are audited, the IRS most likely will ask for the full credit amount back, plus interest and a late-payment penalty.
Bottom line: Don’t let this year’s tax credit pass you by if you meet the criteria. And if you don’t, beware of slick-talking professional tax preparers who tell you that you do.
The IRS has an urgent message for would-be home purchasers: Make the most of the $8,000 first-time-buyer tax credit before it disappears Dec. 1 — if you qualify.
But if you don’t truly qualify, don’t try to play games with the credit. The IRS already has 24 criminal investigations of suspected fraud underway around the country. It has executed seven search warrants, and last month a tax preparer in Florida entered a guilty plea on federal charges of fraud in connection with the first-time-buyer credit. He’s awaiting sentencing and faces up to three years in prison, a $250,000 fine or both.
Congress’s two versions of the first-time-buyer credit — a repayable $7,500 credit in 2008, and this year’s more generous $8,000 credit that does not have to be repaid — have stimulated home sales nationwide. But they’ve also become irresistible temptations for dishonest taxpayers to cash in and claim bogus refunds.
Claiming the credit looks so easy: You just fill out IRS form 5405, list the address of the house you bought, mail it in and wait a month or two for your money. Who’s going to check on whether you really qualify under the definition of first-time buyer — someone who hasn’t owned a principal residence in the previous three years — and that you’re eligible on income and other factors?
With thousands of people buying houses and claiming tax credits, who’s going to be able to check all those filings? The answer from the IRS: We are. The agency said it uses “sophisticated computer screening tools to quickly identify returns that may contain fraudulent claims for the first-time homebuyer credit.”
The IRS won’t discuss the nature of its screening, but it’s clear from the number of ongoing investigations that claims for the credit are getting special scrutiny.
According to a summary of the facts agreed to by Price as part of his plea agreement, he admitted that in February he met with a client who told Price that she didn’t want to buy a house. But Price insisted that she qualified for the credit because “she had two jobs.” He then wrote in a house address on the form 5405, claiming the client closed on the purchase Jan. 5. When she received her $7,500 credit, Price took $1,000 of it for himself.
In the plea agreement, Price admitted following a similar pattern in 14 other tax returns.
IRS spokesman Terry Lemons declined to discuss the ongoing criminal investigations of taxpayers claiming the home-buyer credit. He said the investigations involve individuals as well as tax-return preparers.
The IRS doesn’t “want to discourage people from taking advantage of the credit,” Lemons said, but it wants them to be certain that they’ve read through the eligibility rules so they don’t end up with audits, back taxes and late penalties. On the list of things that can disqualify buyers:
– Purchasing your house from a “related person.” That’s a broad category of people and entities, ranging from immediate family members — a spouse, parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren — to a corporation or partnership in which you have more than a 50 percent ownership stake.
– Buying a home with a spouse who is ineligible, even if you are eligible individually.
– Acquiring a house through an inheritance or gift.
– Financing the house through a tax-exempt mortgage bond program.
– Making too much money — in excess of $95,000 of modified adjusted gross income for singles, $170,000 or more for married joint filers.
What are the downsides if you claim the credit erroneously and do not intentionally defraud the government? If you are audited, the IRS most likely will ask for the full credit amount back, plus interest and a late-payment penalty.
Bottom line: Don’t let this year’s tax credit pass you by if you meet the criteria. And if you don’t, beware of slick-talking professional tax preparers who tell you that you do.