On Tuesday, HUD and the CFPB opened the door to special-purpose mortgage finance. Now, we expect FHFA to use this safe harbor to mandate express GSE equitable-finance programs and for banks to take much of what’s left in all their commitments after George Floyd’s murder and turn it into mortgage and other community-finance products.
The full report is available to subscription clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…
On Tuesday, HUD and the CFPB opened the door to special-purpose mortgage finance. Now, we expect FHFA to use this safe harbor to mandate express GSE equitable-finance programs and for banks to take much of what’s left in all their commitments after George Floyd’s murder and turn it into mortgage and other community-finance products.
The full report is available to subscription clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…
As expected, today’s hearing with Comptroller-nominee Saule Omarova included an unprecedented amount of fireworks for what is normally a low profile appointment. In this report, we omit analysis of the debate on Ms. Omarova’s origins and alleged Marxism, instead assessing policy issues germane should Ms. Omarova succeed in what seems an increasingly difficult confirmation. Notably, moderate Democrats such as Sens. Tester (D-MT) and Warner (D-VA) were clearly concerned with Ms. Omarova’s opposition to the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA), while Republicans lambasted her for previous comments about cutting off credit to the oil and gas industry and proposals they believed would nationalize U.S. banking.
The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…
Later this week, the Senate Banking Committee will hold Saule Omarova’s confirmation hearing for Comptroller of the Currency. Many expect this to be a knock-down, drag-out between the progressive bank-reform agenda and the banking industry’s antipathy thereto. This it surely will be, but to watch only these fireworks is to miss the longer-burning fire below: renewed questions about whether banks are public utilities or private companies with unique privileges fully reimbursed by virtue of unduly-burdensome regulation. It is by this choice — not Ms. Omarova’s most-uncertain confirmation — that the future of U.S. finance will be decided.
Although Ms. Omarova has surely moved on from the Marxist views of which she is accused based on an early academic paper, she clearly sides with those who think that banking is for public purpose, not private profit. Indeed, according to at least some of her work, banking can’t be trusted to banks and thus should be seconded to the federal government or outside experts presumed to be not just objective, but also disinterested in all but the public good.
This is not a new view. After the S&L crisis of the 1980s and the subsequent banking debacle in the early part of the next decade, much was made of the subsidy banks were said to enjoy from unique access to FDIC insurance and the Fed’s discount window. Bankers strongly disputed any subsidy, but I said then and believe now that banks then indeed enjoyed special-purpose charters that warranted not just tough safety-and-soundness …
Progressive Democrats in the House and Senate have introduced legislation demanding an array of new decision factors governing bank M&A transactions and new or even revised BHC activities. President Biden’s executive order demanding more competitive U.S. markets includes numerous bank-related provisions, but does so largely through requests of independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve to work with the Department of Justice to reduce bank consolidation and enhance community service. This legislation backs up these goals with binding requirements that dramatically alter the public-interest, financial, and competitive analyses on which M&A or BHC activities have long been assessed. Many more acquisitions, especially by or among large banks, would almost surely be rejected and the process might also become so public as to undermine the confidentiality essential to initial M&A agreement.
The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…
A week ago Thursday, I was honored to participate in a Congressional Black Caucus Foundation forum assessing the extent to which the Fed exacerbates U.S. economic inequality. Views were mixed on that front, but several panelists stoutly condemned financial institutions for actively discriminating against people and communities of color and the Fed for allowing them to get away with it. That won’t be the last we hear of this.
As our recent assessment of the latest mortgage data make clear, these allegations are not without merit. That underlying factors are complex and sometimes include contradictory evidence does not belie the fact that data remain problematic, the industry is deeply distrusted, and the White House has made racial equity a top-priority Presidential action item. First to what the data do and don’t show and then to what will be done about them unless some of the things that can instead be done are quickly done.
The latest HMDA data show troubling denial disparity ratios (DDRs), interest-rate, and cost disparities when minorities are compared to whites. The DDR for Blacks was 2.6:1, rates were .125 percentage points higher, and the cost of a loan was 38% more. Black credit scores were the lowest among demographic groups (690) and loan amounts were the smallest, but these differences are still striking.
Little noticed but even more puzzling are the DDRs for Asians versus whites. Asian DDRs were 1.4:1 even though credit score and loan amounts were the highest of all demographic groups. …