Early Attacks On Democratic Norms

VICE Vault: Some religious organizations are protecting their wealth and political influence while threatening our country’s democratic norms – all with the aid of America’s political elite.
Showing posts with label housing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label housing. Show all posts

Housing Market

 Economist: Rising Rates May Bring

 Balance to Housing Market

 
    SANTA ANA, Calif. - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 2/23/2022 - First American Financial Corporation (NYSE: FAF), a major global provider of title insurance, settlement services and risk solutions for real estate transactions, recently released the December 2021 First American Real House Price Index (RHPI). The RHPI measures the price changes of single-family properties throughout the U.S. adjusted for the impact of income and interest rate changes on consumer house-buying power over time at national, state and metropolitan area levels. Because the RHPI adjusts for house-buying power, it also serves as a measure of housing affordability.

Chief Economist Analysis: Real House Prices Up 21.7 Percent Year Over Year

    “In December 2021, the Real House Price Index (RHPI) increased 21.7 percent compared with December 2020, the highest annual growth rate since 2014. The record increase was driven by rising mortgage rates and rapid nominal house price appreciation, which make up two of the three drivers of the RHPI,” First American Chief Economics Mark Fleming said. “The 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage and the unadjusted house price index increased by 0.4 percentage points and 21.4 percent respectively.

    “Even though household income increased 5 percent since December 2020 and boosted consumer house-buying power, it was not enough to offset the impact of higher mortgage rates and rising nominal prices on affordability. In the near term, affordability is likely to wane further, as mortgage rates are expected to continue to rise and the pace of house price appreciation exceeds gains in household income. How buyers and sellers react to higher rates may help the housing market regain some balance.”

Existing Homeowners Locked In?

    “When mortgage rates fall, a potential home buyer can buy the same amount of home for a lower monthly payment or buy more home for the same monthly payment. The 40-year tailwind of declining mortgage rates has allowed homeowners to buy a home at one mortgage rate and then later sell and move into a more expensive home when rates are lower,” Fleming said. “This long-run decline in mortgage rates has encouraged existing homeowners to move out and move up.

    “Faster house price appreciation, modestly rising mortgage rates and record low levels of homes for sale have been the economic dynamics dominating the housing market during the second half 2021. While existing homeowners have historically high levels of equity and may feel wealthier because of it, many have also secured historically low fixed-rate mortgages. There is a financial ‘lock-in’ effect that increases as mortgage rates rise and as the size of a mortgage increases. Rising mortgage rates increase the monthly cost of borrowing the same amount that a homeowner owes on their existing mortgage. The higher the prevailing market mortgage rate is relative to the homeowner’s existing mortgage rate, the stronger the lock-in effect. Why move out and move down?

    “Additionally, the record low level of houses for sale makes it difficult to find a better, more attractive house to buy, so sellers – who are also prospective buyers – don’t sell for fear of not finding something to buy. The good news is that builders have been breaking ground on more new homes, which may alleviate some of the supply crunch and encourage existing buyers to move.

    “Nonetheless, buying a home is often prompted by lifestyle decisions more so than financial considerations. Despite the financial lock-in, homeowners will still make the decision to move based on lifestyle changes, such as needing more space to accommodate a growing family or relocating for a new job or other reason.”

The Housing Market Will Adjust

    “Homeowners may feel rate-locked into their homes, but first-time home buyers have no such financial lock. Yet, first-time home buyers must also contend with the record low supply of homes in a declining affordability environment. But what goes up, must eventually moderate,” Fleming said. “Rising rates may be a housing market headwind in 2022, but as some buyers pull back from the market due to affordability and supply constraints and as new construction adds more supply, house prices will moderate, resulting in a more balanced housing market.”

December 2021 Real House Price Index Highlights

  • Real house prices increased 1.9 percent between November 2021 and December 2021.

  • Real house prices increased 21.7 percent between December 2020 and December 2021.

  • Consumer house-buying power, how much one can buy based on changes in income and interest rates, increased 0.04 percent between November 2021 and December 2021, and decreased 0.2 percent year over year.

  • Median household income has increased 5.2 percent since December 2020 and 69.3 percent since January 2000.

  • Real house prices are 4.8 percent less expensive than in January 2000.

  • While unadjusted house prices are now 44.5 percent above the housing boom peak in 2006, real, house-buying power-adjusted house prices remain 33.2 percent below their 2006 housing boom peak.

December 2021 Real House Price State Highlights

  • The five states with the greatest year-over-year increase in the RHPI are: Arizona (+34.3 percent), Florida (+32.0), South Carolina (+29.4 percent), Connecticut (+28.6 percent), and Georgia (+28.4),

  • There were no states with a year-over-year decrease in the RHPI.

December 2021 Real House Price Local Market Highlights

  • Among the Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) tracked by First American, the five markets with the greatest year-over-year increase in the RHPI are: Phoenix (+36.3 percent), Charlotte, N.C. (+36.0), Tampa, Fla. (+32.9 percent), Raleigh, N.C. (+31.5 percent), and Atlanta (+31.5 percent).

  • Among the Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) tracked by First American, there were no markets with a year-over-year decrease in the RHPI.

Next Release

    The next release of the First American Real House Price Index will take place the week of March 28, 2022 for January 2022 data.

Sources

Methodology

    The methodology statement for the First American Real House Price Index is available at http://www.firstam.com/economics/real-house-price-index.

Economic Analysis


House Price Index Shows Decline 

In Affordability for 

Third Month in a Row


    SANTA ANA, Calif. - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 8/12/2021 - First American Financial Corporation (NYSE: FAF), a leading global provider of title insurance, settlement services and risk solutions for real estate transactions, released the May 2021 First American Real House Price Index (RHPI) on July 27. The RHPI measures the price changes of single-family properties throughout the U.S. adjusted for the impact of income and interest rate changes on consumer house-buying power over time at national, state and metropolitan area levels. Because the RHPI adjusts for house-buying power, it also serves as a measure of housing affordability.

Chief Economist Analysis: Record Nominal House Price Appreciation Outpaces House-Buying Power Growth in May

    “Housing affordability declined on a year-over-year basis for the third month in a row in May, following a two-year streak of rising affordability,” said Mark Fleming, chief economist at First American. “The decline in May occurred even as two of the three key drivers of the Real House Price Index (RHPI), household income and mortgage rates, swung in favor of greater affordability relative to one year ago.

    “House-buying power increased by 8 percent in May compared with a year ago, propelled by lower mortgage rates and higher household income. The affordability gains from house-buying power, however, were offset by the third component of the RHPI, nominal house price appreciation, which reached a record 18 percent in May, surpassing the previous peak from 2005,” said Fleming. “As always, real estate is local and national affordability trends are not necessarily reflected in local trends, as house-buying power and nominal house price gains vary greatly from city to city.”

Affordability Declined in 49 of the 50 Major Markets

    “The drop in affordability was broadly felt as affordability declined year over year in 49 of the 50 markets we track,” said Fleming. “The five markets with the greatest year-over-year decline in affordability were:

  1. Phoenix (-22.7 percent)
  2. Seattle (-20.1 percent)
  3. Kansas City, Mo. (-19.6 percent)
  4. Tampa, Fla. (-17.8 percent)
  5. Las Vegas (-17.2 percent)

    “Mortgage rates are generally the same across the country, so a decline in mortgage rates boosts affordability equally in each market,” said Fleming. “Household income growth and nominal house prices, on the other hand, differ from market to market, so the affordability dynamic varies as well.

    “In May, Phoenix had the greatest year-over-year decrease in affordability. While annual income growth was steady at 1.9 percent, Phoenix experienced the biggest annual increase in nominal house prices of any major market – 29.3 percent. The steep increase in nominal house prices overshadowed any affordability gains from increased house-buying power,” said Fleming. “A similar dynamic played out in Tampa as year-over-year nominal house price appreciation of 25.6 percent outpaced house-buying power.

    “In Seattle and Las Vegas, house-buying power ticked up as the positive impact of falling mortgage rates offset a decline in household incomes. However, like Phoenix and Tampa, nominal house price growth in Seattle (20.7 percent) and Las Vegas (19.9 percent) overshadowed the house-buying power gains,” said Fleming. “Kansas City was the only one of the five markets where house-buying power declined, combining with faster house price appreciation to drive a decline in affordability.”

Where Are Nominal House Prices Headed?

    “Declining affordability may cause potential home buyers on the margin to be priced out, prompting fewer or less intense bidding wars and causing house price appreciation to moderate. The increase in housing inventory may likewise ease pressure on nominal house price growth, though the increase remains small relative to historic levels and the broader housing supply shortage is likely to take years to reverse,” said Fleming. “Affordability trends in the coming months will depend on the supply and demand dynamics behind nominal house price appreciation – dynamics which will play out differently in each market.”

May 2021 Real House Price Index Highlights

  • Real house prices increased 0.7 percent between April 2021 and May 2021.
  • Real house prices increased 8.9 percent between May 2020 and May 2021.
  • Consumer house-buying power, how much one can buy based on changes in income and interest rates, increased 1.4 percent between April 2021 and May 2021, and increased 8.4 percent year over year.
  • Median household income has increased 4.7 percent since May 2020 and 78.0 percent since January 2000.
  • Real house prices are 19.9 percent less expensive than in January 2000.
  • While unadjusted house prices are now 30.1 percent above the housing boom peak in 2006, real, house-buying power-adjusted house prices remain 43.8 percent below their 2006 housing boom peak.

May 2021 Real House Price State Highlights

  • The five states with the greatest year-over-year increase in the RHPI are: Arizona (+19.4 percent), Vermont (+17.0 percent), Washington (+16.6 percent), Nevada (+16.3 percent), and Connecticut (+15.4 percent).
  • There were no states with a year-over-year decrease in the RHPI.

May 2021 Real House Price Local Market Highlights

  • Among the Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) tracked by First American, the five markets with the greatest year-over-year increase in the RHPI are: Phoenix (+22.7 percent), Seattle (+20.1 percent), Kansas City, Mo. (+19.6 percent), Tampa, Fla. (+17.8 percent), and Las Vegas (+17.2 percent).
  • Among the Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) tracked by First American, the only market with a year-over-year decrease in the RHPI is San Francisco (-0.1 percent).

Next Release

    The next release of the First American Real House Price Index will take place the week of August 30, 2021 for June 2021 data.

Sources

First American Data & Analytics
Freddie Mac
Census Bureau

Methodology

    The methodology statement for the First American Real House Price Index is available at http://www.firstam.com/economics/real-house-price-index.
 

Note: Original release date, July 27, 2021.

Economic Trends

 Home Price Appreciation Rises 

Prices at Highest Levels Since Before Lockdowns Began

    PHILADELPHIA - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 5-22-2021 - Home prices in the U.S. rose again in April, albeit at a slightly lower rate than recorded in the prior month. According to Radian Home Price Index (HPI) data released May 21, 2021 by Red Bell Real Estate, LLC, a Radian Group Inc. company (NYSE: RDN), home prices nationally rose from the end of March 2021 to the end of April 2021 at an annualized rate of 10.4 percent. The company believes the Radian HPI is the most comprehensive and timely measure of U.S. housing market prices and conditions available in the market today.

    For the prior twelve months, the Radian HPI rose 9.2 percent (April 2020 to April 2021), the fastest annual rate recorded since before the COVID outbreak. While the April month-over-month rate was slightly lower than the prior month, the twelve-month rate increased compared to March. Recent annual increases are benefiting from the more distanced months of lower appreciation recorded during the early days of the national shut-down. The Radian HPI is calculated based on the estimated values of more than 70 million unique addresses each month, covering all single-family property types and geographies.

    “As we are now a full year from the initial COVID induced national closures of 2020, the U.S.’s strong national housing market continues to chug along in April,” noted Steve Gaenzler, SVP of Data and Analytics. 

    Gaenzler added: “Pent-up demand for homes, improving economic activity, a strong labor market and low mortgage rates have been strong tailwinds for housing. However, as the U.S. starts to see growing considerations for ending or reducing government stimulus (monetary and fiscal) in the coming months, and concerns of higher potential inflation making headlines, there is a need to keep a very close eye on housing in the coming half year,”

National Data and Trends

  • Median home price in the U.S. rose to $277,356
  • Active supply of homes well below long term average

    The national median estimated price for single-family and condominium homes rose to $277,356. Since the start of the COVID lockdowns in March 2020, the average home in the U.S. has appreciated by more than $20,000. Home price appreciation over the past year has increased homeowner equity levels by more than $1.5 trillion dollars.

    Gains in home prices are partially due to a continued lack of supply. After falling for 10 of the prior 12 months, active listings have now increased three consecutive months—although only by 32,000 properties from the prior month. In April, more than 881,000 residential properties were for sale, the fifth month with less than one million properties listed nationally. Over the last decade, the U.S. has had an average of 1.4 million homes on the market each month. At the current count of active listings, the U.S. has 40 percent fewer homes on the market, on average, than at any time over the past decade.

Regional Data and Trends

  • All Regions reported solid appreciation from prior month.
  • Three Western states consistently demonstrate strong home price appreciation

    While all six Regional indices reported higher 12-month rates of home price appreciation, only two Regions (Mid Atlantic and Northeast) reported higher rates of appreciation compared to March. In April, the Northeast narrowly edged out the South Region for the highest appreciation rate (+11.9 percent). All Regions showed strength in the month with the worst performing Region (Midwest) still recording a very impressive 9.1% increase from the prior month.

    Looking at trends from the last six months, the Radian HPI can identify some state-level winners and losers. The states showing the greatest increase in appreciation trends include a combination of South, Southwest and Midwest states including NE, AZ, AR, and MS. The most consistently strong states for appreciation in the last half year include ID, MT, GA, and WA. While these states showed increasing or consistently steady rates of appreciation, eleven of the 50 states plus DC, recorded lower monthly appreciation rates than the average appreciation over the last six-months including NC, ND, WV and KY.

Metropolitan Area Data and Trends

  • Boise got stronger in April
  • Large metro areas median price outpace nation

    Across the largest or most important metro areas of the U.S., the last three-months have been some of the faster appreciating on record with an average annualized rate of 9.6 percent appreciation. The strongest metro markets over the last quarter include Boise, ID, which continues to rise rapidly, Phoenix, AZ and Charlotte, NC. Some of the slower appreciating larger cities and metro areas over the last quarter include Boston, MA, Fargo, ND, and Burlington, VT.

    The average median estimated home price of homes in the 50-largest metros ended April at $295,259. However, just the top 20-largest metros topped an average median home price of more than $385,000. Compared to the national median estimated price, the largest cities continue to outpace the nation. In April, the largest metros median stood more than $100,000 higher than the national median.

False Claims Act Reaps $3.5 Billion in FY 2015

   WASHINGTON – 1/1/2016 - The U.S. Department of Justice obtained more than $3.5 billion in settlements and judgments from civil cases involving fraud and false claims against the government in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, announced in December, 2015. This is the fourth year in a row that the department has exceeded $3.5 billion in cases under the False Claims Act, and brings total recoveries from January 2009 to the end of the fiscal year to $26.4 billion.
    “The False Claims Act has again proven to be the government’s most effective civil tool to ferret out fraud and return billions to taxpayer-funded programs,” Mizer said. “The recoveries announced today help preserve the integrity of vital government programs that provide health care to the elderly and low income families, ensure our national security and defense, and enable countless Americans to purchase homes.”
    Of the $3.5 billion recovered last year, $1.9 billion came from companies and individuals in the health care industry for allegedly providing unnecessary or inadequate care, paying kickbacks to health care providers to induce the use of certain goods and services, or overcharging for goods and services paid for by Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health care programs. The $1.9 billion reflects federal losses only. In many of these cases, the department was instrumental in recovering additional millions of dollars for consumers and state Medicaid programs.
   The next largest recoveries were made in connection with government contracts. The government depends on contractors to feed, clothe, and equip our troops for combat; for the military aircraft, ships, and weapons systems that keep our nation secure; as well as to provide everything that is needed to fund myriad programs at home. Settlements and judgments in cases alleging false claims for payment under government contracts totaled $1.1 billion in fiscal year 2015.
  The False Claims Act is the government’s primary civil remedy to redress false claims for government funds and property under government contracts, including national security and defense contracts, as well as under government programs as varied as Medicare, veterans’ benefits, federally insured loans and mortgages, highway funds, research grants, agricultural supports, school lunches, and disaster assistance. In 1986, Congress strengthened the Act by amending it to increase incentives for whistleblowers to file lawsuits on behalf of the government.
    Most false claims actions are filed under the Act’s whistleblower, or qui tam, provisions that allow individuals to file lawsuits alleging false claims on behalf of the government. If the government prevails in the action, the whistleblower, also known as the relator, receives up to 30 percent of the recovery. Whistleblowers filed 638 qui tam suits in fiscal year 2015 and the department recovered $2.8 billion in these and earlier filed suits this past year. Whistleblower awards during the same period totaled $597 million.
Health Care Fraud
    Including this past year’s $1.9 billion, the department has recovered nearly $16.5 billion in health care fraud since January 2009 to the end of fiscal year 2015 – more than half the health care fraud dollars recovered since the 1986 amendments to the False Claims Act. These recoveries restore valuable assets to federally funded programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE – the health care program for the military. But just as important, the department’s vigorous pursuit of health care fraud prevents billions more in losses by deterring others who might otherwise try to cheat the system for their own gain. The department’s success is a direct result of the high priority the Obama Administration has placed on fighting health care fraud. In 2009, the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, the department that administers Medicare and Medicaid, announced the creation of an interagency task force called the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), to increase coordination and optimize criminal and civil enforcement. Additional information on the government’s efforts in this area is available at StopMedicareFraud.gov, a webpage jointly established by the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services.
    Two of the largest health care recoveries this past year were from DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc., the leading provider of dialysis services in the United States. DaVita paid $450 million to resolve allegations that it knowingly generated unnecessary waste in administering the drugs Zemplar and Venofer to dialysis patients, and then billed the government for costs that could have been avoided. DaVita paid an additional $350 million to resolve claims that it violated the False Claims Act by paying kickbacks to physicians to induce patient referrals to its clinics. DaVita is headquartered in Denver, Colorado, and has dialysis clinics in 46 states and the District of Columbia.
   Hospitals were involved in nearly $330 million in settlements and judgments this past year. A cardiac nurse and a health care reimbursement consultant filed a qui tam suit against hundreds of hospitals that were allegedly implanting cardiac devices in Medicare patients contrary to criteria established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in consultation with cardiologists, professional cardiology societies, cardiac device manufacturers, and patient advocates. The department settled with nearly 500 of these hospitals for a total of $250 million, including $216 million recovered in the past fiscal year. For details, see 500 Hospitals.
    Several settlements involved violations of the Stark Law. The Stark Statute prohibits certain financial relationships between hospitals and doctors that could improperly influence patient referrals. Services provided in violation of the Stark Statute are not reimbursable by Medicare or Medicaid. Hospitals settling false claims involving Stark violations include Adventist Health System for $115 million, an organization that operates hospitals and other health care facilities in 10 states; North Broward. Hospital District for $69.5 million, a special taxing district of Florida that operates hospitals and other health care facilities in Broward County, Florida; and Georgia hospital system Columbus Regional Healthcare System and Dr. Andrew Pippas for $25 million plus contingent payments up to an additional $10 million The Adventist settlement also involved allegations of miscoding claims to obtain higher reimbursements for services than allowed by Medicare and Medicaid
    Claims involving the pharmaceutical industry accounted for $96 million in settlements and judgments. Daiichi Sankyo Inc., a global pharmaceutical company with its U.S. headquarters in New Jersey, paid $39 million to resolve allegations of false claims against the United States and state Medicaid programs. Daiichi allegedly paid kickbacks to physicians to induce them to prescribe Daiichi drugs, including Azor, Benicar, Tribenzor and Welchol. Medicare and Medicaid prohibit reimbursement for drugs involved in kickback schemes. AstraZeneca LP and Cephalon Inc. paid the United States $26.7 million and $4.3 million, respectively, in separate settlements for allegedly underpaying rebates owed under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. As part of those settlements, the two drug manufacturers agreed to pay an additional $23 million to state Medicaid programs for their losses. And in another settlement, PharMerica Corp., the nation’s second largest nursing home pharmacy, agreed to pay the United States $9.25 million to resolve allegations that it solicited and received kickbacks from pharmaceutical manufacturer Abbott Laboratories in exchange for promoting the drug Depakote for nursing home patients. PharMerica is headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky.
    Skilled nursing homes and rehabilitation facilities have also been fertile ground for civil fraud and false claims actions. In the largest failure of care settlement with a skilled nursing home chain in the department’s history, Extendicare Health Services Inc. and its subsidiary, Progressive Step Corporation, agreed to pay the United States $32.3 million to resolve allegations that Extendicare billed Medicare and Medicaid for deficient nursing services and billed Medicare for medically unreasonable and unnecessary rehabilitation therapy services. Extendicare and Pro-Step paid an additional $5.7 million to eight states for their Medicaid losses. The department has ongoing litigation against additional nursing home chains and rehabilitation centers based on similar allegations of false claims for medically unreasonable or unnecessary rehabilitation therapy. For example, see HCR ManorCare.
Housing and Mortgage Fraud
    The department has recovered over $5 billion in housing and mortgage fraud from January 2009 to the end of fiscal year 2015, including this past year’s recoveries of $365 million. Notable recoveries this past year include a $212.5 million settlement with First Tennessee Bank N.A. First Tennessee admitted that from 2006 to 2008, through its subsidiary, First Horizon Home Loans Corporation, it originated and endorsed mortgages for federal insurance by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) that did not meet eligibility requirements. First Tennessee also admitted failing to report such deficiencies to the authorities as required under the program despite widespread knowledge by its senior managers by early 2008. In August 2008, First Tennessee sold First Horizon to MetLife Bank N.A., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Inc. Metlife admitted similar misconduct regarding the loans it originated and endorsed from September 2008 to March 2012. MetLife paid the United States $123.5 million to resolve liability under the False Claims Act arising from its misconduct in endorsing mortgagees for FHA insurance.
    The department also settled claims against Walter Investment Management Corp. for $29.63 million. The government alleged that the company, through subsidiaries Reverse Mortgage Solution Inc., REO Management Solutions LLC, and RMS Asset Management Solutions LLC, caused false claims for fees and other costs in servicing reverse mortgages under the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) program. Reverse mortgage loans allow elderly people to access the equity in their homes. The loans provide monthly payments that enable the elderly to meet their day-to-day living expenses while remaining in their homes. To encourage these loans, HUD insures banks and other institutions that service the mortgages against loss, providing the institution complies with requirements to ensure the quality of such loans. Walter Investment allegedly failed to comply with these requirements.
    These recoveries are part of the broader enforcement efforts by President Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. President Obama established the interagency task force in 2009, to wage an aggressive, coordinated, and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. The task force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general, and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes. For more information about the task force, visit www.stopfraud.gov.
Government Contracts
    Government contracts and federal procurement accounted for $1.1 billion in fraud settlements and judgments in fiscal year 2015, bringing procurement fraud totals to nearly $4 billion from January 2009 to the end of the fiscal year. Significant cases include a $146 million settlement with Supreme Group B.V. and several of its subsidiaries for alleged false claims to the Department of Defense (DoD) for food, water, fuel, and transportation of cargo for American soldiers in Afghanistan. Supreme Group is based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE). In addition, Supreme Group affiliates Supreme Foodservice GmbH, a privately held Swiss company, and Supreme Foodservice FZE, a privately-held UAE company, pleaded guilty to related criminal violations and paid more than $288 million in criminal fines.
    In two other defense contract settlements, Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, a subsidiary of aerospace giant Lockheed Martin Inc., paid $27.5 million and DRS Technical Services Inc. paid $13.7 million to resolve allegations that their employees lacked required job qualifications while the companies charged for the higher level, qualified employees required under contracts with U.S. Army Communication and Electronics Command (CECOM). The CECOM contracts were designed to give the Army rapid access to products and services for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In a pair of cases involving contracts with the General Services Administration, VMware Inc. and Carahsoft Technology Corporation paid the United States $75.5 million and Iron Mountain Companies paid $44.5 million to settle their respective liability under the False Claims Act. The government alleged that California-based VMware and Virginia-based Carahsoft misrepresented their commercial sales practices, which resulted in overcharging government agencies for their software products and services sold through GSA’s Multiple Award Schedule. Similarly, Iron Mountain, a records storage company headquartered in Massachusetts, misrepresented its commercial sales practices to GSA and failed to give certain discounts given to its commercial customers, as required to gain access to the vast federal marketplace available to contractors through the Multiple Award Schedule.
    The department settled allegations that private contractor U.S. Investigations Services Inc. (USIS) violated the False Claims Act in performing a contract with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to perform background investigations of federal employees and those applying for federal service. The government alleged that USIS took shortcuts that compromised its contractually-required quality review and that, had the government known, it would not have paid for the services. USIS agreed to forego at least $30 million in payments legitimately owed to the company to settle the government’s allegations.
Other Fraud Recoveries and Actions
    Although health care, mortgage, and government contract fraud dominated fiscal year 2015 recoveries, the U.S. Justice Department has aggressively pursued fraud wherever it is found in federal programs.The department recovered $44 million from Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company for alleged fraud under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s federal crop insurance program. The United States alleged that Fireman’s Fund knowingly issued federally reinsured crop insurance policies that were ineligible for federal reinsurance. Specifically, Fireman’s Fund allegedly backdated policies, forged farmers’ signatures, accepted late and altered documents, whited-out dates and signatures, and signed documents after relevant deadlines. The policies were issued by Fireman’s Fund offices in California, Kansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, Texas, and Washington.
    The department also recovered $13 million from Education Affiliates, a for-profit education company based in White Marsh, Maryland, for alleged false claims to the Department of Education for student aid for students whose qualifications for admission were falsified to get them enrolled so they could receive aid which would be paid to the school. Education Affiliates operates 50 campuses throughout the United States under various trade names.
    In other actions, the department filed lawsuits to recover funds disbursed under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and payments made under contracts awarded to benefit disadvantaged populations identified under the Small Business Administration’s set-aside programs. In one action, the department sued the estate and trusts of the late Layton P. Stuart, former owner and president of One Financial Corporation, and its operating subsidiary, One Bank & Trust N.A., both based in Arkansas, alleging that Stuart made misrepresentations to induce the Department of the Treasury to invest TARP funds in One Financial as part of Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program. The department recently settled with the Stuart estate and trusts for $4 million, but claims remain pending against One Financial Corporation.
   In a second action, the department filed suit against Florida-based Air Ideal Inc. and its owner, Kim Amkraut. The government alleged that Air Ideal and Amkraut falsely certified that the company qualified for preferences given to small businesses located in a Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) when Air Ideal’s HUBZone location was no more than a virtual office and its principal place of business was in a non-HUBZone location. The government further alleged that Air Ideal used its fraudulently-procured HUBZone certification to obtain contracts from the Coast Guard, Army, Army Corps of Engineers, and Department of the Interior that were worth millions of dollars. The department settled with Air Ideal and Amkraut for $250,000 plus five percent of Air Ideal’s gross revenues for five years.
    In addition to those suits involving individuals described above, the department settled or filed suit against individuals in an array of cases. For example, Two Florida couples agreed to pay the United States $1.137 million collectively, to resolve allegations that they accepted kickbacks in exchange for home health care referrals to A Plus Home Health Care Inc. The United States previously settled with A Plus, its owner Tracy Nemerofsky, and five other couples that allegedly accepted payments from A Plus. Dr. Charles Denham, of Laguna Beach, California, paid the United States $1 million to settle allegations that he solicited and accepted kickbacks from CareFusion in return for promoting a CareFusion product and influencing recommendations by the National Quality Forum.
    Denham was a patient safety consultant who co-chaired a National Quality Forum Committee. After settling with two cardiovascular testing laboratories for $48.5 million - Health Diagnostics Laboratory Inc. (HDL) and Singulex Inc., the department intervened in three qui tam suits against another laboratory, Berkeley HeartLab Inc., a marketing company, BlueWave Healthcare Consultants Inc. and three individualsBlueWave’s owners, Floyd Calhoun Dent III and Robert Bradley Johnson and HDL’s co-founder and former chief executive officer, LaTonya Mallory. The department also intervened in two qui tam suits against Florida cardiologist Dr. Asad Qamar and his practice, the Institute for Cardiovascular Excellence PLLC, alleging that Qamar and his practice billed Medicare for medically unnecessary peripheral artery procedures and interventions and paid kickbacks to patients by waiving Medicare copayments irrespective of financial hardship. The department also filed a complaint against H. Ted Cain, Julie Cain, Corporate Management Inc. and Stone County Hospital Inc. for false claims for Medicare reimbursement. The government alleged that Ted and Julie Cain, the hospital and hospital management company owned and controlled by Ted Cain, claimed reimbursement for the hospital’s costs at inflated rates and for ineligible expenses. These matters are ongoing.
    Outside the health care arena, EDF Resource Capital Inc. agreed to transfer assets worth $5.8 million to the United States, and its chief executive officer, Frank Dinsmore, agreed to pay $200,000 to the United States, to settle allegations that they violated the False Claims Act in failing to remit payments to the Small Business Administration under the 504 loan program. The 504 loan program provides growing businesses with long-term, fixed-rate financing for major fixed assets, such as land and buildings. The program operates through local lenders like EDF, who reap benefits from the program in return for shouldering certain financial obligations which Dinsmore and EDF allegedly ignored. The department also entered settlements with two individuals for evasion of Customs duties owed on imports of aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Robert Wingfield, the U.S. sales representative of a Chinese manufacturer, and Bill Ma, owner of an ostensible importer, allegedly misrepresented the country of origin of goods to avoid steep antidumping and countervailing duties imposed by the Department of Commerce and collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on imports of aluminum extrusions from the PRC to protect domestic manufacturers from unfair foreign pricing practices. The government previously settled related allegations with four importers, bringing total settlements in the case to $4.6 million, including the $435,000 from Wingfield and Ma.
Recoveries in Whistleblower Suits
    Of the $3.5 billion the government recovered in fiscal year 2015, more than $2.8 billion related to lawsuits filed under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act. During the same period, the government paid out $597 million to the individuals who exposed fraud and false claims by filing a qui tam complaint, often at great risk to their careers.
    The number of lawsuits filed under the qui tam provisions of the Act has grown significantly since 1986, with 638 qui tam suits filed this past year. The growing number of qui tam lawsuits, particularly since 2009, has led to increased recoveries. From January 2009 to the end of fiscal year 2015, the government recovered $19.4 billion in settlements and judgments related to qui tam suits and paid whistleblower awards of $3 billion during the same period.
    “Many of the recoveries obtained under the False Claims Act result from courageous men and women who come forward to blow the whistle on fraud they are often uniquely positioned to expose,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mizer.
    In 1986, Senator Charles Grassley and Representative Howard Berman led successful efforts in Congress to amend the False Claims Act to, among other things, encourage whistleblowers to come forward with allegations of fraud. In 2009, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, along with Senator Grassley and Representative Berman, championed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, which made additional improvements to the False Claims Act and other fraud statutes. And in 2010, the passage of the Affordable Care Act provided additional inducements and protections for whistleblowers and strengthened the provisions of the federal health care Anti-Kickback Statute.
   Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mizer also expressed his deep appreciation for the many dedicated public servants who investigated and pursued these cases – the attorneys, investigators, auditors and other agency personnel throughout the Department of Justice’s Civil Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, as well as the agency Offices of Inspector General and the many federal and state agencies that contributed to the department’s recoveries this past fiscal year.
    “The department’s lawyers and staff, together with our law enforcement partners in federal and state governments, work tirelessly and often overcome daunting challenges to achieve these successes on behalf of the taxpayers,” Mizer said.
    The government’s claims in the matters described above are allegations only; except where indicated, there has been no determination of liability.
    Source: U.S. Department of Justice release of 12/19/2015

Report Details Health, Status of Older Americans

   (NIH) - 8/19-2012 - Today's older Americans enjoy longer lives and better physical function than did previous generations, although, for some, an increased burden in housing costs and rising obesity may compromise these gains, according to a comprehensive federal look at aging. The report, Older Americans 2012: Key Indicators of Well-Being, tracks trends at regular intervals to see how older people are faring as the U.S. population grows older.
   In 2010, 40 million people age 65 and over accounted for 13 percent of the total population in the United States. In 2030, the number and proportion of older Americans is expected to grow significantly — to 72 million, representing nearly 20 percent of the population said the report, by the Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics.
   Older Americans 2012, the sixth report prepared by the Forum since 2000, provides an updated and accessible compendium of indicators, drawn from official statistics about the well-being of Americans primarily age 65 and older. The 176-page report provides a broad description of areas of well-being that are improving for older Americans and those that are not. Thirty-seven key indicators are categorized into five broad areas — population, economics, health status, health risks and behaviors, and health care. This year's report also includes a special feature on the end of life.
   Highlights of Older Americans 2012 include:
   Increased labor force participation by older women — Participation of older women in the labor force has increased significantly over the past 40 years. In 1963, 29 percent of women aged 62-64 worked outside the home; in 2011, that had increased to 45 percent. In 1963, 17 percent of women aged 65-69 were in the labor force; in 2011, that had increased to 27 percent. For women 70 and older, 6 percent worked in 1963, increasing to 8 percent in 2011. Some older Americans work out of economic necessity. Others may be attracted by the social contact, intellectual challenges or sense of value that work often provides.
   Declines in poverty, increases in income since 1974 — Older Americans are in better economic shape now than they were in 1974. Between 1974 and 2010, the proportion of older people with income below the poverty thresholds (less than $10,458 in 2010 for a person 65 and older) fell from 15 percent to 9 percent. The percentage with low income (between $10,458 and $20,916 in 2010 for people 65 and older) dropped from 35 percent to 26 percent. There were also notable gains in income over the period, as the proportion of people 65 and older with high income ($41,832 and above in 2010) rose from 18 percent to 31 percent.
   Increased housing problems — The most significant issue by far is housing cost burden, which has been steadily increasing over time. In 1985, about 30 percent of households with householders or spouses age 65 and over spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing and utilities. By 2009, the proportion of older people with high housing cost burden reached 40 percent. For some multigenerational households, crowded housing is also fairly prevalent.
   Rising rates of obesity — Obesity, a major cause of preventable disease and premature death, is increasing among older people. In 2009-2010, 38 percent of people age 65 and over were obese, compared with 22 percent in 1988-1994. In 2009-2010, 44 percent of people age 65-74 were obese, as were 29 percent of those age 75 and older.
   More use of hospice — The percentage of older people who received hospice care in the last 30 days of life increased from 19 percent in 1999 to 43 percent in 2009. The percentage of older Americans who died in hospitals dropped from 49 percent in 1999 to 32 percent in 2009. The percentage who died at home increased from 15 percent in 1999 to 24 percent in 2009. In 2009, there were notable differences in the use of hospice services at the end of life among people of different race and ethnicity groups.
   Older Americans 2012: Key Indicators of Well-Being is available online at http://www.agingstats.gov.

Settlement Reached Over Foreclosure Abuses

   WASHINGTON – 2/11/2012 - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller and Colorado Attorney General John W. Suthers announced on Feb. 9 that the federal government and 49 state attorneys general have reached a landmark $25 billion agreement with the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers to address mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure abuses. The agreement provides substantial financial relief to homeowners and establishes significant new homeowner protections for the future.
  Under the terms of the agreement, the servicers are required to collectively dedicate $20 billion toward various forms of financial relief to borrowers. At least $10 billion will go toward reducing the principal on loans for borrowers who, as of the date of the settlement, are either delinquent or at imminent risk of default and owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. At least $3 billion will go toward refinancing loans for borrowers who are current on their mortgages but who owe more on their mortgage than their homes are worth. Borrowers who meet basic criteria will be eligible for the refinancing, which will reduce interest rates for borrowers who are currently paying much higher rates or whose adjustable rate mortgages are due to soon rise to much higher rates. Up to $7 billion will go towards other forms of relief, including forbearance of principal for unemployed borrowers, anti-blight programs, short sales and transitional assistance, benefits for service members who are forced to sell their home at a loss as a result of a Permanent Change in Station order, and other programs. Because servicers will receive only partial credit for every dollar spent on some of the required activities, the settlement will provide direct benefits to borrowers in excess of $20 billion.
   Mortgage servicers are required to fulfill these obligations within three years. To encourage servicers to provide relief quickly, there are incentives for relief provided within the first 12 months. Servicers must reach 75 percent of their targets within the first two years. Servicers that miss settlement targets and deadlines will be required to pay substantial additional cash amounts.
   In addition to the $20 billion in financial relief for borrowers, the agreement requires the servicers to pay $5 billion in cash to the federal and state governments. $1.5 billion of this payment will be used to establish a Borrower Payment Fund to provide cash payments to borrowers whose homes were sold or taken in foreclosure between Jan. 1, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2011, and who meet other criteria. This program is separate from the restitution program currently being administered by federal banking regulators to compensate those who suffered direct financial harm as a result of wrongful servicer conduct. Borrowers will not release any claims in exchange for a payment. The remaining $3.5 billion of the $5 billion payment will go to state and federal governments to be used to repay public funds lost as a result of servicer misconduct and to fund housing counselors, legal aid and other similar public programs determined by the state attorneys general.
   The unprecedented joint agreement is the largest federal-state civil settlement ever obtained and is the result of extensive investigations by federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, HUD and the HUD Office of the Inspector General (HUD-OIG), and state attorneys general and state banking regulators across the country. The joint federal-state group entered into the agreement with the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers: Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Company, Citigroup Inc. and Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC).
   “This agreement – the largest joint federal-state settlement ever obtained – is the result of unprecedented coordination among enforcement agencies throughout the government,” U.S. Attorney General Holder said. “It holds mortgage servicers accountable for abusive practices and requires them to commit more than $20 billion towards financial relief for consumers. As a result, struggling homeowners throughout the country will benefit from reduced principals and refinancing of their loans. The agreement also requires substantial changes in how servicers do business, which will help to ensure the abuses of the past are not repeated.”
   The joint federal-state agreement requires servicers to implement comprehensive new mortgage loan servicing standards and to commit $25 billion to resolve violations of state and federal law. These violations include servicers’ use of “robo-signed” affidavits in foreclosure proceedings; deceptive practices in the offering of loan modifications; failures to offer non-foreclosure alternatives before foreclosing on borrowers with federally insured mortgages; and filing improper documentation in federal bankruptcy court.
   The $5 billion includes a $1 billion resolution of a separate investigation into fraudulent and wrongful conduct by Bank of America and various Countrywide entities related to the origination and underwriting of Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured mortgage loans, and systematic inflation of appraisal values concerning these loans, from Jan. 1, 2003 through April 30, 2009. Payment of $500 million of this $1 billion will be deferred to partially fund a loan modification program for Countrywide borrowers throughout the nation who are underwater on their mortgages. 
    The investigation was conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, with the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch of the Department of Justice, HUD and HUD-OIG. The settlement also resolves an investigation by the Eastern District of New York, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) and the Federal Housing Finance Agency-Office of the Inspector General (FHFA-OIG) into allegations that Bank of America defrauded the Home Affordable Modification Program.
   The joint federal-state agreement requires the mortgage servicers to implement unprecedented changes in how they service mortgage loans, handle foreclosures, and ensure the accuracy of information provided in federal bankruptcy court. The agreement requires new servicing standards which will prevent foreclosure abuses of the past, such as robo-signing, improper documentation and lost paperwork, and create dozens of new consumer protections. The new standards provide for strict oversight of foreclosure processing, including third-party vendors, and new requirements to undertake pre-filing reviews of certain documents filed in bankruptcy court.
   The new servicing standards make foreclosure a last resort by requiring servicers to evaluate homeowners for other loss mitigation options first. In addition, banks will be restricted from foreclosing while the homeowner is being considered for a loan modification. The new standards also include procedures and timelines for reviewing loan modification applications and give homeowners the right to appeal denials. Servicers will also be required to create a single point of contact for borrowers seeking information about their loans and maintain adequate staff to handle calls.
   The agreement will also provide enhanced protections for service members that go beyond those required by the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). In addition, the four servicers that had not previously resolved certain portions of potential SCRA liability have agreed to conduct a full review, overseen by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, to determine whether any servicemembers were foreclosed on in violation of SCRA since Jan. 1, 2006. The servicers have also agreed to conduct a thorough review, overseen by the Civil Rights Division, to determine whether any servicemember, from Jan. 1, 2008, to the present, was charged interest in excess of 6 percent on their mortgage, after a valid request to lower the interest rate, in violation of the SCRA. Servicers will be required to make payments to any servicemember who was a victim of a wrongful foreclosure or who was wrongfully charged a higher interest rate. This compensation for servicemembers is in addition to the $25 billion settlement amount.
   The agreement will be filed as a consent judgment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Compliance with the agreement will be overseen by an independent monitor, Joseph A. Smith Jr. Smith has served as the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks since 2002. Smith is also the former Chairman of the Conference of State Banks Supervisors (CSBS). The monitor will oversee implementation of the servicing standards required by the agreement; impose penalties of up to $1 million per violation (or up to $5 million for certain repeat violations); and publish regular public reports that identify any quarter in which a servicer fell short of the standards imposed in the settlement.
   The agreement resolves certain violations of civil law based on mortgage loan servicing activities. The agreement does not prevent state and federal authorities from pursuing criminal enforcement actions related to this or other conduct by the servicers. The agreement does not prevent the government from punishing wrongful securitization conduct that will be the focus of the new Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group. The United States also retains its full authority to recover losses and penalties caused to the federal government when a bank failed to satisfy underwriting standards on a government-insured or government-guaranteed loan. The agreement does not prevent any action by individual borrowers who wish to bring their own lawsuits. State attorneys general also preserved, among other things, all claims against the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), and all claims brought by borrowers.
   For more information about the mortgage servicing settlement, go towww.NationalMortgageSettlement.com. To find your state attorney general’s website, go towww.NAAG.org and click on “The Attorneys General.”

Fitch: U.S. Residential Construction Still Distressed

   CHICAGO - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 10/20/2011 - Despite recent signs of stabilization in housing starts and new home sales data, Fitch Ratings expects U.S. residential construction activity to remain at distressed levels moving into 2012.
  The September housing starts release by the Commerce Department on October 19 pointed to a modest increase in single-family home starts, but applications for building permits were down slightly versus August, suggesting near-term weakness in new construction activity. The rise in the annualized level of total housing starts to 658,000 in September, up 15 percent from August, reflects some strengthening from this summer's trough, but the biggest driver of monthly gains was a pick-up in multi-family starts, which grew by 51 percent on an annualized basis from August to September.
   Separately, applications for new mortgages declined last week, and the National Association of Homebuilders' confidence index rose but remained at a distressed level. Taken together, recent data provide little support for the view that lower long-term interest rates are driving a material pick-up in the housing market.
   New home demand remains weak in the face of high existing home inventory levels, continuing foreclosure pressure and a persistently weak employment picture. In light of the continuing imbalance in supply and demand, Fitch forecasts very modest growth of approximately 1 percent in U.S. home prices for 2012.
   Although average 30-year mortgage rates have fallen to about 4 percent, near a 40-year low, new home buyer demand is still being depressed by poor jobs growth, tough credit standards applied by lenders and ample availability of competing home inventory.
   Fitch expects new home sales to grow at a rate of 7 percent in 2012, off of a still-depressed 2011 base. Somewhat less competition from distressed home sales, fewer low-cost rental alternatives and historically low interest rates should contribute to the modest rise in single-family home sales next year.

Higher Home Prices Reduce Housing Affordability

   LOS ANGELES - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 8/11/2011 - Housing affordability fell throughout most areas of the state in the second quarter of 2011, primarily due to a seasonal increase in home prices, the California Association of Realtors (C.A.R.) reported today.
   The percentage of buyers who could afford to purchase a median-priced, single-family home in California declined to 51 percent in the second quarter of 2011, down from 53 percent in first-quarter 2011 but was up from 46 percent in the second quarter of 2010, according to C.A.R.’s Traditional Housing Affordability Index (HAI).
    C.A.R.’s HAI measures the percentage of all households that can afford to purchase a median-priced, single-family home in California. C.A.R. also reports affordability indices for regions and select counties within the state. The Index is considered the most fundamental measure of housing well-being for home buyers in the state.
    “The pending cut in the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac high cost loan limits will make it harder and more expensive for those who live in high cost areas to purchase a home,” said C.A.R. President Beth L. Peerce. “Buyers who plan to finance their home purchase with a mortgage of $625,500 or more will face higher interest rates, higher down payments, and tighter loan qualification requirements beginning Oct. 1. Those in a position to buy should act before the loan limits are reduced,” Peerce noted.
    Mortgage rates in the second quarter of 2011 were essentially unchanged from the first quarter of 2011, but were down from second-quarter 2010.
   Buyers needed to earn a minimum annual income of $63,080 to qualify for the purchase of a $293,580 statewide median-priced home in the second quarter of 2011. The monthly payment, including taxes and insurance, would be $1,580, assuming a 20 percent down payment and an effective composite interest rate of 4.85 percent.
    Regionally, housing affordability fell in the higher-priced areas of the state, such as the San Francisco Bay Area and Central Coast, but edged up in lower-priced areas, such as the Central Valley. At 77 percent, San Bernardino County was the most affordable, while San Mateo County was the least affordable, with only 21 percent of households able to afford the county’s median-priced home.
    Visit http://www.car.org/marketdata/data/haitraditional/ to see C.A.R.’s historical housing affordability data. For first-time buyer housing affordability data, visit http://www.car.org/marketdata/data/ftbhai/.

Group Says Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac are Needed

   LOS ANGELES - (BUSINESS WIRE) - 2/14/2011 - In response to the White House’s recommendations last week to phase out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the California Association of Realtors said the elimination of government involvement would raise borrowing costs for home buyers and severely restrict a safe and affordable flow of financing, further impeding the still-fragile housing market recovery.
   “A reduced government presence in the mortgage market will raise the cost of homeownership and make mortgages less available,” CAR President Beth L. Peerce said. “Moreover, Congress needs to understand that during economic downturns, the housing market needs government involvement to ensure capital stability. History has shown the private market is incapable and unwilling to step in during the hardest of times and meet the demands of the nation’s home buyers.”
   CAR, along with the National Association of Realtors, believes that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) should be converted into government-chartered, non-profit corporations. Such an entity would ensure government’s role in a stable real estate finance system, while eliminating the conflict created by the GSE’s current charter allowing for a private profit and public loss structure. With a clear explicit guarantee by the government, these entities would continue to be able to offer low interest rate loans onto home buyers and assure investor confidence.
    The White House’s proposal to allow the maximum loan limit to drop back to $625,500 in high cost areas also would hamper California’s housing recovery
   “California dominates the jumbo loan market and cannot afford a reduced loan limit. The homeownership rate here consistently has lagged behind national figures for the last three decades,” Peerce said. “Any reduction to the conforming loan limit will prevent low- and moderate-income home buyers in high-cost areas from accessing low cost, low rate mortgages.”
    The conforming loan limit determines the maximum size of a mortgage that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can buy or “guarantee.” Non-conforming or “jumbo loans” typically carry higher mortgage interest rates than conforming loans, increasing monthly payments and hampering the ability of families in California to purchase homes by making them less affordable.
    GSE key points:
  • The national loan limit for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is $417,000. Only in areas where the median home price is above $417,000 does the higher loan limit apply, which allows all homebuyers to have equal and fair access to affordable capital.
  • An efficient and adequately regulated secondary market is essential to providing affordable mortgages to consumers. The secondary market, where mortgages are securitized and/or combined into bonds, is an important and reliable source of capital for lenders, and therefore, for consumers.
  • Without a secondary market, mortgage interest rates would be unnecessarily higher and unaffordable for many Americans. In addition, an inadequate secondary market would impede both recovery in housing and the overall economic recovery.
  • Government-sponsored entities have a separate legal identity from the federal government but serve a public purpose. Unlike a federal agency, the entities will have considerable political independence and be self-sustaining, given the appropriate structure.
  • The mission of the GSEs would be to ensure a strong, efficient financing environment for homeownership and rental housing, including access to mortgage financing for segments of the population that have the demonstrated ability to sustain homeownership. Middle class consumers need a steady flow of mortgage funding that only government backing can provide.
  • The entities should guarantee or insure a wide range of safe, reliable mortgage products such as 30- and 15-year fixed-rate loans, traditional ARMs, and other products that have stood the test of time and for which American homeowners have demonstrated a strong ability to repay.
  • There must be strong oversight of the entities (for example, by the Federal Housing Finance Agency – FHFA, or a successor agency) that includes the providing of timely reports to allow for continual evaluation of the entities’ performance.

Crisis Commission Cites Culprits Behind Meltdown


1/27/2011 - Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission says crisis was avoidable, issues comprehensive, 500-plus page report. Details of the report and a copy can be obtained here: http://www.fcic.gov/

Veros Predicts Home Values Will Rise in 2011

   SANTA ANA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- 12/23/10 - The San Diego area regained its lead position for the strongest home price appreciation over the next 12 months in the most recent update to the U.S. real estate market forecast from Veros Real Estate Solutions, an industry leader in enterprise risk management and collateral valuation services.
   Veros’ U.S. real estate market forecast, VeroFORECAST, uses advanced analytics and micro-market data to achieve highly accurate results, and is utilized by economists, statisticians and business leaders as a key resource for forecasting and strategic planning due to its consistent strength and accuracy over the eight years the forecast has been available.
   The forecast for December 2010 through December 2011 indicates that select markets in the U.S. can expect to witness 2.5-3.5 percent appreciation on home values over the next 12 months, including Washington State’s tri-city area, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Fargo, North Dakota, and the Washington D.C. metro area. Florida, Reno, Nevada and Boise, Idaho will experience the nation’s greatest depreciation rates in the coming 12 months, a trend which continues from prior periods.












Projected Five Strongest Markets*
1. San Diego / Carlsbad / San Marcos, CA +3.5 percent
2. Kennewick / Richland / Pasco, WA +3.4 percent
3. Pittsburgh, PA +2.7 percent
4. Fargo, ND-MN +2.6 percent
5. Washington / Arlington / Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV +2.5 percent








 








Projected Five Weakest Markets*
1. Reno / Sparks, NV -7.2 percent
2. Orlando / Kissimmee, FL -6.5 percent
3. Boise City / Nampa, ID -6.4 percent
4. Deltona / Daytona Beach / Ormond Beach, FL -6.3 percent
5. Port St. Lucie / Fort Pierce, FL -6.3 percent










 Strengthening Markets
    The Central Plains and Texas continue to see positive appreciation compared to prior periods, with generally good forecasts in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, North Dakota and Iowa. A strengthening trend is also spreading to the Midwest with encouraging numbers in parts of Mississippi, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. San Diego, California continues its consistent pattern of staying among the nation’s leaders in home value gains. “Smaller metro markets with populations less than 250,000 make up the majority of the better appreciating markets,” says Eric Fox, Veros’ vice president of statistical and economic modeling, crediting affordability factors.
Weak Markets
    The outlook for Florida remains weak, with six of the 10 U.S. markets expecting the greatest depreciation. Other especially weak forecasts include Reno / Sparks, Nevada, California’s interior, much of Idaho, and western portions of Washington and Oregon.
Good News
    “It is noteworthy that depreciating forecasts remain much better than those from a year ago with nothing worse than 7 percent depreciation,” Fox said. “A year ago, we were seeing some markets with depreciation rates in the double-digit range.
    “Approximately 40 percent of all major metro areas are forecast to appreciate over the next 12 months, even though appreciation is expected to be mild. Looking out to the 12 to 24 month horizon, nearly 60 percent of markets are expected to appreciate,” he says. “So while things aren’t happening rapidly, the forecast indicates they are getting better.”
    VeroFORECAST provides forecasts on the national real estate market with the capacity to segment results by property types, by three distinct pricing tiers – upper, middle and entry-level – and by metro area, county or zip code. The forecast utilizes more than 50 critical decisioning factors in its forecast analytics to develop reliable market trend predictions covering more than 900 counties, more than 300 metro areas and nearly 14,000 zip codes.
   Key factors range from interest, unemployment and inflation rates, to housing inventory levels and an array of economic and geographic trends. Veros engineered VeroFORECAST in response to demand for more focused and useful reports featuring improved methods and emphasizing more localized data in its analytics.
    *Markets demonstrated are for residential real estate in major metro areas (typically greater than 500,000 residents) among single-family homes in the median price tier.

Refinancing Your Home in a Depressed Market

   (NewsUSA) - 8/25/2010 - Falling home values are a cause for concern for millions of American homeowners, mortgage lenders and the federal government.
    To help families dealing with lower home values and other personal crises, the Obama Administration announced the Making Home Affordable initiative that is designed to help between 7 million and 9 million Americans improve the affordability of their mortgage and prevent foreclosure.
   There are several programs under the Making Home Affordable initiative. One of these is the Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP). HARP is a refinance program for homeowners who are current on their mortgage payments, but unable to take advantage of the current low interest rates due to their home's depressed value. The program is also designed to assist borrowers in changing from a risky loan, like a negatively amortizing adjustable, into a more stable 30-year fixed rate.     There are several eligibility requirements for the HARP program, however the most important one is that your loan be owned or guaranteed by either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and you must work directly through your lender (the company that currently services your loan).
    Borrowers interested in knowing if they qualify for a HARP refinance program must contact their lender. You can also obtain general information about HARP, as well as access links to determine whether your loan is Fannie Mae- or Freddie Mac-owned or guaranteed, from the Making Home Affordable web site: http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/loan_lookup.html.
    Before your lender can make you an offer, you will need to fully document your income, which generally requires providing: your W-2s, recent bank statements and pay stubs. The PMI Mortgage Insurance Co. has a helpful mortgage-assessment form at www.homesafepmi.com, where you can input the information your lender will likely require.
   Given the backlog of requests, the process from phone call to decision may take 60 to 90 days.
   Source: NewsUSA