Implode-o-Meter:

STOP “FHA Subprime” and Downpayment Money Laundering -
STOP H.R. 600!!! (formerly H.R. 6694)
A Blatant & Unconscionable Abuse of the Taxpayer & Cause of More Foreclosures

This practice has been criticized or ruled against by the FHA, the GAO, the IRS, the FBI, and even US Congress itself, which outlawed it (for the time being) in the 2008 Housing Bill. Yet those who profit off the practice are trying to revive it.

So What is it??

The contentious practice is called “seller-funded downpayment assistance” (SFDPA). It is used to allow home buyers getting Federally-backed mortgages to bypass the need for a downpayment, supposedly for charitable reasons.

On the surface, it sounds benign, but it is actually fraud and money laundering inflicted on the Federal Housing Administration (that is, taxpayers), the housing market in general, and in a sense, even the buyers!

One of these companies, Global Direct Sales (which runs the “Grant America Program”) has sued us in an attempt to stop us from revealing the existence of SFDPA and discussing it frankly. SO FAR A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS BLOCKED THEIR ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE US. (Read More about our battle here. Help us to fight this NUISANCE lawsuit which is a blatant attack on free speech!)

How SFDPA works:

Someone wants badly to sell a home. FHA has subsidized programs to help home buyers. The “problem” is that even with FHA’s programs, a 3.5% down payment is still required (to show committment on the part of the buyer). Sellers realize if they could cut the downpayment to zero, they can make home buyers out of virtually anyone, and hence unload homes easier. Intermediaries like Realtors, as well as home builders, realize this would have the potential to increase their sales and transactions. Even some in Congress are in on the scheme, as they can appear to provide constituents with “free homes”. After all, home ownership is a right, isn’t it??

Enter SFDPA.

Third party, private companies have established programs that allow sellers to cover the downpayment FOR the borrowers, by promising to repay the money after the sale. While initially the downpayment is covered by the SFDPA company, the seller’s money is then channeled through one or more entities which have a nonprofit or otherwise “exempt” status (like an Indian tribe) to repay them. The buyer has already presented the LENT money to the FHA as if it were their own, covering the required downpayment. Effectively, the seller has paid the buyer’s downpayment, with the FHA being none the wiser.

The FHA has no reliable way of knowing which loans were made this way.

The GAO has found that transactions using SFDPA usually have been marked up by about 3%… in other words, USUALLY THE SFDPA DOWNPAYMENT MONEY COMES FROM SIMPLY MARKING UP THE HOME VALUE!!!

Why is this bad? Well,

  • it distorts home prices, and creates an incentive to keep exaggerating prices upwards endlessly
  • it means ALL the money for the purchase actually comes from the FHA (taxpayers), as it is rolled into the loan principle (in other words, the FHA nets NOTHING of real value)
  • since the markup in value is not “real”, it means the buyer immediately has a zero or negative equity position, relative to true market prices

This is bad all around — for everyone, that is, except the seller and the intermediaries INCLUDING THE SFDPA COMPANIES, WHO MAKE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS IN “FEES” OFF EACH TRANSACTION. These companies have netted millions off of SFDPA, given the popularity of the programs with builders and Realtors (in other words, those who want to see homes sell, no matter what).

So why in the world is there a bill to get this practice started again? PERHAPS BECAUSE ITS CONGRESSIONAL SPONSORS LIKE THE DONATIONS THE SFDPA COMPANIES, REALTORS, AND BUILDERS KEEP SENDING IN, to help insure this particular loophole is kept open, and other “housing-friendly” giveaway legislation is put forth. The main sponsors are:

Does SFDPA Actually Help Homebuyers?

Some argue that SFDPA should be allowed because it helps people get into homes. But this makes no sense:

  • If no-money-down loans were a good idea, why wouldn’t the FHA just provide 100% financing itself, and cut out the middle-men? [In fact, the FHA has tried and been blocked in the past... by the SFDPA companies!]
  • If the loans were actually charitable, wouldn’t the money come from charities, instead of the home sellers? [The IRS agrees. Sellers contractually COMMIT to "donate" the money to cover the buyers' downpayment]
  • Think about what is going to happen to these loans in a market of falling prices, with greater job loss, forcing more people to sell & move [All of the performance statistics for these loans, as disturbing as they were, were from good times!]
  • Haven’t we learned as a society that loans with “no skin in the game” are inherently unsound and a bad idea, as they simply lead to foreclosures? [Some people apparently havent -- or they don't care!]

Why Did The Bill Number Change?

The original SFDPA-resurrection bill, H.R. 6694, specifically instituted fees to attempt to cover the risk of SFDPA lending. However:

  • The fees were essentially subprime “risk premiums,” increasing as FICO scores went down. But these practices have already been reviled and discredited!
  • Proponents argued that the FHA would “make money” on the program because of the risk premiums, but neglected to point out that the fees would be simply refunded after a history of on-time payments.
  • If the loans went into default, the FHA would likely lose money. Since home values start off inflated, it is unlikely the “risk premiums” would cover losses (and FHA is already operating at a loss for the first time in its 7-decade history).

The end result: SFDPA borrowers would be treated just like subprime borrowers, and the FHA (taxpayers) would still likely lose lots of money overall.

HR 600 simply omits the risk-based premium regime, leaving it to be instituted by FHA rules after the law passes. We believe this is simply a tactic to deflect criticism — especially of the use of FICO scores — not to actually change the nature of the SFDPA law.

The law is substantially the same — the renewed SFDPA would provide no-money-down, subprime-like loans, at great peril to the FHA and taxpayer. It would continue to inflate home values, and likely lead a great many home buyers into foreclosure.

IT MUST BE STOPPED.

How you can help:

  • Write to and call the bill sponsors expressing your opinion, and to your congressmen to get them to apply pressure to stop the bill.
  • Donate to us in our legal fight to keep our free speech on this subject, and defend the pocketbooks of all taxpayers.
  • Spread the word — put STOP “FHA SUBPRIME” buttons on your web page, and link to this page.

More Campaign Banners:

250×250 black — Copy/paste

<a href=”http://ml-implode.com/sfdpacampaign.html”><img src=”http://s3.amazonaws.com/iehi-img-mli/250x250stopsfdpabk.png” alt=”STOP HR 600: STOP ‘FHA Subprime!’” /></a>

250×250 white — Copy/paste

Category: Bailouts, BP Cafe, Credit

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

2 Responses to “Implode-o-Meter Rolls Out Campaign Against “FHA Subprime””

  1. Boomer says:

    The biggest issue with 100% financing, is that all sorts of games can be played. Valuation in housing is a very messy business and someone with evil intentions can fit the comps to the value in many instances. Also with 100% financing you get the people who are completely impulse buyers with little money to their name. Not exactly the type of people you want to ramrod into a house.

    If you have seller funded DPA + FHA then the FHA underwriting should be much stricter for that group of people. Much lower debt to income ratios.

    I think the politicians really believe they are helping poor people get into homes by reducing the amount of money they need to buy. But the fact is these type of loans (IMHO) are the ones that lead to the highest abuse of the poor. The politicians need to sit and learn all the issues involved before moving forward with this bill. If they did understand I think they would defeat it easily. I can only hope and pray that “100% financing” is a deadly enough phrase to kill the bill before it is passed.

  2. if these peeps, the poli-s, cared about ‘poor people’, they’d look at “Home costs v. Rent”- comparos, and incentivize them Not to make the transaction into HomeOwer-ship..

    But, alas…