February 17 roundup


  • Mortgage robo-signing settlement not actually as punitive toward the banks as you might think

    The only way that could be true is if it gave the banks free blackjack and hookers. Maybe I’m just cynical.

  • What is the IRS position on these mortgage write-downs. A borrower whose house in under water but is having no problem making his current payments may well not want to participate in this program if the IRS is going to charge them taxes (at top marginal rate) on the difference. If not careful this could lead to more defaults and foreclosures. $500,000 mortgage, $300,000 value could result in owing $50,000+ in taxes.

  • Thanks for mentioning my post on Abnormal Use. We have gotten some interesting comments.

  • David, just forget the blackjack! =o)

  • Mark Biggar: “$500,000 mortgage, $300,000 value could result in owing $50,000+ in taxes.”

    Well, they could just take out a second mortgage to pay the tax liability! Oh, wait, no they can’t. OK, so the IRS slaps a lien on the property, then takes the property. It’s all part of their plan! :-(

  • […] What the mortgage settlement did [John Cochrane, earlier] […]

  • […] groups expect to cash in on state AGs’ robosigning settlement [Neil Munro, Daily Caller, earlier] As does NAAG itself [Daniel Fisher] More: Kevin […]