When the homeowner must come clean with accurate data, thereby proving their own part in the fraud, they might just decide it’s better to just let the foreclosure happen.

http://www.housingwire.com/2008/04/23/viewpoint-finding-fraud-and-what-it-really-means-for-loss-mitigation/

If your answer is yes, how much money would you be willing to spend right now?

If your answer is no, then how ought the U.S. pay for such a tax break?

Let’s see….how much are we in debt right now?

How many trillions did the banks and lenders make during the bubble run up?

Dragging this out with bailouts will ONLY lead to a prolonged recession and postpone the housing recovery than many more years into the future, which I am fearful will happen.

Seems to me that a tax break would get things back on track for stabilization. Low sales = low excise tax paid, which an entire set of new problems.

The same reason so many people bought during the bubble even though they could’ve rented for way less than a mortgage payment.

“A fed bailout that gave tax breaks to lenders for giving homeowners new terms wouldn’t be such a bad thing …”

Maybe not as bad as other bailout plans, but still a bad idea. A tax break means that tax revenue that would’ve been coming from those lenders comes from everyone else instead. So it’s still penalizing people that had nothing to do with the mortgage mess for the terrible decisions that lenders and other people made.

A tax break for people that were wise and didn’t gamble with risky mortgages would be best.

Perhaps because they don’t want to go through any foreclosure, let alone two: Being foreclosed out of their house and being foreclosed out of being able to ever by another one–no matter how long they wait!

Stated differently, I think the ability of people with foreclosures on their record to get financing (ever!) will disappear for a lot longer period of time than sub-prime loans.

This is partly why I wish lenders would consider a second w/no payments due…but I still think that a homeowner who is currently in possible trouble but could afford payments IF THEY COULD REFI but the only thing that’s holding them back is the LTV restrictions, they would refi and stay in their home.

I’m dealing with home owners who are seeking help with refinancing but there are no comps to support values required for the transaction. A borrower would not have to go up to 120% (and I’m sure that there would be price hits all the way up the LTV ladder)…but to losen the restrictions on a rate term refinance would prevent SOME (not all) foreclosures.

A fed bailout would be bad. When you read B. Franks site regarding the mortgage plans they’re passing, he states “this is not a bailout”…