Hike in payments for good-credit homebuyers to subsidize high-risk mortgages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also it’s extremely misleading (but typical in right wing media) not to make clear that this affects only FHA loans, not the conventional mortgages that most buyers with good credit have.

Has Biden's administration put out a public statement clarifying this issue so everyone can be aware?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also it’s extremely misleading (but typical in right wing media) not to make clear that this affects only FHA loans, not the conventional mortgages that most buyers with good credit have.

Has Biden's administration put out a public statement clarifying this issue so everyone can be aware?

probably there was notice but who knows where.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also it’s extremely misleading (but typical in right wing media) not to make clear that this affects only FHA loans, not the conventional mortgages that most buyers with good credit have.

Has Biden's administration put out a public statement clarifying this issue so everyone can be aware?

https://thehill.com/business/3876339-what-is-the-fha-mortgage-fee-cut/amp/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also it’s extremely misleading (but typical in right wing media) not to make clear that this affects only FHA loans, not the conventional mortgages that most buyers with good credit have.

Has Biden's administration put out a public statement clarifying this issue so everyone can be aware?

https://thehill.com/business/3876339-what-is-the-fha-mortgage-fee-cut/amp/

And

https://www.fhfa.gov/mobile/Pages/public-affairs-detail.aspx?PageName=FHFA-Announces-Targeted-Increases-to-Enterprise-Pricing-Framework.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I... don't understand the policy reason behind this?

I had mediocre credit (600 score) when we bought our current home and we wound up with a higher rate as a result. We also only had 10% down, which also impacted our rate. But I've worked incredibly hard for almost 15 years to improve my credit and sock away money, plus we've never missed a mortgage payment (including all our PMI payments since we were putting down less than 20%), and you're saying that because I now have a 800+ credit score and have worked diligently for two decades in order to save money and build equity, I now have to pay more money in order to help people who are now in the exact same situation I was in 15 years ago?

I don't understand. I did exactly what I was told I needed to do. Why am I the one being asked to help?

Because minorities often have lower credit scores than white people. This is just a way to redistribute wealth.

Welcome to how democrats are enacting progress and equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone help me understand this in a neutral, nonpolitical way?

Is this accurate?

The mortgage companies need to raise a certain amount of money through fees. Before, people with lower credit scores were charged nearly all of the money needed. Now, the charges are more even, and the people with higher credit scores will pay a higher percentage than the people with lower credit scores.

No. That is not correct.

First, if you are getting a conventional loan this does not affect you.

If you are getting a FHA loan, there are fees.

People with good credit scores paid insanely low fees, people with bad scores paid insanely high fees. These fees did not relate in any way to actual risk,

People with good credit scores will still pay very low fees perhaps 1% vs .25%, people with lower credit scores will pay reasonable fees, perhaps 2.5% instead of 4%.

People with good credit are still paying lower fees than people with bad credit.

If you have a good credit score you probably don’t need and FHA loan you probably will qualify for a conventional mortgage and this will not affect you.

No. That is not correct. The fees absolutely reflect risk.

You are also conflating FHA and FHFA.

FHFA sets the fees for Fannie and Freddie, who guarantee conventional mortgages.

To answer the "why" question above, FHFA is doing this to make it easier (cheaper) for first-time and low/moderate income borrowers to be able to get a mortgage. It's an equity play. They are very upfront about it.

Well I posted the link on waivers so anyone [great credit score and debt to equity ratio] can get a waiver! It's all in finding a small originator to process the paperwork.

[Anonymous]

FYI-low asset list of originators even inlcudes a DE BNY Mellon where the total assets exceed 46t. Delaware!!! Comunity Bank-Lewes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I... don't understand the policy reason behind this?

I had mediocre credit (600 score) when we bought our current home and we wound up with a higher rate as a result. We also only had 10% down, which also impacted our rate. But I've worked incredibly hard for almost 15 years to improve my credit and sock away money, plus we've never missed a mortgage payment (including all our PMI payments since we were putting down less than 20%), and you're saying that because I now have a 800+ credit score and have worked diligently for two decades in order to save money and build equity, I now have to pay more money in order to help people who are now in the exact same situation I was in 15 years ago?

I don't understand. I did exactly what I was told I needed to do. Why am I the one being asked to help?

Because minorities often have lower credit scores than white people. This is just a way to redistribute wealth.

Welcome to how democrats are enacting progress and equity.

Nope again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Communism

more like socialism

This is a government program to help very private banks protect their very private profits. You can hate communism and socialism but that should involve knowing what they are, or at least what they aren’t.

NP. I think the pp’s point is that banks should be charging the risky people fees to offset their risky mortgages and protect their own private profits that way. Interest rates and fees have always been a function of risk since that’s how the banks protect their investments. It shouldn’t be responsible people paying more fees for this, even if risky people still pay fees as well like they should.

This point can’t be made credibly by shouting out social systems designed to not enrich private banks.

To your point, private banks have since their inception taken advantage of blocked or limited access to bank resources in minority and poor communities to charge usurious fees to these communities for basic banking services. This has been the subject of decades of litigation. It has allowed banks to amass fortunes, while maintaining higher income clients by offering them better rates. Banks make money however the law allows them, as well as through extralegal ways until available laws are enforced. If you identify people being treated unfairly by a bank, that means there is a group of even richer people benefiting from that policy. Banks benefit when each group focuses anxiety on supposed unfair gains to the people below them instead of massive gains to the people above them. Look up!

[Anonymous]

Between rising crime and penalizing achievement in favor of "equity", I'm not sure why Democrats don't understand how much they are at risk of losing the votes of hard working, middle class moderates. Especially Asian and Hispanic 1st and 2nd generation immigrants who have studied, saved and worked their way up and aren't impressed with the value signaling of rich, white people. This won't play well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Between rising crime and penalizing achievement in favor of "equity", I'm not sure why Democrats don't understand how much they are at risk of losing the votes of hard working, middle class moderates. Especially Asian and Hispanic 1st and 2nd generation immigrants who have studied, saved and worked their way up and aren't impressed with the value signaling of rich, white people. This won't play well.

This doesn’t affect those people in a negative way it actually will help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also it’s extremely misleading (but typical in right wing media) not to make clear that this affects only FHA loans, not the conventional mortgages that most buyers with good credit have.

Has Biden's administration put out a public statement clarifying this issue so everyone can be aware?

It doesn't affect FHA loans. It affects conventional (Fannie and Freddie loans) -- more than 50% of the market.

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand the outrage from liberals on this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Communism

more like socialism

Equity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the outrage from liberals on this?

where are you seeing liberal outrage?