by Calculated Risk on 1/06/2010 06:30:00 PM

A few related stories ...

From Jon Prior at HousingWire: CMBS Delinquencies Reach New All-Time High

For the first time since the industry began forming commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), delinquencies reached above 6%, according to a report from Trepp, which studies commercial real estate trends.

For the month of December, 6.07% of CMBS loans fell behind by 30 days or more, up from 5.65% in November and a far climb from 1.21% in December 2008.

And from the MBA: Commercial/Multifamily Real Estate Market Continues to Feel Effects of Economic Downturn

Commercial real estate markets show the strains of the downturn.

Vacancy rates rose in the third quarter for all major property types. For apartment properties, vacancy rates rose from 6.5 percent in the third quarter of 2008 to 8.4 percent in the third quarter of 2009. Industrial properties saw vacancy rates rise from 9.8 percent to 13.0 percent; office properties saw a rise from 16.0 percent to 19.4 percent and retail vacancies rose from 12.9 percent to 18.6 percent.

And asking rents have been falling – by 6 percent for apartments, 9 percent for industrial properties, 9 percent for office properties and 8 percent for retail properties. Even with lease terms muting some of the impact, the combination of falling rents and rising vacancies has placed greater pressure on properties’ bottom-lines.

More on the MBA Quarterly report with graphs from Diana Golobay at HousingWire: Commercial, Multifamily Lags With Vacancy, Delinquency, MBA Says

And from early this morning: Reis: Strip Mall Vacancy Rate Hits 10.6%, Highest on Record

by Calculated Risk on 1/06/2010 03:54:00 PM

I've excerpted below from a paper by New York Fed Researchers Andrew Haughwout, Ebiere Okah, and Joseph Tracy: Second Chances: Subprime Mortgage Modification and Re-Default

Although the paper uses subprime data, the general results are applicable to all mortgages. The researchers point out that principal reductions lead to much lower redefault rates (that is obvious, but still worth noting). They also note that principal reductions help mitigate the mobility problem - as I've noted before, the lack of worker mobility slows the potential growth of the economy, leads to lower home maintenance, and possibly "diminished support for local public goods"¹.

But the authors don't suggest who should pay for the reductions in principal. If this was a government program, it would be very expensive and unpopular. Diana Olick wrote today at CNBC: Are Principal Writedowns the Answer to Housing Crisis?

I would honestly rather see my home's value go down than see the guy next door ... who made a poor/negligent financial decision get a mulligan at my expense.

I think that would be the overwhelming public reaction.

Some people point to Lewis Ranieri's apparent success with principal reductions, from Fortune: Lewie Ranieri wants to fix the mortgage mess

Now Ranieri is championing an inventive solution for fixing the mess he's accused of enabling in the first place. Ranieri has raised $825 million from 31 foundations and corporate and public pension funds, including the South Carolina Retirement Systems, to form the Selene Residential Mortgage Opportunity Fund.

Selene's mission is simple: to buy delinquent mortgages at a deep discount, work with homeowners to get them paying again, and resell the now stable loans for profit. To get homeowners to do their part, Ranieri is taking the radical step of substantially lowering their mortgage balances.

This only works because Ranieri bought the distressed mortgages at a deep discount, and his company has no reputation risk. Ranieri wants his borrowers to know that he will reduce their principal.

Imagine what would happen to Wells Fargo or Bank of America if their borrowers found out that the banks would substantially reduce their principal if they were 1) underwater (negative equity), and 2) stopped making their payments. The delinquency rate and losses would skyrocket!

So there is no easy solution. Government supported principal reductions will probably not happen, and private principal reductions - although happening - will not become widespread. This means more foreclosures and short sales (or as I always joke, build a time machine and stop the bubble early - that might be easier!)

And here are some excerpts from the paper:

Our analysis of those modifications in which payments were meaningfully reduced indicates that re-default rates – around 57% in the first year – are distressingly high. Yet the magnitude and form of modifications make a difference. Mortgages that receive larger payment reductions are significantly less likely to redefault, as are those that are modified in such a way as to restore the borrower’s equity position. Of course, these kinds of modifications are not mutually exclusive, since reductions in mortgage balances offer both increased equity and reduced payments.

Our findings have potentially important implications for the design of modification programs going forward. The Administration’s HAMP program is focused on increasing borrowers’ ability to make their monthly payments, as measured by the DTI. Under HAMP, reductions in payments are primarily achieved by subsidizing lenders to reduce interest rates and extend mortgage term. While such interventions can reduce re-default rates, an alternative scheme would simultaneously enhance the borrower’s ability and willingness to pay the debt, by writing down principal in order to restore the borrower’s equity position. We estimate that restoring the borrower’s incentive to pay in this way can double the reduction in re-default rates achieved by payment reductions alone.

Another distinction between modifications that reduce the monthly payment by cutting the interest rate as compared to reducing the principal is the likely impact on household mobility. Ferreira et al (2010) using over two decades of data from the American Housing Survey estimate that each $1,000 in subsidized interest to a borrower reduces the two-year mobility rate by 1.4 percentage points. Modifying the interest rate to a below market rate creates an in-place subsidy to the borrower leading to a lock-in effect. .... modification creates an annual subsidy of over $3,000. The results in Ferreira et al (2010) imply that this will lead to on average a reduction in the household two-year mobility rate of over 4.4 percentage points – more than a forty percent reduction in the overall rate. In contrast, reducing the monthly payment through reducing the principal on the mortgage does not create an in-place subsidy and would not lead to a lock-in effect.
emphasis added

¹ Housing Busts and Household Mobility by Fernando Ferreira, Joseph Gyourko (both from Wharton) and Joseph Tracy (New York Fed).

by Calculated Risk on 1/06/2010 02:00:00 PM

Here are the December FOMC minutes. Economic outlook:

In their discussion of the economic situation and outlook, meeting participants agreed that the incoming data and information received from business contacts suggested that economic growth was strengthening in the fourth quarter, that firms were reducing payrolls at a less rapid pace, and that downside risks to the outlook for economic growth had diminished a bit further. Although some of the recent data had been better than anticipated, most participants saw the incoming information as broadly in line with the projections for moderate growth and subdued inflation in 2010 that they had submitted just before the Committee's November 3-4 meeting; accordingly, their views on the economic outlook had not changed appreciably. Participants expected the economic recovery to continue, but, consistent with experience following previous financial crises, most anticipated that the pickup in output and employment growth would be rather slow relative to past recoveries from deep recessions. A moderate pace of expansion would imply slow improvement in the labor market next year, with unemployment declining only gradually. Participants agreed that underlying inflation currently was subdued and was likely to remain so for some time. Some noted the risk that, over the next couple of years, inflation could edge further below the rates they judged most consistent with the Federal Reserve's dual mandate for maximum employment and price stability; others saw inflation risks as tilted toward the upside in the medium term.

A number of factors were expected to support near-term expansion in economic activity. Consumer spending appeared to be on a moderately rising trend, reflecting gains in after-tax income and wealth this year. Recent upward revisions to official estimates of the level of household income in recent quarters gave participants somewhat greater confidence that consumer spending would continue to expand. The housing sector showed continuing signs of improvement, though housing starts had leveled out after increasing earlier in the year and activity remained quite low. Businesses seemed to be reducing the pace of inventory reductions. The outlook for growth abroad had improved since earlier in the year, auguring well for U.S. exports. In addition, financial market conditions generally had become more supportive of economic growth. While these developments were positive, participants noted several factors that likely would continue to restrain the expansion in economic activity. Business contacts again emphasized they would be cautious in adding to payrolls and capital spending, even as demand for their products increases. Conditions in the commercial real estate (CRE) sector were still deteriorating. Bank credit had contracted further, and with many banks facing continuing loan losses, tight bank credit could continue to weigh on the spending of some households and businesses. Some participants remained concerned about the economy's ability to generate a self-sustaining recovery without government support. In particular, they noted the risk that improvements in the housing sector might be undercut next year as the Federal Reserve's purchases of MBS wind down, the homebuyer tax credits expire, and foreclosures and distress sales continue. Though the near-term outlook remains uncertain, participants generally thought the most likely outcome was that economic growth would gradually strengthen over the next two years as financial conditions improved further, leading to more-substantial increases in resource utilization.
emphasis added

And on real estate:

CRE activity continued to fall markedly in most parts of the country as a result of deteriorating fundamentals, including declining occupancy and rental rates, and very tight credit conditions. Prospects for nonresidential construction remained weak.

In the residential real estate sector, home sales and construction had risen relative to the very low levels reported in the spring; moreover, house prices appeared to be stabilizing and in some areas had reportedly moved higher. Generally, the outlook was for gains in housing activity to continue. However, some participants still viewed the improved outlook as quite tentative and again pointed to potential sources of softness, including the termination next year of the temporary tax credits for homebuyers and the downward pressure that further increases in foreclosures could put on house prices. Moreover, mortgage markets could come under pressure as the Federal Reserve's agency MBS purchases wind down.

That last paragraph is important. It appears residential investment will disappoint in Q1, and prices might already be falling again - and that is before the massive government support programs will be wound down over the next 6 months. Of course CRE is getting crushed, but residential investment is usually a key to a recovery - and residential investment will remain sluggish.

by Calculated Risk on 1/06/2010 12:16:00 PM

From Jennifer Steinhauer at the NY Times: New Year but No Relief for Strapped States

[A]t least 36 states struggle to close budget shortfalls and also begin confronting the next fiscal year’s woes.

For many of the states, the new year spells the end to accounting maneuvers, one-off solutions, tax increases and service cuts that were as deep as lawmakers thought they could bear. ...

“A budget gap of 5 percent or 10 percent in any given year is a tough problem,” said Corina Eckl, fiscal director at the National Conference of State Legislatures. “But we’re talking about gaps in excess of 20 percent over multiple years. The size of these gaps is staggering.”

... states averted deeper cuts than anticipated last year because of the federal stimulus package. But those dollars will shrink over the next fiscal year, and unless jobs return and tax revenues rise, or Congress sends them more aid, states will most likely continue to be overextended.

These "staggering" gaps mean more budget cuts, or more tax increases, or another stimulus package ... unless the state economies improve quickly, and that seems unlikely.

by Calculated Risk on 1/06/2010 10:00:00 AM

This is another weak service report. According to this survey, the service sector barely expanded in December, and employment also contracted "for the 23rd time in the last 24 months".

From the Institute for Supply Management: December 2009 Non-Manufacturing ISM Report On Business®

Economic activity in the non-manufacturing sector grew in December after one month of contraction, say the nation's purchasing and supply executives in the latest Non-Manufacturing ISM Report On Business®.

The report was issued today by Anthony Nieves, C.P.M., CFPM, chair of the Institute for Supply Management™ Non-Manufacturing Business Survey Committee; and senior vice president — supply management for Hilton Worldwide. "The NMI (Non-Manufacturing Index) registered 50.1 percent in December, 1.4 percentage points higher than the 48.7 percent registered in November, indicating growth in the non-manufacturing sector for three out of the last four months. The Non-Manufacturing Business Activity Index increased 4.1 percentage points to 53.7 percent, reflecting growth after contracting for one month. The New Orders Index decreased 3 percentage points to 52.1 percent, and the Employment Index increased 2.4 percentage points to 44 percent. The Prices Index increased 0.9 percentage point to 58.7 percent in December, indicating a slight increase in prices paid from November. According to the NMI, seven non-manufacturing industries reported growth in December. Respondents' comments vary by industry and, for the most part, are either neutral or slightly more optimistic about business conditions."
...
Employment activity in the non-manufacturing sector contracted in December for the 23rd time in the last 24 months. ISM's Non-Manufacturing Employment Index for December registered 44 percent. This reflects an increase of 2.4 percentage points when compared to the 41.6 percent registered in November. Four industries reported increased employment, 12 industries reported decreased employment, and two industries reported unchanged employment compared to November.
emphasis added