Housing starts down

The Commerce Department says housing starts dropped 5.0% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 549,000 units, the lowest level since October.  It was the second straight month of decline in activity and was well below market expectations for a 580,000-unit rate.  May's housing starts were previously reported as a 10.0% drop, but are now revised down to show a 14.9% decline.  Compared to June last year, starts were down 5.8%, the biggest decline since November.  Driving the June decline was a more than 20% drop in the volatile condominium and apartment market. Construction of single-family homes, the biggest part of the market, was down slightly by 0.7%.  The only positive sign in the report was an unexpected 2.1% rise in applications for building permits to a 586,000-unit pace in June.  That followed a 5.9% drop in May and compared to analysts' expectations for a slip to 570,000 units.  Still, the slumping job market and competition from foreclosed properties have forced builders to limit construction, especially after tax credits that spurred sales expired at the end of April.  "Despite record low mortgage rates, housing is at risk of a double dip unless job growth strengthens soon," said Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets.  Economists had had predicted that construction would fall to a rate of 580,000 and had projected that building permits would sink to a rate of 570,000, according to Thomson Reuters.  In a typical economic recovery, the construction sector provides much of the fuel. But not this time. While developers have cut back on construction and the number of new homes on the market has fallen dramatically, they still must compete against foreclosed homes selling at deep discounts. 

Consumers will pay for new rules

Up until recently, bankers have remained mum on particular reform measures, saying that regulators will first need to write specific rules.  But Bank of America broke ranks on Friday, detailing the impact of several provisions, including the so-called Durbin amendment, named after sponsor Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., which will limit the fees banks collect from debit card swipes.  Bank of America executives said the new rule would reduce fees earned from debit cards anywhere between 60% and 80% starting in the second half of 2011. This year, the company said it expects to produce $2.9 billion in revenue from that business.  "We now fear that the Durbin bill could have a great negative impact on bank revenue than we had originally estimated," BMO analyst Lana Chan wrote in a note to clients Monday.  Even though BoA is hit hard, , the biggest hit was expected to fall on major regional players such as Regions Financial, KeyBank and Fifth Third. Each institution generated over 3% of their overall revenue from interchange fees last year, compared to Bank of America's 2%, according to Chan.  Analysts suggested that perhaps the company most exposed to the new measure was the Minnesota-based lender TCF Financial.  In 2009, more than 10% of its revenue came from interchange. FBR's Paul Miller projected Monday that TCF's earnings could fall by as much as 40 cents a share as a result.  Banks have not been sitting idly by. A number of major financial institutions have reportedly started to eliminate free checking accounts, as well as imposing new or higher fees, ultimately putting the cost of the forthcoming new laws on the consumer.  "That is probably what is going to happen here," said TCF Financial CEO Bill Cooper said during a conference call with investors last week.  The bad news is that the Durbin rule is just one small piece of an ongoing effort to rewrite the rules of the road for the financial services by this administration and congress.

Olick - Jumbo loans are back

"After several years of stagnation in high-end housing, thanks to the disappearance of the jumbo market, things are moving yet again.  A quick check on Bankrate.com shows the 30-year fixed jumbo at around 5.50%, and Citibank last week reported applications for jumbos up 30% just over the last 60 days.  "It is the overall weak economy driving the 10 year lower, which is the proxy for most mortgage loans," says FBR's Paul Miller. "This is still probably the best of the best getting loans at these low rates, but Jumbo activity is still very, very low." Miller says it's good for the market, but only "marginally better," as banks are desperate to find good loans to put on their books.  But how long will it last? Probably only as long as investors remain nervous about the economy.  “Preliminary signs of life in the secondary market are a good indication that the narrower spread between jumbo and conforming loans will stick around," says Bankrate.com's Greg McBride. "However, the level of mortgage rates will hinge more than anything on the demand for Treasuries.”  Bank of America tells me that applications and fundings for jumbo loans rose over 10% from May to June. They say they've always been the leader in jumbos, which could be why Citi is getting more aggressive."

Wall Street Journal editorial - Obama paying Americans not to work

"Presidents typically invite Americans to appear at Rose Garden press conferences to trumpet their policy successes, but yesterday we saw what may have been a first. President Obama introduced three Americans—an auto worker, a fitness center employee and a woman in real estate—who've been out of work so long they underscore the failure of his economic program. Where are his spinmeisters when he really needs them?  Sure, Mr. Obama's ostensible purpose was to lobby Congress for the eighth extension of jobless benefits since the recession began, to a record 99 weeks, or nearly two years. And he whacked Senate Republicans for blocking the extension, though Republicans are merely asking that the extension be offset by cuts in other federal spending.  But Mr. Obama was nonetheless obliged to concede that, 18 months after his $862 billion stimulus, there are still five job seekers for every job opening and that 2.5 million Americans will soon run out of unemployment benefits. What happens when the 99 weeks of benefits run out? Will the President demand that they be extended to three years, or four?  Only last week Vice President Joe Biden was hailing the stimulus for "saving or creating" three million jobs. This week the White House says we need even more stimulus, in the form of jobless checks, to make up for the jobs his original spending stimulus didn't create.  The one possibility the President and Congressional Democrats won't entertain is that their own spending and taxing and regulating and labor union favoritism have become the main hindrance to job creation. Since February 2009, the jobless rate has climbed to 9.5% from 8.1%, and private industry has shed two million jobs. The overall economy has been expanding for at least a year, but employers still don't seem confident enough to add new workers. The economists who sold us the stimulus say it's a mystery. But maybe employers are afraid to hire because they don't know what costs government will impose on them next.  In the immediate policy case, Democrats are going so far as to subsidize more unemployment. If you subsidize something, you get more of it. So if you pay people not to work, they often decide . . . not to work. Or at least to delay looking or decline a less than perfect job offer, holding out for something else that may or may not materialize.  The economic consensus—which includes Obama Administration economists in their previous lives—couldn't be clearer on this. In a 1990 study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, labor economist Lawrence Katz found that "The results indicate that a one week increase in potential benefit duration increases the average duration of the unemployment spells of UI recipients by 0.16 to 0.20 weeks."  A March 2010 economic report by Michael Feroli of J.P. Morgan Chase examined several studies and concluded that "lengthened availability of jobless benefits has raised the unemployment rate by 1.5% points."  A 2006 NBER study by Raj Chetty of UC Berkeley on a related subject begins, "It is well known that unemployment benefits raise unemployment durations."  The current recession is bearing this out, as a record 6.7 million Americans have now been out of work for at least six months. That's 45.5% of the total jobless, close to the highest share ever recorded. The number was 23.4% in February 2009. Americans tend to support jobless benefits on compassion grounds, but at some point such a policy becomes the false compassion of welfare by keeping people out of the job market and thus not learning new skills."

Home Builder Confidence Plummets

Builders have been feeling increasingly pessimistic of late. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) said yesterday that its monthly reading of builders' sentiment about the housing market sank to 14 -- the lowest level since March 2009. Readings below 50 indicate negative sentiment about the market.  "We continue to see a lull in home buying activity following the expiration of the federal home buyer tax credit program, as many of the sales that would have occurred this summer were likely pulled forward to meet that program's deadline," said NAHB chairman Bob Jones, a homebuilder in Bloomfield Hills, Mich., in a press statement. "In addition, builders are reporting continuing consumer hesitancy regarding home purchases due to uncertainty in the overall economy and job markets."  Paul Dales, a US economist at the Toronto-based Capitol Economics concurred that the tax credit's expiration is impacting the housing market.  "It is becoming increasing clear that without the government's artificial support, the US housing market is struggling to stand on its own two feet," Dales wrote in commentary Monday. " The fall in the NAHB housing index…shows that demand for new homes has weakened further."  Specific factors contributing to the negative view include hesitation on the part of homebuyers, tight consumer credit and continuing competition from foreclosed and distressed properties, according to NAHB chief economist David Crowe.