Are We Returning to a Path of Owing Our Souls to the Company Store?

The Center for American Progress recently completed two related reports that are read-worthy:

Cash for Homes: Policy Implications of an Investor-Led Housing Recovery

Across the country, investors have been taking advantage of the nation’s foreclosure crisis to purchase homes at bargain prices, often beating out potential homeowners who have been a bit hesitant to purchase, frequently choosing to sideline themselves. In July 2013, cash-on-hand investors bought about 55 percent of the homes sold in Las Vegas and numerous properties in other major metropolitan areas such as Miami, Phoenix, and Prince George’s County, Maryland, a suburb of Washington, D.C.

Investors can play a key role in a housing recovery. By absorbing excess inventory, they establish a floor for home prices and jump-start appreciation. Responsible investors can also offer quality, affordable rental opportunities to families who may be locked out of home ownership due to foreclosure or lost wealth from the recession.

But while they can support communities, irresponsible investors can also destroy them by allowing properties to sit empty, declining to bring rental properties up to code, and neglecting tenants’ needs in instances where the home is occupied. Additionally, investors that buy large quantities of properties in a single area can cause prices to overheat and increase market volatility. Conversely, if institutional investors following a set business plan sell numerous properties in the same time frame, prices in those neighborhoods could decline again.

Read this full PDF report here

When Wall Street Buys Main Street
The Implications of Single-Family Rental Bonds for Tenants and Housing Markets

In October 2013, an institutional investor created the first triple-A-rated, mortgage-backed security supported by revenue from single-family rental properties, a development that may offer even lower-cost financing to institutional buyers than has been available thus far through bank credit lines. A mortgage-backed security is created by pooling assets together and then selling interests in that pool to investors, who then receive regular payments from the asset pool. This process provides access to a much larger pool of investors than would otherwise be feasible, increasing liquidity and generally providing a less expensive source of funding than traditional borrowing from banks or private investors.

In this instance, a subsidiary of the private equity firm Blackstone took out a $479.1 million loan from Deutsche Bank that was secured by a pool of more than 3,000 single-family rental homes. The loan was then turned into a security that was purchased by investors, who now receive monthly rental cash payments from the homes. If the loan is not repaid, the trustee—the legal representative of the bondholders—has the right to seize the homes.

The emergence of a new form of mortgage-backed securities tied to single-family rentals is certain to have an impact on the housing market, communities, and tenants. Analysts predict that the funding of single-family rental acquisitions through securitization will likely become a dominant model quickly; American Homes 4 Rent and Colony American Homes, two new single-family rental firms, are reportedly preparing to launch single-family rental bonds in the coming months. The market for this new asset class is expected to top $70 billion per year by 2016, on par with the bond financing for apartment buildings, casinos, and commercial real estate for this year. While institutional investors only represent a fraction of those in the housing market—mid-sized companies and small mom-and-pop investors who own less than 10 properties are currently far more prevalent in most markets—securitization may begin to shift this balance.

Depending on the success of this new asset class, investor appetite for these types of bonds may boost the size and scope of this relatively new and untested industry to a level that may not be sustainable, either because the industry does not have the capacity to manage thousands of new homes or because a significant increase in purchases inflates home prices.

Read the full PDF Report here.


This material above was created by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. It was created for the Progress Report, the daily e-mail publication of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Click here to subscribe.

Advertisements

Tweet of the Day on Gas Prices

Today’s tweet of the day comes from Nancy Pelosi:

However, if you listen to the GOP’s candidates, they claim the President has absolutely hindered oil exploration and drilling at every turn and should they be elected President they will increase drilling and, as one is claiming (the Newt), will bring gas prices down to $2.50/gallon.

Now that’s interesting.  Out of one side of their faces, they’re claiming they’re for small government so insignificant you could fit it in a thimble such that the free market could take off like a rocket and fuel the seeds of economic growth across America.  Out of the other side of their faces, they’re proposing to jump right in the middle of the free market and ensure Americans get their next oil energy fix at a “fixed” price?

I call that hypocrisy!  Either we have a “free market” or we don’t.  Either it’s the President’s fault or he’s not.  Frankly, if you want to blame anyone, you should blame President Bush.  He’s the one who appointed CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton whose job it is on the Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee of the US Commodity Futures Training Commission to quell rampant speculation of OIL commodities on Wall Street.  What’s he done?  Zip.  Nada.  Nothing.

Maybe the GOP candidates should take the advice of one of their own, who defended then President Bush on FauxNews during the 2008 campaign year when gas prices hit the $4 range (right before the entire economy took a trip south and everybody forgot about how bad they were because everything else was so much worse than that).