Posts Tagged ‘money’

Reflecting on the Impact of an Extended Tax Credit

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

uncle-sam-stimulus-package-2Last week a bi-partisan deal was announced in the Senate that will likely pave the way for the new homebuyer’s tax credit to be extended through April 2010.  The deal also includes plans for a significant expansion of the tax credit, raising the income requirements to $125,000 per individual and $225,000 per couple from $75,000 per individual and $150,000 per couple. This expansion means that many more individuals will be eligible for the tax credit than were previously. Finally, the deal added a $6,500 tax credit will be available to homeowners wishing to move out of their current home into a more expensive one.

I have been thinking about the deal all weekend, and I worry about its effects. While the goal of the credit is to strengthen the market and help bring home prices back up, increasing income requirements and adding a tax credit to incentivize trading up seems like it risks exacerbating the current problems in the housing market.  Many of the current problems in the housing market have been created by homeowners (many first-time homeowners) taking out mortgages that were more than they could afford to pay in order to buy homes. Even when they could afford the mortgage, the recent economic problems have led many to be out of work or find their401(k)s and pensions to be less than they had expected. Consequently, the number of foreclosures and mortgage delinquencies reached all time highs in recent months.

In light of these developments, some proposed that maybe homeownership should no longer be an essential part of the American Dream.  It was argued that it is a disservice to put people into homes they cannot afford. While the tax credit is not a very large sum of money, it is enough money to push individuals to act in uncertain times.  A realtor in Portland, ME commented that nearly 70% of their clients were motivated by the tax credit. Yes, the housing market could use a boost, but when individuals are making a significant long-term financial decision for a short-term financial incentive, it seems like many poor choices can occur.

Reverse mortgages and refinances are available to help homeowners who find themselves over-extended, but reverse mortgages are only available to those over 62, and refinances and short pays have been extremely hard to get.  To avoid another housing crisis, the government does need to stimulate the market, but putting more borrowers into homes they cannot afford does not seem to be a safe way to do so.

Insurance Against Financial Fraud/Swindling

Friday, June 5th, 2009

Reverse Mortgage Daily wrote a blog post today focusing on the case of a man in Minnesota who pleaded guilty to swindling his mother and was sentenced to the maximum thirty days in jail and five years of probation.  Amongst the ways the man swindled his mother was through a reverse mortgage, and the writer wondered if there was a way to protect seniors from such crimes without harming the reverse mortgage industry.

I think the answer is yes. 

Every year there are several stories of individuals who have been swindled out of their life savings.  We could protect those individuals without harming the reverse mortgage industry by allowing them to buy insurance that would protect their life’s savings if someone has been convicted of defrauding or swindling them, allowing them to replace a portion of the money they have lost and ensuring that they still have money to live on in their old age. 

Private companies and/or states could offer insurance against swindling/financial fraud. The insurance could be either mandatory or optional, and could taken out by the policy holder at any point throughout their life. In the same way the FDIC ensures up to $100,000 of each individual’s money in case of a bank failure, the financial fraud insurance would serve to protect an individual’s life savings against instances of swindling, theft, or fraud. While the policy would not necessarily be unlimited, policies of even up to $100,000 could do a lot to ensure that individual’s life savings are protected.  Although cases of fraud are not incredibly common, they can be catastrophic to the individuals involved when they do occur.  These policies would benefit those involved in something like the Madoff scandal as well. 

The only way to collect on the insurance policy would be to show that an individual and/or corporation had been convicted of swindling the policy holder.  In this case, the guilty plea from the son would be sufficient to guarantee the mother her pay out.  If such insurance existed and the  mother was able to collect on it, she would be left with more than the eighty dollars currently remaining in her bank account.

Correction: The man was sentenced to thirty days in jail, not thirty years.