Senate Housing Bill Generates Scant Support

RSS stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com Share this on Facebook

ANDREW TAYLOR | April 10, 2008 05:04 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday passed a bipartisan package of tax breaks and other steps designed to help businesses and homeowners weather the housing crisis.

The measure passed by an impressive 84-12 vote, but even its supporters acknowledge it's tilted too much in favor of businesses such as home builders and does little to help borrowers at risk of losing their homes.

The plan combines large tax breaks for homebuilders and a $7,000 tax credit for people who buy foreclosed properties, as well as $4 billion in grants for communities to buy and fix up abandoned homes.

The measure, titled the Foreclosure Prevention Act, will be significantly redrawn by House critics who say it favors businesses such as home builders instead of borrowers.

"Quite candidly, what we've done does not quite live up to the title," said Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and the measure's top sponsor. "We have more work to do. We do not do enough in preventing more foreclosures in the country."

Democrats failed to win approval of ideas such as giving people threatened with losing their homes the right to seek more favorable loan terms from their lenders in bankruptcy courts. At the same time, a proposal to have the government back up refinanced loans for people facing foreclosure has yet to win GOP support.

The White House opposes the plan but has not issued an explicit veto threat. It says parts of the legislation would make the problem worse by depressing some home values, and that the measure inappropriately uses taxpayer money to bail out lenders saddled with foreclosed houses.

The House is likely to reject key portions of the Senate measure, including $25 billion over three years in tax breaks for money-losing businesses such as home builders. A plan adopted Wednesday by a key House panel dropped that idea as well as the tax credit for purchasers of foreclosed homes.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the Financial Services Committee Chairman, said the tax credit was "like paying a dog to eat a bone," and called the business tax break "a mistake."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., acknowledged that changes will be needed in upcoming talks with the House and the White House.

"This is just the beginning of the process," Reid said. "This bill will go to the House. With the House and the White House we can come up with a piece of legislation fairly quickly."

Before passing the measure, the Senate added $6 billion in unrelated tax breaks for renewable energy producers, despite Senate rules that say tax cuts must be "paid for" with revenue increases elsewhere in the tax code.

The bill also offers $150 billion for pre-foreclosure counseling and stronger loan disclosure requirements.

The $25 billion tax break the plan offers to homebuilders and other businesses absorbing heavy losses and the energy tax package were both dropped from an economic rescue plan enacted in February. Critics of those proposals said they were overly expensive and would not stimulate the economy.

But deepening public worries about the housing crisis appear to have emboldened lawmakers to swell the $9 trillion deficit to pay for the measures.

The $7,000 tax credit for the purchase of foreclosed homes, opponents argue, would unfairly reward purchases that would have happened anyway while possibly devaluing other homes. It also could give banks an incentive to foreclose on homes by subsidizing purchases of such properties.

The measure calls for a long-awaited modernization of the Federal Housing Administration that would enable more homeowners to refinance into loans backed by the Depression-era agency.

It includes $10.9 billion in tax-free mortgage revenue bonds to help homeowners refinance subprime loans, a move endorsed by President Bush.

A House bill takes a far different tack, steering tax breaks toward first-time home-buyers and investors in low-income rental housing. The measure is likely to be paired with a broader housing rescue package being drafted by Frank that would have the FHA step in to back $300 billion in refinanced loans for 1 million or more homeowners who otherwise might face foreclosure.

Frank said his panel would consider the plan April 23-24.

Under a similar plan by Dodd, the FHA would insure up to $400 billion in loans.

The Bush administration countered those plans Wednesday with its own, far narrower, proposal. It would expand an existing FHA program to allow more homeowners who are facing large rate hikes to refinance into more affordable government-insured loans.

 
 

Comments
15
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- TN See Profile I'm a Fan of TN permalink

Oh I almost forgot. Thanks Nancy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 AM on 04/11/2008
- TN See Profile I'm a Fan of TN permalink

Screw Bush, if he veto's what the dems want, the whole country will know it and it will hurt the republicans. We'll do it next February instead. In any deal you have to be willing to walk. I'm really glad the homebuilders won't get a dime, they made fortunes on illegal labor and have lots of money in the bank, at least the owners of those companies do. I like Barney Franks proposal, why can't we the people loan them the money and make some money?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 AM on 04/11/2008
- MicahD See Profile I'm a Fan of MicahD permalink

To those who say people should not have gotten loans they could not afford. Hogwash, not every situation is black and white. Try to re-fi now, it's gotten a lot tougher. We need stability in the housing market for many reasons.
It is in our national interest to keep people in their homes, paying prop taxes and not sending them onto the street.
Homeowners need relief.
150 billion in counseling???? Kidding right. Spend that money on giving loan guarantees to people that need to keep their homes and qualify under certain conditions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:25 PM on 04/10/2008
- JoeBlough See Profile I'm a Fan of JoeBlough permalink

As has been mentioned many times before, if a person can't afford to keep the home they bought, they should lose it, so that someone who can afford it can buy it.

The only way most young buyers will ever be able to buy a home is if the price drops to meet the house's value. The Government bailout will only keep the price artificially higher than value. Thus keeping the young forever out of the market. Prices went sky high over a few short years. The value didn't.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 04/10/2008
- Thermodynamics See Profile I'm a Fan of Thermodynamics permalink

Cash Buyer Hurt Too

I am not a young buyer and I paid cash for the full purchase price but now I wish I had started renting 4 years ago. I need to move to another state for personal and job reasons but now I cannot find a buyer. The rental market is flooded.

A stable financial and market situation is basic for business. Let me repeat that. If you want to have business flourish, you need a stable economy so that people can make reasonable forecasts and know what will happen with investments. At least I am only complaining about a house. What if I had built a mall or an apartment complex?

About that $7k for foreclosure purchase specialists: they are called "vultures " in the real estate business.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 AM on 04/11/2008
- WMG See Profile I'm a Fan of WMG permalink

Thermo, your middle paragraph about stability reminds me of language used by Rothbard discussing business cycles and the Fed, in America's Great Depression. His point based on Austrian Economics, is that business cycles are inevitable and unavoidable, so a perfectly "stable" market will never exist for long periods of time. But most importantly, he stresses that the FED, with its manipulation of money supply and efforts to smooth the business cycle, will ALWAYS and inevitably create both inflation (debasement of currency) AND more violent boom/busts in the economy. And just like the entrepreneur who is disadvantaged by the false signals in the market place, in this latest boom/bust cycle, most homeowners got a taste of it too.

If the system does collapse and we get a reset, I'll be one of the ones pleading for giving it a try without a central bank¦ we did relatively better without one.

Good luck w/ everything.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 AM on 04/11/2008
- WMG See Profile I'm a Fan of WMG permalink

part 2
It seems quite obvious to me that this $7K gift is a direct subsidy to the owner of the bankrupt or near bankrupt home, i.e., the bank. Given two identical houses, one being offered by a responsible citizen, the other offered by a bank that made or bought a bad loan, which would you buy? You would buy the one with a $7K rebate. This provision picks money from the pockets of responsible citizens and taxpayers and the goes straight to the banks. Further, those buyers on the fence now will likely wait until this provision, and possibly other hoped-for gifts not yet dreamt up, come along to make their purchase decision easier. Thus this provision and others like it will likely delay the recovery in housing, not expedite it.

So are you so foolish that you believe this actually helps Main Street? Or are you happy to line the pockets of banks at the expense of the people you claim to represent? Which is it Senator?

As far as I can discern, this provision ranks right up there with Hummer tax credit passed in 2003. It clearly was written by industry for its own benefit to detriment of average citizens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 04/10/2008
- WMG See Profile I'm a Fan of WMG permalink

part 1
This article reminds me why I hate Democrats almost as much as I hate Republicans.

Set aside the criminal tax break to homebuilders, most of them closely held, who profited at staggering rates during the bubble.

Look at this little provision "for buyers":
"The $7,000 tax credit for the purchase of foreclosed homes, opponents argue, would unfairly reward purchases that would have happened anyway while possibly devaluing other homes. It also could give banks an incentive to foreclose on homes by subsidizing purchases of such properties."
Duh.
Here's my unanswered letter to Reid:

Dear Honorable Senator Reid,

I read with interest your remarks about the Senate housing bill:
""We helped Wall Street ... But now is our opportunity to take care of people on Main Street," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.
The Senate bill attempts to ease the impact on communities of foreclosed homes by offering a $7,000 tax credit spread over two years to buyers of homes in or near foreclosure."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 04/10/2008
- maggiemae656 See Profile I'm a Fan of maggiemae656 permalink

Good post, WMG...How can anyone think this bill is anything but another corporate rescue bill? Congress must be unaware that, for a change, people are paying attention to what they're doing. This is absolutely ridiculous.

I posted on another housing topic that I feel it is a travesty that home builders would get any breaks--they are notorious for hiring illegals, and have been a major player in the serious damage to our wage base. The government has done them huge favors already by way of turning a blind eye to their law breaking employment activities.

Since we don't need houses, why should home builders get credits and encouragement to build more houses? You cannot stimulate this economy unless you get us some jobs...and giving contractors money so they can pass it on to illegals--who in turn send it out of the country--is purely moronic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 04/10/2008
- WMG See Profile I'm a Fan of WMG permalink

thanks maggie...
Whatever the illegals siphon off, its got to be trivial compared to the bad debt that will be lost in the financial markets based on the fraudulent Wall Street structured finance that both supported and created this bubble. I mean, according the BB at the Fed, the $30B bailout of Bear was needed to avoid a collapse of the system. It is Wall Street's fraud and failures, and the consequences that flow from them, which most deserve the pubic's ire, in my view.

But you raise maybe the most important point of the bailouts: we are overbuilt and do not need to do ANYTHING to encourage more building. That politicians won't grasp and honor this most basic and obvious principle speaks volumes about their utter incompetence and corruption. I'm so far past being disgusted, I don't have a vocabulary to express how it makes me feel.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 AM on 04/11/2008
- mmckinl See Profile I'm a Fan of mmckinl permalink

Oh ... and more good news ... remember how the weak dollar would help the trade deficit ?

The trade deficit went up again anyway ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:20 PM on 04/10/2008
- mmckinl See Profile I'm a Fan of mmckinl permalink

And No Wonder ... Tax Breaks for Homebuilders ... for what? ... to put up more houses!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 04/10/2008
- nodonjuan See Profile I'm a Fan of nodonjuan permalink

I know people are having a hard time with their mortgages but, how about all the renters out there who will never be able to buy a home. Yes, that's me. No tax breaks for renters ever except 60.00 CA. state tax credit. Renters are second class citizens who's tax money is supporting greedy brokers, greedy realtors, greedy finance companies & house flippers. And, with so many people losing their homes, rents are increasing so, we lose again. Sucks to be a renter these days.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 04/10/2008
- TN See Profile I'm a Fan of TN permalink

Move to Tennessee. I wish I could move to CA but I can't afford to buy a home there. So I choose to stay here and own instead of go their and rent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 04/11/2008
- maggiemae656 See Profile I'm a Fan of maggiemae656 permalink

Agreed. I think that most people are having a hard time accepting that all of us will be held financially responsible for the mess that the banks, investors and the government have gotten us into. I have a feeling that people at risk of foreclosure are going to end up as renters soon, as opposed to any government assistance. Also think about the people who have already lost their homes and how they would feel if the government was to step in and rescue those who are still hanging by a thread. Do you think they would make any foreclosure action retroactive? Once the house is gone, it's gone. It's all a matter of timing, not of fairness.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 04/10/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

Stock Quote

Enter a ticker symbol below:

Data provided by AOL



Related Tags