![]() Our findings point to the role of this segment being critical for future policy and research. ![]() Second, real estate investors are the major driver of aggregate mortgage balances and defaults, suggesting that owner-occupied housing is less sensitive to movements in real estate values. First, increasing restrictions on loans to subprime borrowers may be misguided, as these borrowers contributed to the boom-bust in credit only marginally. ![]() Our results then offer new perspectives for policies aimed at preventing or remediating turmoil in the mortgage and housing markets. We find that investors were responsible for most of the growth in balances and virtually all of the rise in defaults for prime borrowers. Our analysis points to a large role of real estate investors – mortgagors who held multiple first liens – in both the boom and bust of the housing market. As a result, the fraction of foreclosures accounted for by the highest three quartiles of the credit score distribution rose from 35% to 70%. While borrowers with low credit scores typically had higher default rates than those with higher credit scores, default rates for borrowers with higher credit scores rose substantially during the financial crisis. We also find that the rise in defaults during the 2007-09 crisis was concentrated in the middle of the credit score distribution. Borrowing by individuals with low credit scores was virtually constant during this period. Specifically, we show that credit growth during the boom was concentrated in the middle and at the top of the credit score distribution. Our findings suggest an alternative narrative, which challenges the view that an expansion of the supply of mortgage credit to subprime borrowers played a large role in the credit boom in 2001-06 and the subsequent financial crisis. These administrative data contain the full history of borrowing and defaults for a nationally representative panel of borrowers, as well as their credit score and demographic information, allowing us to provide a comprehensive assessment of their behaviour. In a new paper, we also examine the evolution of mortgage debt and defaults during the credit boom and throughout the financial crisis and its aftermath, using individual-level data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Consumer Credit Panel (Albanesi et al. (2017), who point out that credit did not shift towards lower income individuals or locations in the run-up to the crisis. (2016), who emphasise the role of the “middle class”, as well as Foote et al. That popular narrative has been challenged more recently by Ferreira and Gyourko (2015), who argue that debt growth was similar for prime and subprime borrowers, Adelino et al. According to that narrative, the expansion of subprime credit then led to a rise in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures, which caused the housing crisis and the subsequent 2007-2009 recession (Mian and Sufi 2010, 2011, Mian et al. A popular narrative, based on the findings in Mian and Sufi (2009), suggests that most of the growth in credit during the 2001-2006 boom was concentrated in subprime zip codes, even though income did not rise over the same period for these areas. Understanding the fundamental factors behind the boom and bust in credit has been a hotly debated topic in academic and policy circles.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |