Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Joshua Rosner
646/652-6207
jrosner@graham-fisher.com
Twitter: @JoshRosner
Deep MI, CSP: The MBAs New and Dangerous Mission Creep
Between 2000 and the financial crisis the term mission creep was aptly
and often used by large banks, mortgage lenders and the private mortgage
insurance (PMI) industry to warn of the threat of the government
sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac creeping over
the borders of their intended functions.
The GSEs were created and chartered as secondary-market firms and
intended to provide liquidity to the primary mortgage market, and transfer
credit risk into the hands of investors. Mission creep was, in fact, a real
threat not only to those primary market players but also to systemic
stability. When the GSEs activities blurred the lines between primary
market lenders and secondary market liquidity providers, as example
through their automated underwriting systems, they transitioned away
from being the backbone of a countercyclical insurance regime to ensure
that liquidity to the primary mortgage origination market would continue
in adverse economic periods.
As the crisis descended on the economy and mortgage markets, the
problems of the GSEs and the primary market players became highly
correlated. While this should have been a lesson for policymakers and the
mortgage industry, it has not yet been learned. Instead, over the past few
years we have witnessed increasing efforts by primary market players to
get a larger role and foothold in the secondary market. With the GSEs
muzzled in conservatorship and prohibited from engaging in activities that
could be argued to be lobbying, there are few voices to warn of the
dangerous path we are on of a new mission creep led by the primary
market players, who seek to comingle functions across those two distinct
markets. Unless there are independent and honest voices brought to bear
on this matter, we will recreate the same dangerous and pro-cyclical
system that failed.
It is understood that Corker-Warner, Crapo-Johnson, Rep. Hensarlings
PATH Act and the recently introduced Title VII of Sen. Shelbys reform
bill (authored by Sen. Corker) would be generous gifts to the big banks
and PMIs. Given the false assumption that private capital attracted in good
times would remain available in bad times, these bills do little to provide
necessary countercyclical buffers beyond a further backstop of the federal
governments safety net for these same institutions.
June 2015
With legislative efforts having stalled, the largest primary market players
in concert with PMIs and rating agencies are now seeking to exert public,
political and administrative pressure to force their way into the secondary
market. This can be seen through their efforts, with the assistance of
captured or nave legislators,i to gain access to the secondary market
Common Securitization Platform (CSP) that FHFA is forcing the GSEs to
build. It can also be seen through their efforts to gain acceptance of deep
MIii as a means to reduce the fees charged by the GSEs for insuring
mortgages originated by those largest lenders and to generate new revenue
and income streams for the PMIs and rating agencies.
The CSP
While the purpose of this brief is to raise some red flags about unspoken
risks of deep MI. Still, it is worth briefly highlighting three of the key
concerns we have with the too-big-to-fail institutions purchased support
for gaining access to the CSP.
1- The GSEs, as secondary market providers of liquidity for
support of the primary market, were never intended to insure or
guarantee all mortgages, even all of those mortgages that are
conforming and conventional. They were intended to ensure
liquidity, in the form of insurance, in instances where primary
market lenders did not have sufficient access to, or where there
was not sufficient access in, the primary market.
If the GSEs properly priced the cost of the insurance they
provided (g-fees) to the primary market then those largest
primary market lenders who choose not to hold loans on
balance-sheet and have direct access to capital markets, would
be able to package and securitize mortgage-backed securities,
as private label securities (PLS), at comparable rates to those
they would find as a result of a GSE insurance wrap. In good
times this would reduce the size and need of the GSEs
(secondary market). As a result, only those smaller lenders who
did not have direct access to the capital markets would require
GSE insurance wraps. Through the GSEs these smaller firms
would be able to compete, on a level playing field, with their
larger peers. In adverse economic times, though, wellcapitalized GSEs would be able to properly price the credit risk
and cost of insurance so that any firm that did not have direct
access to markets would be able to continue to support the
allocation of capital to the mortgage market of the real
economy.
-2-
June 2015
2- If the largest firms get direct access to the CSP, those smaller
firms would likely lose their ability to compete with the larger
firms as they would not generate the same volume of loans and
would therefore suffer relatively higher execution costs. As a
result, they would be increasingly likely to sell their volumes to
the larger players. This would turn the smaller players into the
same third party originators that failed during the crisis and
create further concentration in the primary market.
3- If the largest firms were to gain access to the CSP it is likely
that within a few short years they would use their lobbying
power to suggest, without any real proof, that by being allowed
to vertically integrate real estate sales into their allowable
activities they could reduce the costs to homebuyers.
Obviously, given the broad competition in real estate sales,
compared to the heavily concentrated and oligopolistic nature
of the mortgage origination industry, this argument is
threadbare.
Although we have other concerns with the idea of granting primary market
firms with direct access to the secondary market CSP, we will address
those in a future note.
Deep MI
Over the past year, we have witnessed the Mortgage Bankers
Associations (MBAs) efforts to try to advance the notion of deep MIiii.
These efforts have grown louderiv, more full of hyperbole and less
considerate of the risks of deep MI. This is not traditional mortgage
insurance, in which the GSEs require a borrower to buy either
directly or through a bulk policy mortgage insurance on any portion
of a mortgage that exceeds an 80% loan-to-value ratio, and when the
borrower builds enough equity in their home, the mortgage insurance
is cancelled thus reducing the revenues to the PMI firms. This is a
new product selected and paid for by lenders, and the numerous
problems in its design would become new operating costs to the GSEs.
Because the GSEs calculate the cost of an insurance wrap that a lender
must pay to cover the risk the GSEs bear, both for the MI as counterparty
and for the underlying loan, the g-fee reflects those costs. The Mortgage
Bankers Association is now pushing the notion that by buying PMI
directly and more deeply than the 80% LTV, they can justify and should
receive a lower cost on the g-fees they pay the GSEs. While this sales
pitch sounds sensible on its face, it ignores the risks incurred and appears
little more than another effort of the mortgage industrial complex to
creep into the secondary market and to assure new volumes of loans,
-3-
June 2015
-4-
June 2015
-5-
June 2015
Letter from Senators Bob Corker, Mark Warner, Mike Crapo, Jon Tester,
Dean Heller, Heidi Heitkamp, Pat Toomey, Mark Kirk to The Honorable
Mel Watt Director Federal Housing Finance Agency, March 17, 2015,
available at:
http://www.corker.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/221a4274-f6fd-432db03b-949cc055498e/Senate%20CSP%20Letter%2003172015.pdf (See:
A CSP that is accessible and valuable to not only to Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, the Government Sponsored Enterprises ("GSEs"), but also
private sector participants in the secondary mortgage finance market,
would facilitate positive transformation in the nation's housing finance
system.) Note: The only shareholder owned and governmentally
chartered secondary-market firms are the GSEs and the home loan banks.
This is clearly an attempt at mission creep by firms that are not chartered
or regulated for secondary market activities. Allowing such firms access
to the secondary market will only serve to increase systemic risk and
reduce the effects of competition, in the primary markets, from smaller
lenders.
ii
Letter from David H. Stevens, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Mortgage Bankers Association to the Federal Housing Finance
-6-
June 2015
-7-
June 2015
1- This report is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who
is a citizen or resident of or located in any locality, state, country or other jurisdiction where such
distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or which would
subject Graham Fisher or its subsidiaries or affiliated to any registration or licensing requirement
within such jurisdiction. All material presented within this report, unless specifically indicated
otherwise, is under copyright to Graham Fisher & Co. (GF&Co).
2- No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to the fairness, accuracy,
completeness, or correctness of the information and opinions contained herein. GF&Co accepts no
liability for loss arising from the use of the material presented in this report. This report is not to be
relied upon in substitution for the exercise of independent judgment. The views and the other
information provided are subject to change without notice.
3- The information, tools and material presented in this report are provided to you for information
purposes only and are not to be used or considered as an offer or the solicitation of an offer to sell
or buy or subscribe for securities or financial instruments. GF&Co. has not taken any steps to
ensure that the securities referred to in this report are suitable for any particular investor. The
contents of this report are not intended to be used as investment advice.
4- Past performance should not be taken as an indication or guarantee of future performance, and
no representation or warranty, express or implied is made regarding future performance.
Information, opinions and estimates contained in this report reflect a judgment at its original date of
publication by GF&Co and are subject to change.
-8-