Addressing Continued Concerns About the FHA

In January of this year, both Joe Murin and I were asked by HUD Secretary Donovan to remain as Ginnie Mae president and FHA Commissioner respectively to help the new Administration deal with the on-going housing crisis.  We both were privileged to be asked and were honored to continue serving in the Obama Administration for several more months.

However, today, as a former government official, if I could leave you with one message it would be this:

There has never been a point in our nation’s history that better illustrates exactly why FHA and Ginnie Mae exist. During these uncertain economic times, their counter-cyclical role of ensuring adequate mortgage activity and liquidity has been necessary and vital.

FHA has saved close to one million sub-prime/Alt-A borrowers from possible financial ruin by allowing them to refinance into a safe and secure 30-year fixed rate mortgage.  Another 2 million qualified borrowers (80% of them first-time homebuyers) have taken advantage of the declining house prices and historically low interest rates to purchase a home using FHA.  FHA’s role has grown substantially from three percent of lending activity by dollar volume in 2006 to nearly 25 percent of all mortgages originated today. That massive uptick in volume occurred almost overnight beginning in spring 2008.

Through it all…. FHA has helped pump more than $400 billion of mortgage activity and liquidity into the market since 2008, while still managing to deliver a higher credit quality borrower whose average FICO score is 700.

One can only imagine how much worse our economy would be right now without the FHA. However, the growth of FHA in the past 18 months has understandably attracted a lot of attention. While the FHA did not take part in the housing boom, it is feeling its effects.

As many anticipated, given the current sluggish economy, the FHA is experiencing an increased rate of delinquencies and more foreclosures.

Simultaneously, as home values fall or just fail to appreciate, the number of homes the FHA insures is rising significantly. In October, this forced HUD to announce that in 2010 the FHA’s reserves could dip below the mandatory 2% level required by Congress.

Reminder: FHA collects premiums from borrowers (revenue) and also pays out claims to lenders when loans go into default and foreclosure (outlays).

For FHA, the primary reason for continued defaults and foreclosures will be macro-economic problems that go beyond the scope of underwriting. For instance, continued job losses and the further decline of home values and equity.

Absent a massive economic downturn, I don’t believe FHA will face the same type of catastrophic losses we saw in the subprime sector. The reasons for FHA’s problems are very different from the ones experienced in the subprime sector where unsafe loan features and poor underwriting made investing in non-agency mortgages risky from the start.

The FHA has undeniably tightened guidelines in an effort to help ensure a higher loan quality.  Prospective borrowers must verify income and job history as part of a rigorous underwriting process.

I offer this assurance in an effort to raise your comfort level as to the future of FHA.  FHA must keep its eyes on the ball to make certain that American homeowners and renters are served while American taxpayers are protected.

As a reminder, I offer the following insight about the strategies the FHA is considering to ensure the market remains confident in the FHA’s risk management models:

• Tighten underwriting criteria
• Increase premiums
• Raise the down payment requirements above 3.5%
• Overlay a credit score cut-off

Looking forward it’s important for all of us to continue advocating for reforms that better ensure a vibrant, transparent, and sound mortgage marketplace. Current market conditions highlight the critical role of the private and public sectors in keeping mortgage credit flowing.

All of us are trying to make sure we are well positioned to continue serving customers as this industry moves through truly tectonic change. I welcome the opportunity to hear about the challenges you face and discuss how all of us are addressing this brave new world of mortgage finance.

I wanted to repost it so please take a moment to read this, as its VERY important.

—-

U.S. Mortgage Backer May Need Bailout
by David Streitfeld and Louise Story
Friday, October 9, 2009

A year after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac teetered, industry executives and Washington policy makers are worrying that another government mortgage giant could be the next housing domino.

Problems at the Federal Housing Administration, which guarantees mortgages with low down payments, are becoming so acute that some experts warn the agency might need a federal bailout.

Running questions about the F.H.A.’s future — underscored by interviews with policy makers, analysts and home buyers — came to the fore on Thursday on Capitol Hill. In testimony before a House subcommittee, the F.H.A. commissioner, David H. Stevens, assured lawmakers that his agency would not need a bailout and that it was managing its risks.

But he acknowledged that some 20 percent of F.H.A. loans insured last year — and as many as 24 percent of those from 2007 — faced serious problems including foreclosure, offering a preview of a forthcoming audit of the agency’s finances.

“Let me simply state at the outset that based on current projections, absent any catastrophic home price decline, F.H.A. will not need to ask Congress and the American taxpayer for extraordinary assistance — we will not need a bailout,” Mr. Stevens said in his testimony.

But to its critics, the F.H.A. looks like another Fannie Mae. The hearings on Thursday came on the same day that the federal agency charged with overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac provided a somber assessment of those giants’ health. In the year since the government stepped in to rescue them, the companies have taken $96 billion from the Treasury, and may need more.

Since the bottom fell out of the mortgage market, the F.H.A. has assumed a crucial role in the nation’s housing market. Created in 1934 to help lower-income and first-time buyers purchase homes, the agency now insures roughly 5.4 million single-family home mortgages, with a combined value of $675 billion.

In addition, these loans are bundled into mortgage-backed securities and guaranteed through the Government National Mortgage Association, known as Ginnie Mae. That means the taxpayer is responsible for paying investors who own Ginnie Mae bonds when F.H.A.-backed mortgages hit trouble.

“It appears destined for a taxpayer bailout in the next 24 to 36 months,” Edward Pinto, a former Fannie Mae executive, said in testimony prepared for the hearing. Mr. Pinto, who was the chief credit officer from 1987 to 1989 for Fannie Mae, went further than most housing analysts and predicted that F.H.A. losses would more than wipe out the agency’s $30 billion of cash reserves.

The issue has polarized Congress. Republicans, who led efforts to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before those companies ran into trouble, are now seeking to bridle the F.H.A. Many Democrats insist the F.H.A. is playing a vital role in the housing market, which is only just starting to stabilize.

“F.H.A. has stepped into the void left by the private market,” Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat from California, said at the hearing. “Let’s be clear; without F.H.A., there would be no mortgage market right now.”

That was the case for Bernadine Shimon. Like many Americans, Ms. Shimon has recently been through some rough times. She lost a house to foreclosure, declared bankruptcy, got divorced and is now a single mother, teaching high school English in a Denver suburb.

She wanted a house but no lender would touch her. The Federal Housing Administration was more obliging. With the F.H.A. insuring her mortgage, Ms. Shimon was able to buy a $134,000 fixer-upper in August.

“The government gave me another chance,” she said.

The government is giving as many people as it possibly can the chance to buy a house or, if they are in financial difficulty, refinance it. The F.H.A. is insuring about 6,000 loans a day, four times the amount in 2006. Its portfolio is growing so fast that even F.H.A. backers express amazement.

For decades it was an article of faith that helping people of limited means like Ms. Shimon get a house was good for the new owner, good for the neighborhood and good for American capitalism. Then came the housing bust, which demonstrated that when lenders allowed people to buy houses they ultimately could not afford, it hurt the parties — while putting the economy itself in a tailspin.

In the aftermath of the crash, there is wide divergence on how easy, or how hard, it should be to become a homeowner. Skittish lenders are asking for 20 percent down, which few prospective borrowers have to spare. As a result, private lending has dwindled.

The government has stepped into the breach, facilitating loans with down payments as low as 3.5 percent and offering other incentives to stabilize the market. Real estate agents in some hard-hit areas say every single one of their clients is using the F.H.A.

“They’re counting their pennies, scraping up that 3.5 percent,” Bonni Malone of Prudential Americana in Las Vegas said. “Mostly they’re buying foreclosed homes from banks, although I had one client who bought from a guy that was dying. It’s turning around the market.”

While the government’s actions have helped avert full-scale economic disaster, there is growing concern that it might have doled out its favors with too generous a hand.

Many of the loans the F.H.A. insured in 2007 and last year are now turning delinquent, agency officials acknowledge. The loans made in those two years are performing “far worse” than newer loans, dragging down the whole portfolio, Mr. Stevens of the F.H.A. said in an interview.

The number of F.H.A. mortgage holders in default is 410,916, up 76 percent from a year ago, when 232,864 were in default, according to agency data.

Despite the agency’s attempt to outrun its fate by insuring ever-larger amounts of new loans to such borrowers as Ms. Shimon — the current rate is over a billion dollars a day — 7.77 percent of the portfolio is in default, up from 5.6 percent a year ago.

Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview that the defaults were, in essence, worth it.

“I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the bad loans occurred,” he said. “It was an effort to keep prices from falling too fast. That’s a policy.”

The troubled loans are nevertheless weighing on the agency’s capital reserve fund, which has fallen to below its Congressionally mandated minimum of 2 percent, from over 6 percent two years ago.

The optimism expressed by Mr. Stevens, the F.H.A. commissioner, places him at odds not only with some outside experts but with Kenneth Donohue, the inspector general of the Housing and Urban Development Department, who is also F.H.A.’s watchdog. Mr. Donohue said the drop in reserves was “a flashing red light” that the agency was not taking seriously enough.

“It might be we’ll get ourselves out of this and that everything will be fine, but I don’t paint that rosy a picture,” Mr. Donohue said. “They’re banking on the fact that the economy will continue to improve, that the housing market will begin to sustain itself.”

He noted that if private lenders had raised their down payment requirements in the last two years, it raised the question, “what does the F.H.A. think it is doing by asking only 3.5 percent?”

Any more than that and Ms. Shimon, 45, would still be a renter. As it was, she cashed in her retirement savings account to come up with the necessary funds. She did not have enough to spare for closing costs, so her mortgage broker arranged a deal where the charges were wrapped into the loan at the cost of a higher interest rate. She cried when the deal was done.

The house was empty and trashed. Slowly, she is trying to bring it back to life. She spent the first few weeks picking up garbage in the backyard.

Is Ms. Shimon a good bet? Even she has no easy answer. Her mortgage payment, $1,100, is half of what she takes home every month. It is not easy to make ends meet. Teachers can get laid off like everyone else.

“The government,” she said, “is doing what it needed to do — taking a risk on people.”

Chaz Fullenkamp, an automotive technician in Columbus, Ohio, got an F.H.A. loan even though he was living on the financial edge. “If I got unemployed, I’d be wiped out in a month or two,” he says. Thanks to the F.H.A., however, he is better off than he used to be.

Mr. Fullenkamp used F.H.A. insurance to buy a house this spring for $179,000. The eager seller paid the closing costs and also gave Mr. Fullenkamp $2,500 in cash. He immediately applied for the $8,000 tax rebate. Even taking his down payment into account, he came out ahead.

“I knew in my heart I could not really afford the house, but they gave it to me anyway,” said Mr. Fullenkamp, 22. “I thought, ‘Wow, I’m surprised I pulled that off.’ ”

As the number of loans has soared, random quality control checks have decreased sharply, F.H.A. staff members say. Mr. Donohue, the inspector general, cited numerous examples of organized fraud in testimony to Congress earlier this year.

“They need to stop taking bad loans in the door,” he said in an interview. “They’re taking on all this volume, they have to have very active underwriting standards.”

Jack Healy contributed reporting from New York.

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.

Sonny: Get this over with, Mush.

Mush: Come on, dice. Baby needs a new pair of shoes. Come on, seven!

Mush: Come on! Come on, dice!

Sonny: I don’t even have to look.

(Spectator) And seven!

Mush: Craps! I’m out!

Sonny: Get him out of here! Man never hit a number in his life!

As we all have been following lately, rates have been pretty damn good. I mean REALLY DAMN GOOD. That was…until a week or so ago.

I was working with one of my clients and highly advised him to lock in his rate at 4.875% on a 30 Year Fixed, however he decided to float instead of paying a “little” bit more for an extra 15 days. Why? Only he knows.

He is now at a 5.75%. (crickets chirping)

Ladies and Gentlemen- DO NOT END UP LIKE EDDIE MUSH (featured above) and crap out in this market!!! I cannot stress to you enough how important it is to secure a good rate in when you see it. I am coming across several people daily that REALISTICALLY expected rates to go down to the high 3’s because the media puts their dirty little paws on it, and in the end, they lose out on something great.

Would you listen to Al Roker talking to you about mortgage rates or me about weather? I really hope not.

The loan officers that are still here (you can tell who the seasoned ones are) are here for a reason. We have flourished through the good, withstood the bad, study the market, subscribe to various sources of mortgage news, and have a pretty good grasp on what’s going on.

Many feel that when the loan officer says “Mrs. Jones, you need to lock in,” it is mostly viewed as a sales pitch to get your commitment rather than advice, and many clients back off.

I mean this is normal. I can understand it and would probably do the same.

Do this. Next time your loan officer does this, ask them “Why should I secure this rate Mr. Mortgage? And don’t tell me rates are going to go up. Explain WHY” and see what they say. If studdering occurs, move on to the next mortgage professional. If they can advise you with detailed information, they’re a keeper!

In the end, it is only YOU that will win…or lose.

Tommy’s 2 cents

DON’T BE GREEDY.

At first, I thought it was just another “mortgage scam”. Trust you me, the real mortgage industry always leaves room for the next “million-dollar-idea”. If you pay close attention, you may even end up seeing your next door neighbor on the 6 o’clock news getting caught for selling “ARMS” from the back of his van in a dark alley.

After doing a little bit of research to see the legitimacy of this rumor, I ended up finding the official HUD Mortgagee Letter 2009-15.

Who Can Offer It

Let’s begin with who can offer this “loan” on a loan. (Is that a conundrum?)

According the letter, Federal, state, local governmental agencies, non-profit governmental subsidiaries, and FHA-Approved nonprofits will be able to offer this to home buyers.

How It Works?

Essentially, this is a bridge loan. You are borrowing this money for a short amount of time until you get your tax credit, and then it is paid back to these agencies.

What happens is you are taking out a second lien on your home, and that amount CANNOT be more than:

Down Payment + Closing Costs + Pre-Paid Expenses

Here is a list of some more facts on how this works:

1.) You cannot get any cash back at closing.
2.) You will have a deadline to pay this money back, and if you do not, principal and interest will begin automatically. (What a concept!)
3.) If payments are required, it will be calculated as a monthly liability when qualifying for the loan.
4.) If payments are deferred, it must be for at least 36 months and will not be used against you when qualifying.

I cannot stress to you enough -BE VERY CAUTIOUS with this type of transaction. It leaves so much room for deception, and if you end up in the wrong hands, you may kiss your $8k tax credit goodbye very fast!

While it may bring an influx of new potential buyers to Realtors and open a lot of doors to potential buyers, it is a double-edged sword and I do not particularly agree with it. In my opinion, it can do more bad than good and is basically bringing back “100% financing” and that is part of what has caused the “Mortgage Meltdown”.

I would suggest stopping and thinking as to why many down-payment assistance programs went bye-bye towards the end of 2008. It was simply because more buyers defaulted on those types of loans. The LAST THING we need is the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) getting into financial issues.

Tommy’s 2 Cents:

Use it IF you absolutely HAVE to. The $8,000 is yours one way or another.

To break it down very simply, and this is USUALLY always the case, when a family member sells to ANOTHER family member, FHA looks at that as an Identity-of-Interest Transaction.

I get at least 1-2 calls per month with this scenario, and want to post it on my mortgage blog to educate YOU, the consumer.

So even though FHA has a minimum down payment requirement of 3.5%, in THIS case, you would have to put down 15% percent.

Here is ONE of the exceptions to this rule:

1. The family member has rented the property for at least 6 months predating the contract, in which case a rental agreement will be needed.

If you are in this type of  situation and do not have the 15% to put down, feel free to contact me for more info and some other tips that may help you out!

By Amy Hoak, MarketWatch

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — Lured by low mortgage rates, many homeowners have been rushing to refinance. Interest is gaining for good reason: Eligible borrowers can lock in rates that haven’t been this attractive in decades.

“With interest rates hovering around 5% for conforming loan amounts, homeowners should begin to seriously consider refinancing into a new fixed-rate mortgage, especially if they currently have an adjustable-rate mortgage,” said Lisa Weaver, president of Columbia, Mo.-based Certitude Financial Group. And don’t drag your feet, either, she said.

Rates on jumbo mortgages are still high, she said, but the national average rate on a 30-year fixed-rate conforming mortgage is the lowest in at least 37 years, according to Freddie Mac. The conforming loan limit in 2009 is $417,000 for most areas of the continental U.S., although in designated high-cost markets it will be up to $625,500.

Given the volatility in the mortgage market this year, Greg Gwizdz, national retail sales manager for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, also advises homeowners to be proactive. It’s possible that rates will be low for a while, but in this turbulent economy, it’s not best to gamble that tomorrow will bring a better deal.

“Don’t sit back and say I’m going to wait for something to happen and for rates to go even lower,” he said. If you’re able to refinance into a mortgage that will be better for your finances, don’t pass up the opportunity, Gwizdz said.

Below are other points to consider:

1. Have an idea of home’s value
Prior to starting the refinancing process, call a real-estate agent or look online at sites including Zillow.com to get an estimate of what your home could be worth, said Scott Everett, founder and president of Dallas-based Supreme Lending. If you’re “drastically upside down” on your mortgage, meaning that you owe a lot more than your home is now worth, the possibility of refinancing might end right there.

“If you owe $250,000 and the house is worth $250,000, it [refinancing] is worth discussing,” he said. But if you owe $250,000 and “the house is worth $150,000 and you’re in Southern California, then you probably won’t be able to do it,” he said. Many Southern California markets have experienced a drop in home prices.

To get a better idea on a home’s value, borrowers might ask their mortgage firm if the appraiser it works with could give a ballpark estimate before starting the process, said David Adamo, CEO of Luxury Mortgage, in Stamford, Conn. But that’s still just an estimate until an appraiser comes out to your home, he pointed out.

2. Get ready for a thorough screening process
It’s not impossible to get a mortgage in today’s environment. But lending standards are likely a lot stricter than they were the last time you applied for a mortgage, so expect a thorough and frank discussion of your finances with a mortgage banker or broker before the application is even filled out.

Lenders are asking would-be borrowers to document income and assets thoroughly. In general, many also want FICO credit scores of 660 or 680 for conventional conforming mortgages; requirements are lower for loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, Gwizdz said.

Those who might have a particularly tough time getting a mortgage today are self-employed homeowners who don’t have two years of income documentation — even if they have the income to support the mortgage, Adamo said. The availability of stated-income mortgages, which don’t require borrowers to fully document their income, is limited, he added.

3. Know what you’ll be saving
The old rule of thumb was that your rate should drop two percentage points for a refinance to be worth it, but that doesn’t always apply anymore, Adamo said. If you can recoup closing costs of the new mortgage in the first 12 months — and can save three-quarters of a percentage point on your interest rate every year thereafter — it’s probably economically justifiable to refinance, he said.

In any case, have a conversation about what rate would make refinancing worthwhile, and be prepared to take action. Borrowers also need to consider how long they want to stay in the property to determine which mortgage makes the most sense for their situation, Weaver said.

Sometimes you could be better off refinancing even if you don’t get a better rate, Gwizdz pointed out. If you have an adjustable-rate mortgage that resets in a year, but can get a fixed-rate mortgage at the same rate, it’s probably a good idea to refinance now if you plan on being in the home for years to come, he said.

He also cautions people about refinancing into mortgage terms that extend the life of the loan; doing so may bring monthly payments down, but will probably make the loan more expensive in the long term. “However, for homeowners that must have the lowest payment possible, it may be the right choice when combined with a lower fixed-rate product,” Ms. Weaver said.

4. Don’t count on cashing out
Tapping home equity through a cash-out refinance is much more difficult these days, due to stringent credit standards and loan-to-value requirements, Weaver said.

According to Freddie Mac, the share of refinances with a cash-out component was 63% over the first three quarters of 2008, the lowest level since 2004. Cash-out refinance mortgages have loan amounts at least 5% higher than the paid-off mortgage balances.

“The combination of declining home values and tighter underwriting standards have reduced the amount of equity that can be extracted by homeowners this year,” Frank Nothaft, Freddie Mac’s chief economist said in a news release.

Amy Hoak is a MarketWatch reporter based in Chicago.

I checked rates today and we are up about 32 bp (basis points) and are still hovering around the 4.75% mark on a 30 fixed, so lock ‘n load if you can.

No major reports today, but tomorrow’s Consumer Confidence report will have an impact in my opinion. What this reports does is detail the attitudes on present economic conditions and what consumers (YOU AND ME) expect to happen in the future, and this has a pretty big impact on stock and bond markets.

On Wednesday, the MBA (Mortgage Bankers Association) Purchase Applications report and the Jobless Claims Report will be coming out, in which last time was nearing the 7% mark.

Without going into too much detail, I would recommend locking something in at the moment. No point in risking ANYTHING with prices being this good. I don’t think this holiday season has been the best in terms of spending, and with the Hamas and Israel conflict going on too, this is definitely going to have a negative impact on oil prices which will hurt interest rates.

Take my advice and thank me in ‘09.

Hope you all have a safe and great New Year!

Its CRUCIAL to be able to calculate income correctly and UP FRONT at the time of application because this can save everyone a lot of money and headaches when done correctly.

Individual Tax Returns (IRS Form 1040).

The amount shown on the IRS Form 1040 as “adjusted gross income” either must be increased or decreased, based on the lender’s analysis of the individual tax returns and any related tax schedules. Particular attention must be paid to the following:

a. Wages, Salaries, and Tips. An amount shown under this heading may indicate that the individual is a salaried employee of a corporation or has other sources of income. It also may indicate that the spouse is employed, in which case the income must be subtracted from the adjusted gross income in the analysis.

b. Business Income or Loss (from Schedule C). The sole proprietorship income calculated on Schedule C is business income. Depreciation or depletion may be added back to adjusted gross income.

c. Rents, Royalties, Partnerships, Etc. (from Schedule E). Any income received from rental properties or royalties may be used as income after adding back any depreciation shown on Schedule E.

d. Capital Gain or Loss (from Schedule D). This transaction generally occurs only one time, and it should not be considered in determining effective income. However, if the business has a constant turnover of assets resulting in gains or losses, the capital gain or loss may be considered in determining the income, provided the borrower has at least three years’ tax returns evidencing capital gains. An example includes an individual who purchases old houses, remodels them, and sells them for a profit.

e. Interest and Dividend Income (from Schedule B). This income, which is taxable and tax-exempt, may be added back to the adjusted gross income only if it has been received for the past two years and is expected to continue. (If the interest-bearing asset will be liquidated as a source of the cash investment, the lender must adjust accordingly.)

f. Farm Income or Loss (from Schedule F). Any depreciation shown on Schedule F may be added back to the adjusted gross income.

g. IRA Distributions, Pensions, Annuities, and Social Security Benefits. The nontaxable portion of these items may be added back to the adjusted gross income, if the income is expected to continue for the first three years of the mortgage.

h. Adjustments to Income. Certain adjustments to income shown on the IRS Form 1040 may be added back to the adjusted gross income. Among these adjustments are IRA and Keogh retirement deductions, penalties on early withdrawal of savings, health insurance deductions, and alimony payments.

i. Employee Business Expenses. These expenses are actual cash expenses that must be deducted from the borrower’s adjusted gross income.