Mortgage Prof.: FHA Reverse Mortgage Needs to Appeal to a Different Crowd

Basing reverse mortgage policy changes on the recent actuarial report that found the Federal Housing Administration’s finances to be well into the red would be a mistake, writes Jack Guttentag, a.k.a. The Mortgage Professor in column this week. 

The report, while it holds merit, includes assumptions based on changing forecasts that vary from year to year. Further, while there are fixes needed in the FHA’s home equity conversion mortgage program, they may not be the changes FHA is targeting currently. 

Guttentag writes: 

Advertisement

…The critical problem of the HECM is that it attracts too many borrowers with short time horizons and poor payment habits, looking for as much cash in hand as possible, who impose heavy costs on FHA’s insurance reserve fund. And it is not attracting enough borrowers who need steady financial help to stay in their homes during their retirement years, or who will have intermittent needs over extended periods. The HECM program was designed to serve the second group, which also imposes much lower costs on the reserve fund than the first group.

…The standard fixed-rate option can be criticized for providing an incentive to exhaust all borrowing power at the beginning, attracting those who are most shortsighted, and encouraging others to become shortsighted.

This is inconsistent with the major objective of the HECM program, which is to help seniors stay in their homes by providing funding during their retirement years — not concentrated at the outset of retirement. Allowing seniors to withdraw it all upfront leaves nothing to withdraw later on when needs may be greater.

Losses to FHA on fixed-rate cash-out loans are much higher than those on HECMs that fund over time. Equity depletion is greater in the early years, which can discourage maintenance and encourage property tax defaults.

View the full article on Inman News and the Mortgage Professor’s website.  

Written by Elizabeth Ecker

Join the Conversation (1)

see all

This is a professional community. Please use discretion when posting a comment.

  • The mortgage professor gets much right in his opinion piece but the following two sentences prohibits endorsement:

    “Losses to FHA on fixed-rate cash-out loans are much higher than those on HECMs that fund over time. Equity depletion is greater in the early years, which can discourage maintenance and encourage property tax defaults.”

    All HECMs fund after the required period of rescission, if any. The last half decade have proven that so called “equity depletion” from accrued costs and payouts may not be nearly as detrimental to equity than loss in home value. Why so much of the mortgage industry (I am also a real estate broker) insists at looking primarily at what happens to the the subtrahend (liens and debts) of the equity subtraction equation and not the minuend (value) is ridiculous.

string(116) "https://reversemortgagedaily.com/2013/01/28/mortgage-prof-fha-reverse-mortgage-needs-to-appeal-to-a-different-crowd/"

Share your opinion