The Dodd-Frank Act and Housing Finance: Can It Restore Private Risk Capital to the Securitization Market?

Adam J. Levitin, Andrey Pavlov, Susan M. Wachter
{"title":"The Dodd-Frank Act and Housing Finance: Can It Restore Private Risk Capital to the Securitization Market?","authors":"Adam J. Levitin, Andrey Pavlov, Susan M. Wachter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1970288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Private risk capital has virtually disappeared from the U.S. housing finance market since the market’s collapse in 2008. This Article argues that private risk capital is unlikely to return on any scale until the informational problems in housing finance are resolved so that investors can accurately gauge and price the risks they assume. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a first step in reforming the U.S. housing finance. It takes a multi-layered approach, regulating both loan origination and securitization. Dodd-Frank’s reforms, however, fail to adequately address the opacity of credit risk information in mortgage markets and thus are insufficient for the restoration of private risk capital. The Article argues that Dodd-Frank reforms like “skin-in-the-game” credit risk retention fail to solve the informational problems in the housing finance market, as they merely replace one informational opacity with another. Instead, the Article argues, it is necessary to institute structural changes in the housing finance market, particularly the standardization of mortgage securitization, that force the production of information necessary for accurate risk-pricing.","PeriodicalId":359023,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown Law Center","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown Law Center","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1970288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Private risk capital has virtually disappeared from the U.S. housing finance market since the market’s collapse in 2008. This Article argues that private risk capital is unlikely to return on any scale until the informational problems in housing finance are resolved so that investors can accurately gauge and price the risks they assume. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a first step in reforming the U.S. housing finance. It takes a multi-layered approach, regulating both loan origination and securitization. Dodd-Frank’s reforms, however, fail to adequately address the opacity of credit risk information in mortgage markets and thus are insufficient for the restoration of private risk capital. The Article argues that Dodd-Frank reforms like “skin-in-the-game” credit risk retention fail to solve the informational problems in the housing finance market, as they merely replace one informational opacity with another. Instead, the Article argues, it is necessary to institute structural changes in the housing finance market, particularly the standardization of mortgage securitization, that force the production of information necessary for accurate risk-pricing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多德-弗兰克法案与住房金融:它能让私人风险资本重返证券化市场吗?
自2008年美国住房金融市场崩溃以来,私人风险资本实际上已经从市场上消失了。本文认为,在住房金融的信息问题得到解决,从而使投资者能够准确地衡量和定价他们所承担的风险之前,私人风险资本不太可能以任何规模回报。《多德-弗兰克法案》是改革美国住房金融的第一步。它采取多层次的方法,既规范贷款的发放,也规范贷款的证券化。然而,多德-弗兰克法案的改革未能充分解决抵押贷款市场信用风险信息不透明的问题,因此不足以恢复私人风险资本。文章认为,多德-弗兰克改革,如“游戏中的皮肤”信贷风险保留,未能解决住房金融市场的信息问题,因为它们只是用另一种信息不透明取代了一种信息不透明。相反,文章认为,有必要在住房金融市场进行结构性改革,特别是抵押贷款证券化的标准化,这将迫使生产准确风险定价所必需的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Skin-in-the-Game: Risk Retention Lessons from Credit Card Securitization What Consensus? Ideology, Politics and Elections Still Matter The Dodd-Frank Act and Housing Finance: Can It Restore Private Risk Capital to the Securitization Market? Pari Passu and a Distressed Sovereign's Rational Choices The Inherent Jurisdiction of WTO Tribunals: The Select Application of Public International Law Required by the Judicial Function
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1