2017

Did you know that the District of Columbia has assigned officers to enforce its police-your-dog laws? The Poop Police. How low do you have to go, how badly do you have to screw up to be assigned in the District of Columbia to the Poop Police? Do they go under cover? Do they pack heat? In risible juxtaposition to this Singapore-like nod to order and governance, we see our Congress attempting to do tax reform. What a mess. As I write this, the Tax Conference Committee has apparently settled on something and we will likely see a vote in both Houses this week. The belly-scratching, horse trading, posturing and the manufacturing of sly optics…ugh. At least it is almost over. Something to be said for that. It was a sorry exercise.
Continue Reading Our Nation’s Capital Has Dog Poop Police, But We Let the Congress Do This?

Back in July of 2015, we blogged about “Current Marketplace Trends in Real Estate Crowdfunding”.  How young and breathless we were, in hindsight, now that we’re tapped into the Next Big ICO thing.  Yes, the “fintech” world has apparently leapt forward into the dawning age of the ICO without so much as a backward glance, still unfettered by the restraining hand of regulation (such as the JOBS Act “exemption”, which seems to have throttled old-world crowdfunding in the cradle).

But wait a sec—just what is an ICO? 
Continue Reading Does the ICO Open a New Chapter for RE Crowdfunding?

Every once in a while we get some good news around the capital markets hood and this is one of those times.  Admittedly, all we’re doing here is fixing a problem which was one of the unintended consequences of the Dodd-Frank regulatory regime and just gets us back to where we thought we were before the issue arose, but hey – a victory is a victory. 
Continue Reading Third Party Purchaser Agreements Don’t Destroy Sale Treatment: A Victory for the Unintended Consequences Resistance

As we look back each November to bestow the year’s crop of Golden Turkeys to the silliest and most annoying instances of regulatory overreach, legislative inanity, governmental misfeasance or the mere idiotic behavior of people without any help from the government apparatchiki, there’s always a glorious excess of candidates. This whole commentary thing would be really hard if the world made sense and behaved in a predictable, rational, Newtonian universe sort of way, but blessedly it does not.

So, as we get ready for the season of cheer, the season of desperate efforts to close yet one more deal and the nice calculation of bonuses, and before we imbibe too much good food and drink to be at all disciplined, here is our list for 2017:
Continue Reading CrunchedCredit.com’s 8th Annual Golden Turkey Awards

Or maybe not.  At the outset, let’s give credit where credit is due.  It was gratifying to read a governmental missive on the capital markets that made sense, showed an actual grasp of how markets function and an awareness of the issues confronting capital formation.  Best damn thing I ever read coming out of the swamp.

The Treasury Report on the capital markets published in early October is indeed pretty fantastic stuff.  The Report covers the Treasury’s recommendation on re-centering many of the rules around the capital markets over a wide range of regulatory issues important to securitization and capital formation.

Let’s focus on the provisions in this Report that are central to securitization.

These can be summarized as follows:

  • There should be one agency with the responsibility for the Risk Retention Rule and we should dispense with the committee-of-committee that’s been running the clown car for the past couple of years. The old saw that “a camel is a horse built by a committee” is certainly proven by the risk retention experience.
  • Regulatory bank capital requirements treat investment in non-agency securitized instruments punitively.
  • Regulatory liquidity standards unfairly discriminate against securitized products.
  • Sponsor risk retention as set out in the Risk Retention Rule represents an unnecessary cost imposed upon securitization.
  • Some of the new and improved (read: expanded) disclosure requirements under Dodd-Frank are unnecessarily burdensome.

In other words, our regulatory regime needs a certain amount of recalibration to achieve its goals of safety and soundness in the financial market place while not impeding capital formation. 
Continue Reading Treasury Report on the Capital Markets: A New Day

On September 27, 2017, the Federal Reserve, FDIC and OCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) that they describe as simplifying compliance with certain aspects of the agencies’ risk based capital (RBC) rules to, among other things, replace the standardized approach’s (SA) treatment of HVCRE loans with a simpler treatment for most acquisition, development or construction (ADC) loans called high volatility acquisition, development or construction (HVADC). Spoiler alert: it just replaces vague and confusing rules with a slightly different set of vague and confusing rules.
Continue Reading Yakety Yak – Talk Back: Regulators Respond to HVCRE Complaints

As an industry, we remain in high dudgeon over the inanity of much of Dodd-Frank, the ideological and often unhinged regulatory instincts of our various governments and the vast amount of effort, time and money it takes to comply with the mind-numbing complexity of rules and regulations that seem to be largely untethered from the goal of solving actual problems. We winge. We boviate. We testify, write white papers, fund PACs and pursue “engagements” with the regulatory apparatchiki in the pursuit of sensible relief. But do we still really care?

Are we witnessing a process of reconciliation? Could it be that the capital markets have found a way to thrive inside the current regulatory state’s bear hug?
Continue Reading Welcome to Stockholm! We Are Learning To Love Our Regulatory State

Earlier this month, our very own Kenneth D. Hackman, a regular contributor to Crunched Credit, moderated a panel entitled Single-Family Rental: The Landscape and Future of CRE’s Newest Asset Class, hosted by Dechert LLP, for CREFC’s After-Work Seminar Series.

The esteemed panel consisted of Kevin S. Dwyer, Senior Vice President, RMBS, Morningstar Credit Ratings, LLC; Bradley J. Hauger, Senior Vice President, Loan Servicing Director, PNC Real Estate/Midland Loan Services; J. Christopher Hoeffel, Chief Financial Officer, CoreVest American Finance and R. Christopher Jones, Director, Deutsche Bank.

Readers of Crunched Credit know that we are bullish on SFR: single-family rental is the largest class of rental stock in America, eclipsing the multi-family market. The number of single-family rental units grew 23% from 2006-2015, with most of that growth following the Great Recession. Since then, the institutional single-family rental business has blossomed into a viable, long-term business. And as institutional ownership has grown, SFR finance has grown apace.

You know, for a long time, we, and I think many other observers, thought that SFR was a trade created by the collapse of the residential housing market in 2007-2008. We thought when the opportunity to buy single family homes at ridiculously low prices, fix them up and rent them went away, the trade would go away. We were wrong and SFR is growing into a mature industry that is likely to continue to grow for many years. Right now, depending on who you ask, 12 or 13% of US housing stock is now single family home rentals. Of that, only a small percentage is in institutional hands. Note that in several G20 countries, a very large portion of the housing stock is in institutional hands. It seems there’s plenty of headroom for this industry to grow here at home.
Continue Reading Single-Family Rental: The Landscape and Future of CRE’s Newest Asset Class