Morning Report – Inequality studies cooked books? 12/23/13

Vital Statistics:

Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1805.8 3.7 0.21%
Eurostoxx Index 3037.7 6.7 0.22%
Oil (WTI) 98.84 -0.2 -0.20%
LIBOR 0.248 0.003 1.02%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 80.73 0.103 0.13%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.95% 0.02%
Current Coupon Ginnie Mae TBA 104 0.3
Current Coupon Fannie Mae TBA 102.8 -0.1
RPX Composite Real Estate Index 200.7 -0.2
BankRate 30 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage 4.52
Markets are higher this morning on news the IMF would raise its outlook for the economy. Bonds and MBS are down small.
Personal Incomes increased .2%, lower than expected, but consumer spending increased .5%. The Chicago Fed National Activity Index came in better than expected.
It looks like Mel Watt plans to delay the g-fee hike and the new LLPAs for conforming loans. He wants to evaluate the impact these would have on credit. Ed DeMarco was a “protect the taxpayer” guy. Watt is a CRA guy.
Interesting story about hedge funds in the rental business. Here are the cash buyers in this market. What happens when a big distant hedge fund with no ties to the community becomes the biggest property owner?
Interesting editorial about income inequality – The numbers in the studies Obama looks at exclude transfer payments, employee benefits, and our highly progressive tax code. When you include those numbers, the Gini coefficient actually fell in the 90s and the 00s. The punch line: economic booms tend to benefit the poor and the middle class, and recessions tend to hurt them. This can be an issue when the guy leading the country cares more about inequality than growth.

8 Responses

  1. Another deadline, another extension.

    Nova, is there any potential consequence to not going through the regular rule publication and commentary process down the line, or are they relying on the fact that no one will have standing to bring a challenge?


  2. Here’s the underlying reg that I think they are using. but they’re not really saying, and I’m not as tapped in on this as compared to Medicare …. that said,

    The original hardship exception was at 45 CFR 155.605(g)(1)

    (g) Hardship—(1) General. The Exchange must grant a hardship exemption to an applicant eligible for an exemption for at least the month before, a month or months during which, and the month after, if the Exchange determines that—

    (i) He or she experienced financial or domestic circumstances, including an unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or she had a significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses that prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan;

    (ii) The expense of purchasing a qualified health plan would have caused him or her to experience serious deprivation of food, shelter, clothing or other necessities; or

    (iii) He or she has experienced other circumstances that prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan.

    My bet … an extremely generous reading of (iii)


  3. Then there is this:

    It’s guidance on what (g)(1) means. or what it meant in June. I think they are altering the guidance.


  4. See also, the special enrollment period section. which was amended October 30. Looks like they’re doing it again.


  5. I’m out for the rest of the week. Merry Christmas everyone!


Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: