Did Modification Programs Work?

The government decided early on that the market would not be able to absorb the number of foreclosures that the financial crisis was creating without crushing house values. This was one reason that they funded the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). This past week, the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) weighed in with their opinion on TARP’s success.

Today we want to concentrate on the parts of the report that pertain to real estate. TARP funds were to be used:

…in a manner that protects home values, college funds, retirement accounts, and life savings; preserves homeownership and promotes jobs and economic growth; maximizes overall returns to the taxpayers of the United States.

Did TARP Accomplish Its Housing Goals?

One way TARP was to accomplish ‘protecting home values and preserving homeownership’ was through the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). According to the COP report:

…when the President announced the Home Affordable Modification Program in early 2009, he asserted that it would prevent three to four million foreclosures. The program now appears on track to help only 700,000 to 800,000 homeowners.

We want to say that, if hundreds of thousands of families averted the devastation foreclosure can bring, we consider the program as worthwhile. Successful? That’s a different story.

Another program initiated to help was HOPE for Homeowners. It was established by Congress in July 2008 to permit the FHA to insure refinanced distressed mortgages. However, as the report explains:

HOPE for Homeowners was initially expected to help 400,000 homeowners, but it managed to refinance only a handful of loans. This was likely due to the program‘s poor initial design, lack of flexibility, and its reliance on voluntary principal write-downs, which lenders were very reluctant to make.

The Only Good News?

The only silver lining is that TARP didn’t cost the taxpayer as much as was originally estimated. At what expense to troubled homeowners? In discussing the falling cost of the program COP stated:

… a separate reason for the TARP‘s falling cost is that Treasury‘s foreclosure prevention programs, which could have cost $50 billion, have largely failed to get off the ground. Viewed from this perspective, the TARP will cost less than expected in part because it will accomplish far less than envisioned for American homeowners.

Bottom Line

TARP was set up to avoid home values being crushed under the weight of foreclosures. To that regard, it seems to have done nothing but delay the inevitable.