Return to the Great Recession?
US News & World Report quoted me in What Happens if Trump Dismantles the Financial Regulations of the Great Recession? It opens,
On Feb. 3, 2017, President Donald Trump signed two executive orders that will affect the financial sector. That change will come to consumers is undeniable. But exactly what change is coming is, naturally, up for debate.
One of the orders requires the Treasury secretary to review the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, passed in 2010 and designed to address some of the shortcomings in the financial system that led to the Great Recession. The other executive action mandates that the Labor Department review its Department of Labor Fiduciary Rule and look at its probable economic impact. As it stands now, the fiduciary rule is supposed to be phased in from April 10, 2017 to Jan. 1, 2018. The rule requires financial professionals who work with retirement plans or provide retirement planning advice to act in a way that’s only based on the client’s best interests.
What do these executive orders portend for consumers? Nobody knows, but what follows are some educated guesses – with best-case and worst-case outcomes.
How the housing market might be affected. There’s potential good news and bad news here, according to Francesco D’Acunto, a finance assistant professor at the University of Maryland. In a study performed by D’Acunto and faculty colleague Alberto Rossi, in the wake of Dodd-Frank, banks decreased mortgage lending to middle class families by about 15 percent in 2014.
“Title XIV, which regulates the mortgage market, could be in for a full-scale renovation that might ultimately improve the fortunes of potential homebuyers from the middle class,†D’Acunto says.
So if you’ve been having trouble getting a mortgage for a house, you may have less trouble – provided you find a reputable lender. Because the downside, according to D’Acunto, is that “such a move risks bringing a return of predatory behavior in lending and mortgage cross-selling, especially by large banks and by non-bank mortgage originators.â€
To avoid that, D’Acunto hopes that Congress intervenes “surgically on Title XIV†and only reduces the regulatory costs imposed by the new Qualified Mortgage classification. Created by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Qualified Mortgage category of loans includes features designed to make it more likely that a consumer will be able to pay it back.
But if they don’t intervene with the careful attention to detail D’Acunto advises, then expect “big changes, most of them negative,†says David Reiss, a Brooklyn Law School professor whose specialty is in real estate finance.
Potential best-case scenario: After being denied a mortgage for some time, you finally get your house.
Potential worst-case scenario: Because you were steered to a high-interest loan you can’t afford, you lose your house.
How credit cards, auto loans and student loans might be affected. There has been a lot of talk that the CFPB could be a casualty in the executive order that asks the Treasury secretary to review Dodd-Frank. But will it be ripped to shreds or have its power diminished?
The latter seems to already be happening. For instance, lawmakers, led by Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.), are in the midst of trying to repeal a rule that is scheduled to go into effect this fall. The rule, among other things, would mandate prepaid-card companies to disclose detailed information about their fees, make it easier to access account information and would curb a consumer’s losses if the cards are lost or stolen.
A little weakening might not be so bad, Reiss says. He thinks the CFPB has tightened “the credit box too much, meaning that some people who could manage more credit are not getting access to it.â€
But he also thinks if the CFPB were dismantled, the negatives would far outweigh the positives.
Potential best-case scenario: Easier access to loans and more choices. And for some consumers who can now get that car or credit card, their quality of life improves.
Potential worst-case scenario: Thanks to that easier access, some consumers end up stuck with high-interest loans with a lot of hidden fees and rue the day they applied for them.
Professor at Columbia University in the City of New York
8 å¹´I tend to agree that regulations are too tight and credit is a bit too limited at present--at least for the current investment marketplace. But add massive deregulation across many sectors, careless public investments (in infrastructure and military hardware), lower taxes, and a return to high rates of inflation at an unpredictable date and with unpredictable monetary policy, and you have a more volatile mix. Under that (likely) scenario, we might be at the sweet spot for Dodd-Frank. To expand on that a bit... Imagine that banks loosen up and lend again to slightly higher risk clients at risk of going under. Huge public investments lead to higher commodity prices and a tighter labor market. Inflation increases. Normally, this would lead to tighter monetary policy. But once the Fed is replaced with Trump supporters, there is not guarantee that the responses will be tightening until it is clear that we need to slam on the brakes. Now, those attractive variable interest loans go to 10% and tons of people are again underwater. In short, you have George W. Bush's policies on steroids, and the potential for a much bigger financial crisis.
Waechter rhymes with Hector....
8 年I've discovered the key to financial security - don't spend borrowed money. Especially on things that depreciate or aren't assets - cars, vacations, shoes, college degrees, and law degrees above all else. $150,000 in debt for a degree in a field where there are 3 graduates per job.... If You MUST Go to Law School… https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/you-must-go-law-school-steven-waechter
Entrepreneur
8 å¹´i just read an article on this. Numbers never lie. #fiscalissues