Why Fall Is the Best Time of Year to Buy a Home

Few people know Fall is arguably the best time of year to buy a new home. The weather becomes cooler, the leaves begin to change, football season begins, and pumpkin-flavored everything is in abundant supply. But there's another great reason to love fall that might be less obvious...it's the best time of year to purchase a home.

Prices Are Typically Lower
The concept that buyers can get a better bang for their buck in the fall has been a popular notion for some time, but two recent reports validated that line of thought with data from actual home sales. According to a report by RealtyTrac, sales prices are typically 2.6% below fair market value during October — a steeper discount than any other month of the year. Another report by NerdWallet found that sales prices drop about 2.96% from summer to fall, which is roughly an $8,300 discount for the median home. It's also worth noting that while listing prices don't decrease much, sales prices do, and that's the price that counts for potential buyers.

There's Less Competition
The majority of people buy a home in spring or summer, when inventory is traditionally high. This gives families time to make their move before the school year starts, but the tradeoff is that buyers are faced with strong competition and often pay higher than asking price during that time. People who buy in fall, however, have less competition, and sellers are more motivated. This means more negotiating power for the buyer, which often results in a better deal.

There's Still Inventory
It's true that the inventory of homes for sale is at its peak during spring and summer, but when you buy in the fall, there's still a decent supply of homes left to choose from. Buying a home in the fall gives you the best of both worlds — lower prices and less competition but still enough inventory to find the home you want.

If you're serious about buying a home, doing so this fall may save you money or help you afford more than you expect. Plus, with interest rates on the rise, the longer you wait, the less buying power you may have. Click here to learn more about the impact that rising interest rates have on affordability. NMLS#1043983

As we indicated with our November 10th Blog,

https://efinitygroup.blogspot.in/2016/11/if-you-currently-are-or-have-been.html

the Federal Reserve voted yesterday (Wednesday March 15th) to again raise the key interest rate one-quarter percentage point. This is just the first of three hikes we anticipate for 2017. The rate was increased one-quarter percentage point just three months ago in December 2016. This was the probable outcome following encouraging employment figures in February.

We believe this consecutive increase marks a turning point in policy. The Fed raised the rate only twice in the past decade. Wednesday’s decision quickens the pace, signaling the potential for more aggressive action as the year unfolds.


Rising rates have been top of mind for members of the housing industry, especially those of us in residential finance. Raising interest rates with the unprecidented apprecition witnessed in Texas, makes the fear of affordability a viable concern. We know in speaking with many of our potential homeowners the anticipated monthly payments on homes in various price ranges have "felt" higher. This is something which will continue to play out throughout 2017.

Learn the Facts & Myths of Reverse Mortgages

I had a lengthy conversation yesterday with one of my trusted realtors regarding Reverse Mortgages. While this is not been in Efinity Group's typical space, I was shocked at the misinformation that was understood as fact regarding this program. Similar to what we have done in the past I wanted to put something together to get the facts out there for our reading audience. Taking equity from a house is large decision for most seniors. It's not a decision that should be taken lightly. That said, a Reverse Mortgage is designed to allow seniors to improve their lives by freeing up the monthly obligations of a mortgage and whatever restrictive monthly cash flows that may present. Having access to funds to pay off credit cards, home equity loans and increasing cash flow for living expenses are a few benefits to having a reverse mortgage. Here are a list of facts and myths about reverse mortgages to help you make your decision.

Myth #1: It is the bank that owns the senior's home. Fact: When a customer has a reverse mortgage, their name will stay on the title unless a change in the title is made.

Myth #2: The bank has the right to make an elderly person leave their home. Fact: Reverse mortgages are insured and regulated by the Federal government. Any mortgage servicer has no authority to ask a senior to give up their home unless they fail to comply with the loan terms. Similar to any other mortgage, items like property taxes and homeowners insurance need to be paid and current. Texas Senior Lending wants to help customers stay in their homes as long as they can.

Myth #3: The senior’s heirs will eventually have to repay the loan if the customer passes away. Truth: A reverse mortgage is a non-recourse loan that gives the estate a year to sell the home at market value. Once the house is sold, the money from the sale will pay for the loan.

Myth #4: You will be responsible to make payments on reverse mortgage loans. Truth: Payments are due when the last living homeowner of the property permanently leaves the home.

Myth #5: Reverse mortgage proceeds are taxable and affect Social Security or Medicare. Truth: Although proceeds of a mortgage are not taxable and have no effect on your social Security or Medicare, you’re Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid can possibly be affected. We hope some of what was provided above is beneficial.

Securities Lending – Share Hypothecation

For the last several months, Efinity Finanical has quietly grown in the Dallas Fort Worth market. Those clients already presently working with our advisors are well aware of the weekly commentary we publish. Last week's was so good we felt it should repost here on the Efinity Report. Enjoy.

Securities Lending – Share Hypothecation
One of the main issues facing the financial world today is the difficulty investors have estimating the effect that a specific financial issue, such as a 50% haircut on Greek bonds, may have on the global or domestic financial and banking system.

So why can’t the people who run the European Central bank, the U.S. Central Banks Federal Reserve and Wall Street estimate the probability and effect of a bank going out of business? It looks like the reason some banks are classed as “too big to fail” is the fact that no one knows what will happen if they DO fail!

The reason is the financial system is based on everyone lending and making promissory contracts with each other. The system has evolved to a highly leveraged point where very little real cash or collateral exists. Looking at ‘cash in the bank’ has been replaced by credit ratings and rates as means to judge the fiscal security of a loan to a counterparty.

Unfortunately, these ratings and loan rates can change quickly; confidence is especially ephemeral these days. Take Italy, for example, whose cost of borrowing has nearly doubled in a period of weeks. This means the capital held by banks in the form of Italian bonds has shrunk by nearly 50%.

European banks are currently levered by approximately 30 to 1 – for every $1 they have in actual capital, they have $30 in borrowings. U.S. banks are current around half that level.

Shorting the System
Another reason for high volatility is the increasing ability of financial firms to profit from betting against markets - Shorting. Probably the most infamous example was Goldman Sach’s $550 million fine relating to fraud charges over the shorting of (seeking to profit from betting against) mortgage securities they had previously profited from by advising clients to buy. The fund was called Abacus.

Securities Lending
Securities Lending, a.k.a. Share Hypothecation, is a little known method for large financial firms to leverage the financial system - proponents call it the lubrication of securities markets. It certainly facilitates increased short selling activity. It is estimated that $1.9 trillion of securities are out on loan every day.

Securities Lending allows a Wall Street firm to loan shares to another firm in return for both a transaction fee and collateral to cover the loan. Although this may sound ‘normal’ among large companies, many Wall Street investor custody agreements include securities lending clauses allowing the firm to lend out shares owned by retail investors.

Yes, investment banks and the like regularly take their investors’ shares and loan them to companies looking to short the market.

For any financial relationship you have, check to see if the company participates in Securities Lending. If they do and the lender goes bankrupt, you will lose your shares!


Why Lend Securities?
Financial companies often “Lend” securities to facilitate short selling. Selling a stock “Short” means borrowing stock from a Lender for a period then selling the stock to a Buyer. At the end of the borrowing period, the Borrower has to give the stock back to the Lender.

If the price of the stock goes down during the lending period, at the end of the period the Borrower buys the stock in the market at the current reduced market price and gives it to the Lender. The Borrower therefore pockets the difference between the price they had originally sold to the Buyer at the start of the lending period and the price they had just paid for it at the end of the lending period.

If the stock rises in value during the borrowing period, the Borrower loses the difference in the original sale price and the price they have to buy it back to satisfy the loan. This practice avoids the short company for being accused of “Naked Shorting”, the practice of selling a stock short without owning the underlying stock.

Take a moment to think how frightening this concept is…in order to make a big negative bet against a company or country, all a Wall Street company has to do it find a counterparty who is willing to loan the representative securities for a nominal fee.

Even worse, the collateral to cover the trade is rarely “tangible”; it’s often other financial contracts. It is therefore very easy to see how confidence can rapidly evaporate in financial markets.

Company versus Country
One interesting result of the above is the changing risk/credit perception between many large corporations and a number of countries, chiefly those in Europe. Sovereign fixed income investments that were previously thought to be low volatility are now behaving like Tech stocks! At the same time, high yield corporate bonds are relatively stable.

Countries have been able to run whatever fiscal policy they wanted because their credit rating always allowed them to borrow and borrow at low interest rates. Companies generally had to maintain pristine balance sheets to enjoy anything like similar access to debt. Moreover, everyone assumed sovereign debtors were highly creditworthy whereas companies have to prove their creditworthiness on a quarterly basis.

Now that the confidence in the finances of many countries has disappeared, we are seeing massive swings in the prices of sovereign bonds; those securities that we all previously thought were very stable. Hedge Funds and short sellers are able to use leverage to bet against the debt of countries in the same way they contributed to the decline of Lehman Brothers.

In our opinion, large multinationals have managed their finances exceptionally well in recent years and their debt (Bonds) deserve the stability currently being shown. We have long stated that the world continues to grow in new areas and different ways. Companies and not countries seem to be doing much better at managing this change.

Damn'd if you Do and Damn'd if you Don't

A state court judge has ruled that Illinois can move forward with a lawsuit alleging that Wells Fargo & Co. steered minority borrowers into risky mortgages at the height of the housing bubble. Important to note the court DID NOT find that Wells Fargo engaged in discriminatory lending but the Illinois action is the first fair-lending lawsuit brought by a state attorney general against a national bank to reach discovery, attorneys familiar with the case said. After discovery, Illinois may be able to bring the case to trial. We believe this is a poor decision.
Here are the underlying issues and possible ramifications for this. ALL residential mortgage lenders (BofA, Wells Fargo, Chase, Ally Bank even Efinity for that matter) had and have annual requirements and goals for community lending. Ten years ago, the push from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to grow minority ownership. This was a directive from prior US President Bill Clinton during his presidency (1993-2001). A challenging task as these markets historically have been plagued with on-going credit and down payment issues. The "steering" as referred by the Illinois state attorney general will be difficult to defend as home loan underwriting requirements were much less focused on standard automated underwriting findings and subject to interpretation. Many of the loan programs available to mortgage lenders at the time were very lenient on income and employment documentation compared to the standard FHA loan programs. In addition, programs typically offered short term fixed payment durations lowering the starting rate and payment which many borrowers were attracted to. Add the year over year property increase assumptions, these underwriting decisions are now deemed discriminatory. Furthermore, what will be difficult to defend is the reasoning why those loan programs were selected. In many circumstances, borrowers fully intended to flip or move in a short time window making short term fixed duration loans preferable as the interested rates were significantly lower. Adding to the lack of clarity behind these transactions in question, no where within the application explains or supports the reasoning behind the transaction.

WF was "gently" pushed to lend in certain markets which conventional lending could and would not support. The transactional volume requirements demanded certain products which were available to the market place. Unfortunately while clients are usually always made aware of the risks associated with an adjustable mortgage product the purchase decision is usually made payment. Are there individual transactions where perhaps the risk/rewards were not fully vetted out 100%, perhaps but in this instance we believe individual borrowers are not taking personal responsibility for their decisions.

Creative planning but ...

There are new developments between the Obama administration and a federal housing regulators who are considering a program to draw private investment back into the government-dominated residential mortgage market by having Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sell slices of securities that wouldn't carry a federal guarantee but would pay a higher interest rate than current mortgage-backed bonds.

No decisions have been made, but officials believe a small pilot program could be rolled out sometime next year, according to people familiar with the matter.

Officials see it as a step toward reducing the $10.4 trillion U.S. mortgage market's dependence on government-controlled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If the leadership in both groups believe this model would keep US residential mortgages affordable, we're all for it. However, we fear what this same leadership has not factored in is the "dramatic" increase private money would require in rate to not have government guarantee. The margins just aren't attractive to the everyday commercial investor and without attractive margins, rates to the consumer will surely rise.

You can lead an Economy to Water, but can you make it Create Jobs?

You can lead an Economy to Water, but can you make it Create Jobs?

So it‟s now official, the U.S. Economy is going through a “soft spot”. According to the U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, speaking last week at an International Monetary Conference in Atlanta:

• "The U.S. economy is recovering from both the worst financial crisis and the most severe housing bust since the Great Depression, and it faces additional headwinds ranging from the effects of the Japanese disaster to global pressures in commodity markets. In this context, monetary policy cannot be a panacea."
• …the economic recovery is “uneven …and frustratingly slow”
• The Fed will keep interest rates bottomed out for “an extended period.”

A few conclusions spring forth from these quotes:

• The Fed will keep Interest Rates low for as long as
possible; longer than most economists currently
believe. Bonds won‟t be under too much interest rate
pressure for a while yet.

• Chairman Ben Bernanke currently feels the launch of a
third round of monetary easing will probably do nothing
to stimulate „real‟ economic demand; principally
meaning create jobs.

• Ben is looking for help from the Government and
Private Sectors in his efforts to inflate the economy.

• The Fed expected QE2 to have more impact on jobs
and GDP. The money benefitted the banking industry
but not industry in general.

It‟s possible to explain away the „soft spot‟ as a result of the Spring 2011 Supply Shocks in Japan and the Middle East; it may even be possible to extrapolate this thinking to justify a return to GDP growth in the Fall.

But one thing remains, until the job market shows signs of sustained improvement, long term confidence in a persistent domestic economic recovery will be questionable.

“Until we see a sustained period of stronger job creation, we cannot consider the recovery to be truly established”, another quote from Ben Bernanke.
Monetary policy cannot be a Panacea
Is The Fed saying that it has done as much as it can through Monetary Easing; the printing and circulating of more money?
QE1 and QE2 achieved their objectives by:

• Saving the U.S. Banking System, and therefore the world‟s banking system.
• Raising the price of Equities
• Reducing Interest Rates and the Dollar

But QE2 or QE3 can‟t sustain economic growth. Quantitative Easing was initially a protective measure; pump liquidity into the economy and provide banks with copious amounts of free capital.

Thereafter, it was intended to be a box of matches that could set the economy ablaze. Well, now all the QE matches have been struck, the economic wildfire still refuses to spread.

Employment is the fuel necessary to get this fire to spontaneously combust.

How to Stimulate Employment?

Jobs are a common byproduct of economic activity; however, productivity increases (together with an amount of outsourcing) has created an economic recovery with fewer new jobs than expected.

So what‟s a government to do about job creation?

QE3?

The Fed obviously thinks: “QE1 and QE2 didn‟t ignite the job market, so why would QE3 do any better?” Additionally, the debt created by quantitative easing requires repayment at some stage (seriously). Repayment will require deficit reduction which will require cut backs in economic activity.

Conclusion: QE3 may ultimately hurt the job market.

Keeping Interest Rates and the Dollar Low?

The Fed may have ended the QE programs, but it will still try to keep interest rates and the dollar low by other means; means too complex to detail here.

Why keep Interest Rates and the Dollar Low?

• Lower interest rates encourage investment (loans cost less) and discourage savers (don‟t put your money in the bank; put it into riskier assets or a business).
• A lower dollar makes domestic goods cheaper and more competitive overseas while making imports more expensive.

Although recent balance of payments data shows U.S. exports have benefitted from a lower dollar, it‟s clear that low interest rates have failed to stimulate lending and economic activity. Why pump more money into the monetary system when it isn‟t finding its way to enough businesses and households. The Government needs to direct the monetary faucet where it can create jobs.
If the printing presses don‟t stop creating money soon, the risk of inflation will increase dramatically. In turn, this may cause interest rates to rise which would defeat the object of the stimulus exercise.

Rising interest rates are synonymous with monetary tightening. Monetary tightening normally means fewer jobs; a downwards spiral no one wants to see at the moment.

Failure to control spending can actually hurt jobs in a similar way to reducing spending.

Note: For all you bond investors, a domestic “rising interest rate environment” may yet be a year or two away if the Fed has their way.

Government & Private Sector Stimulus

Chairman Bernanke‟s comment: “monetary policy cannot be a panacea” begs the question “What else will help monetary policy to create sustainable growth?”

"Policymakers urgently need to put the Federal governments' finances on a sustainable trajectory," Bernanke said in Atlanta. "Establishing a credible plan for reducing future deficits now would not only enhance economic performance in the long run, but could also yield near-term benefits by leading to lower long-term interest rates."

Looks like Ben thinks it's now up to the politicians to help the economy by reducing the federal deficit.

And now the good news – it appears both sides of the political divide agree that the deficit must be reduced. The debate has moved on to:

• How to Reduce the Deficit: Reduce Spending or Increase Taxes?
• How much to Reduce the Deficit by

At a time when investors are looking for a clear direction, let us weigh in with a decisive conclusion:

Let’s wait and see what the Government agrees and what kind of earnings season we have starting early July…


PS: Have you noticed the increasing number of States and Municipalities implementing fiscal tightening activities. Nowhere near enough to make a difference yet, but a step in the right direction and a shining beacon for the route the Federal Government will have to follow soon.

As we called it, Double Dip Housing has arrived

Here are latest from S&P/Case Shiller report out this morning.

• 4.2 percent decline in Q1 of 2011, 2.9 percent from one year ago.

• The 10 cities fell .6 percent in March

• Top 20 cities fell .8 percent in March

What's probably most concerning and begs to question, what happened to the home buyer tax credits which were supposed to stimulate the economy and housing market (not necessarily in that order)?

Perhaps the best news to come out of this will be evidence that mortgage rates will remain low as yields become subject to basic economic supply and demand. With new mortgage transaction counts down, there just isn't enough fixed income products out there to buy outside of corporate bonds and US Treasuries..

To further the point, the National Association of Realtors released an article the other day verifying the median income of real estate agents has fallen 22% to $34,100? Median income….half make more and half make less. Also, a mere 16% of national real estate agents made 6 figures last year. I’m sure you’re curious to what that number represents and it’s 176,556 agents.

Ok, so all this wonderful news is out there. Here's our take on how to truly jumpstart both the housing industry and this economy.

• Bring back down payment assistance. I know the GSE's (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) despised these buyer assisted grant programs. Here's how the vast majority of them worked: Seller of the home (at closing) would make a "charitable donation" to a Non-profit organization (say a church), the church in turn work pocket a $900 admin. fee but remit the rest of the month (at times up to $10,000) towards the buyers closing cost. True the default in loans structured in the aforementioned way had higher default levels but now that HUD has grossly increased both the initial upfront Mortgage Insurance Premium and Monthly Premium, there's got to be a pretty decent model which supports a 3-6% default and still ensure "success" in homeownership.

• Housing is only so important to an already service oriented country like the US. Manufacturing MUST return. Leadership in Washington DC must bring back significant incentives to "defend" this countries manufacturing arm.

• Flat tax. If this county remains (as we suspect it will) a service oriented country, we must tax it accordingly whereby those leveraging the most services or consuming the most goods, in turn pay more.

Simple, now where do we petition these simple requests?

Someone else seems to "get it"

Rising food, gas prices lift U.S. consumer inflation

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42605692/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER
WASHINGTON— Americans are paying more for food and gas, a trend that could slow economic growth in the months ahead.

The Consumer Price Index rose 0.5 percent in March, the Labor Department said Friday. That
matched February's increase, the largest since the recession ended in June 2009. In the past 12 months, the index has increased 2.7 percent, the biggest rise since December 2009.

Excluding the volatile food and gas categories, the so-called core index rose 0.1 percent and it is up only 1.2 percent in the past year.

Consumers are spending more, but the steep rise in food and gas prices could limit their
ability to purchase discretionary goods and services. Consumer spending makes up 70
percent of economic activity.

Rising inflation has caused many analysts to reduce their estimates for economic growth in
the January-March quarter from roughly 3 percent or higher to as low as 1.5 percent.

Gasoline jumped 5.6 percent last month and has risen nearly 28 percent in the past year.
Consumers paid an average price of $3.81 a gallon nationwide on Friday according to the
travel group AAA.

Food prices rose 0.8 percent last month, the largest increase in almost three years. Prices
for fruits and vegetables, dairy products, chicken and beef all increased. Coffee costs
rose 3.5 percent.

Separately, the Federal Reserve said U.S. factories produced more consumer goods,
business equipment and raw materials in March, boosting manufacturing activity for the
ninth straight month. Overall industrial production increased 0.8 percent.

Factory production, the largest single segment of industrial production, increased 0.7 percent advertisementadvertisement Rising food, gas prices lift U.S. consumer inflation
Trend could slow economic growth in the months ahead, new report suggests last month. Manufacturing has been a key driver of economic growth since the recession ended. That continued last month, even with supply chain disruptions stemming from the
crisis in Japan.

Manufacturers, food processors and other producers are facing higher costs for oil,
grains and other commodities. But only some of those increases are reaching the consumer.
Many retailers are reluctant to pass on the higher prices for fear of losing price-
conscious customers.

Vegetable bandits strike as food prices soar

Consumers have seen wages and salaries stagnate in the past year, limiting their ability
to pay more for many goods. According to a separate government report Friday, average
hourly earnings for all employees, adjusted for inflation, dropped 1 percent in the past 12
months.

Stagnant wages are a big reason that most Federal Reserve policymakers say the spike in
gas and food will have only a modest and temporary impact on inflation.

"Nothing here to change the Fed's view that the surge in commodity prices can be ignored as
long as it doesn't lead to second-round effects in wages and core inflation," said Paul
Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics.

Who can you trust?

Here's a question I would like to pose for the loyal Efinity audience.

Is the economic environment in this country really improving or are we all being fed a stream of special interest commentary which want us to think things are getting better?

I have two separate examples for your collective review which point to the latter. I for one have a HUGE problem with this. It's important to note that I include our government included as one of the special interest groups.
Example #1
As reported by the Wall Street Journal, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke Monday downplayed inflation fears which led some of colleagues to recently warn tighter monetary policy may be needed to keep prices in check. Bernanke said the rise in global commodity prices is likely to be temporary and shouldn't translate into a broader inflation problem. However, the Fed chief was quick to add that if his prediction is wrong and inflation begins to mark strong gains, the central bank would respond. "I think the increase in inflation will be transitory," Bernanke said when asked to further explain.
This has been a consistent them from the Fed Chairman for the past 18 months. In no way shape or form believe my limited view trumps the access to data the Fed Chairman has, however I do believe that statistics can be shown in many ways to shape many opinions. And if left-unchecked can fog the real issue which is that inflation is here, it will affect the economic recovery of this country and there is a strategic advantage for the Fed to not fully publicize the real issue.

Allow me to explain further (if you don't care to read through this, you can skip to my summary). First, one has to understand how the Bureau of Labor Statistics determines the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI is a measure of the average change in prices over time of goods and services purchased by households. The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes CPIs for two population groups: (1) the CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which covers households of wage earners and clerical workers that comprise approximately 32 percent of the total population and (2) the CPI for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) and the Chained CPI for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U), which cover approximately 87 percent of the total population and include in addition to wage earners and clerical worker households, groups such as professional, managerial, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, and retirees and others not in the labor force. The CPIs are based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, and fuels, transportation fares, charges for doctors' and dentists' services, drugs, and other goods and services that people buy for day-to-day living. Prices are collected each month in 87 urban areas across the country from about 4,000 housing units and approximately 26,000 retail establishments-department stores, supermarkets, hospitals, filling stations, and other types of stores and service establishments. All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are included in the index. Prices of fuels and a few other items are obtained every month in all 87 locations. Prices of most other commodities and services are collected every month in the three largest geographic areas and every other month in other areas. Prices of most goods and services are obtained by personal visits or telephone calls of the Bureau's trained representatives.

In calculating the index, price changes for the various items in each location are averaged together with weights, which represent their importance in the spending of the appropriate population group. Local
data are then combined to obtain a U.S. city average. For the CPI-U and CPI-W separate indexes are also published by size of city, by region of the country, for cross-classifications of regions and population-size classes, and for 27 local areas. Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of prices among cities; they only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period. For the C-CPI-U data are issued only at the national level. It is important to note that the CPI-U and CPI-W are considered final when released, but the C-CPI-U is issued in preliminary form and subject to two annual revisions.

The index measures price change from a designed reference date. For the CPI-U and the CPI-W the reference base is 1982-84 equals 100. The reference base for the C-CPI-U is December 1999 equals 100. An increase of 16.5 percent from the reference base, for example, is shown as 116.500. This change can also be expressed in dollars as follows: the price of a base period market basket of goods and services in the CPI has risen from $10 in 1982-84 to $11.65.

Now that you have a better understanding, here's the most recent summary dates March 17th (see http://bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm)
I'd like to point you to a few items once you've read through this list.

Seasonally adjusted changes from preceding month
Un-adjusted 12-mos.
Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. ended
2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 Feb. 2011

All items.................. .2 .2 .2 .1 .4 .4 .5 2.1
Food...................... .1 .3 .1 .2 .1 .5 .6 2.3
Food at home............. .0 .4 .1 .2 .2 .7 .8 2.8
Food away from home (1).. .3 .3 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2 1.6
Energy.................... 1.6 1.1 2.5 .1 4.0 2.1 3.4 11.0
Energy commodities....... 2.6 2.2 4.4 .7 6.4 4.0 4.8 19.3
Gasoline (all types) .... 2.9 2.2 4.5 .7 6.7 3.5 4.7 19.2
Fuel oil (1)............ .9 .8 4.7 4.2 4.9 6.8 5.8 27.1
Energy services.......... .4 -.4 .0 -.8 .6 -.6 1.1 .2
Electricity............. .1 -.1 .2 .6 .3 -.5 .4 2.2
Utility (piped) gas
service.............. 1.4 -1.4 -.6 -5.3 1.7 -1.2 3.4 -5.9
All items less food and
energy................. .1 .0 .0 .1 .1 .2 .2 1.1
Commodities less food and
energy commodities.... .1 -.2 -.2 .0 -.1 .2 .2 .0
New vehicles............ .2 .1 -.1 -.2 -.1 -.1 1.0 .9
Used cars and trucks.... .9 -.4 -.6 .1 -.1 -.3 .1 1.9
Apparel................. .0 -.5 -.2 .1 .1 1.0 -.9 -.4
Medical care commodities
(1).................. .2 .3 .1 .2 .1 .5 .7 2.7
Services less energy
services.............. .0 .1 .1 .2 .1 .1 .2 1.5
Shelter................. .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .8
Transportation services .0 .3 .3 .4 .2 .6 .5 3.5
Medical care services... .2 .7 .2 .2 .3 -.1 .4 3.0


Our SummaryWhile statically speaking, the adjusted 12 month index reflected a 2.1% increase (before seasonal adjustments), unless you're radically different than most people I know and don't spend equally on a whole range it items (including evidently a whole lot of apparel) this report summarized simply does not accurately reflect the present sign of the times. Which is; food, energy and gasoline are MAJOR drivers for people's spending. Car sales are down. Home sales are down. So if we were to focus on the net spending habits of people and clients (we deal with); here's the summary of inflation as it affects them:
• Food - 2.3 increase
• Food at home - 2.8% increase
• Energy - 11% increase
• Gasoline (all types) - 19.2% increase
Interesting that all of these figures are materially higher than the 2.1% reported CPI. The takeaway here is simply that disposable income is being reduced. As a country moving away from manufacturing and more towards consumer services, disposable income is imperative to a healthy and strong recover. Same goes for jobs. Perhaps this is a prime reason channels like CNBC dedicate some much talk of crude oil prices.

Example #2 forthcoming in the next Efinity Report post.

If you won't listen to us... perhaps the writers with the AP will sway you

Era of super-low mortgage rates is OVER


30-year benchmark rises to 5.05 percent from 4.81 percent
The average rate for a 30-year home loan rose above 5 percent this week for the first time since last April — just as Americans are feeling more secure in their jobs and confident about the economy, and just before the big spring home-buying rush.

Freddie Mac said Thursday that the average rate was 5.05 percent, almost a full percentage point higher than in November, when it hit a 40-year low.

Economic signals suggest the recovery is gaining momentum. New claims for jobless
benefits came in this week at the lowest in three years, and the unemployment rate has fallen nearly a full percentage point in two months. Americans are spending more and saving less.

The exception is the beleaguered housing market. Record foreclosures have forced home prices down, and last year was the worst for sales in more than a decade. About the only good news was that qualified buyers could get the deal of a lifetime from their lenders, if they had the means — and the stomach — for the market.

Now rates are rising, and analysts expect that will continue through the end of the year, to about 5.5 percent. The next few months are the busiest for the housing market — about one in three home sales happens in the spring.
It doesn't help," says Greg McBride, a senior financial analyst with Bankrate.com. "Any increase in mortgage rates takes away buying power and dilutes the incentive to refinance."

Rates have been rising since the fall, mostly because of fears that higher inflation is coming. Investors have been demanding higher yields on Treasury bonds ever since the Federal Reserve announced its program to pump up the economy by spending $600 billion to buy government debt. Mortgage rates tend to track the yield on the 10-year Treasury note.

"You'll see some effect on demand, but it's really how secure people are in their jobs and how much money they feel they have relative to their homes," says Cristian deRitis, an economist specializing in housing for Moody's Analytics.

"Many of those people just won't buy a house," says Wells Fargo senior economist Mark Vitner. "They'll hold off."

Home prices are expected to fall at least 5 percent more this year. Because of the feeling that the home isn't the failsafe investment it used to be, renting is more attractive. Especially when some analysts say it could be years before prices return to their pre-recession peak.

That may be contributing to the fact that, despite record inventory levels of affordable homes in nearly half of U.S. cities, mortgage applications continue their downward slide as buyers remain on the sidelines.

"Believe it or not, what I'm seeing, and I'm working with first-time homebuyers, they are not as affected by the interest rate as they are by getting a down payment," says Julie Longtin, a real estate agent with RE/MAX Cityside in Providence, R.I. "That's what is holding them back."

On a $200,000 loan, the payment difference between today's rate and November's is less than $100 a month — hardly enough by itself to spook a buyer.

If rates continue to rise, as many predict they will, the housing market will be in for yet more trouble. "Six percent would do serious damage if it happened in a very short period of time," said Patrick Newport, U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight.

Even 6 percent would be a bargain for homebuyers historically. Rates were in double digits through most of the 1980s. It wasn't until 1991 that rates consistently stayed below 10 percent. At the peak of the credit bubble in July 2006, the 30-year fixed mortgage was 6.76 percent.

All this leaves buyers wondering: What is the new normal for interest rates?

"We're turning to a more normal mortgage rate environment, says Guy Cecala, publisher of the trade magazine Inside Mortgage Finance. "That pretty much means the 30-year in the 6 percent range. I don't think rates will be going down." - AP writers JANNA HERRON, MICHELLE CONLIN

What this REALLY means for the market and housing over the next 3-5 years + will be detailed in the Efinity Report's next blog. Stay tuned...

Our 2011 Outlook (no 3-D glasses required)

Over the last 90 days I have been keeping a watchful eye on our equity markets, general economic news and perhaps more important, the US consumer sentiment. There have been encouraging signs that the economy may have finally stopped sliding into the abyss and by all accounts moving forward under the new financial paradigm. I’d like to refer to this as the “New Normal”. Unemployment has held steady, the Christmas shopping season appears to have beat expectations, the stock market has had a fantastic run over the last 180 days. GM complete its bankruptcy process and most of the largest banks have repaid the TARP money lent to them. Hey, JP Morgan Chase recorded outstanding record profits for Q4.
All of that said, before we take that collective sigh’ and pat ourselves and our fearless leaders in Washington on their backs for a job well done, I’d like to turn some our attention to a news story which was recorded by 60 Minutes in which the title Day of Reckoning and where wall street brain trust Meredith Whitney whose focus of this story was to paint a fairly bleak picture of the individual State balance sheet(s) and the windfall of potential risks. While the news story (seen here http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7166293n ) did have in my humble opinion a few misleading conversation points, it is true that the bulk of the attention has been paid to the national financial deficit problem, not our individual state issues (see Illinois) where these problems have been getting progressively worse over the last 10 years. The issue I am most concerned with as it directly relates to not only to Efinity’s core businesses, but our countries general way of life; the seemingly non-issue of inflation. There has been a growing undertow of consumer inflation in several areas and while gas prices tend to get the most headline coverage, if you compare just the last 6 months of the everyday costs of meat, bread, milk, corn, you’ll begin to see changes which on the onset don’t appear much (.10c to .30c) however these have been in a fairly stable gas price environment. With the highly anticipated summer gas price increase in the 20-30% range (as found in the futures market), we could see a dramatic change in the ability for many American’s to operate their daily lives as they have been. For our older members of society, it’s even worse as not only did many of them have significant capital stripping take place from 2007-2009 but there is a HUGE gap in anticipated appreciation and available returns of investment in savings and market rates. Add the growing concerns in the municipal bond markets and you’ll find the options are even more limited. So, in short order 2011 will be more of the same. A country with potential but with serious legacy problems it needs to deal with, which will come at a cost to all of us and an impediment to GDP.

Oh No They Didn't....

The US Debt Commission charged by the president on balancing the US’ budget, remitted their fiscal austerity plan. Within the proposal was a key ingredient which will greatly affect American homeownership, specifically the income-tax deduction for mortgage interest. The 18-member commission has been looking for ways to trim the federal deficit. Among the $3.8 trillion in debt-cutting options being considered by the “National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform” was initially written to include the eliminating for second homes mortgages of more than $500,000, and home-equity loans. The final release is a bit more aggressive. It includes a 12% non-refundable tax credit available to all tax payers with mortgages now caped at $500,000. NO credit from interest from second homes and home equity loans. As one might expect, the reaction from various housing industry leaders was a strident “Not A Good Idea”. With its release, the Congress and the President “must decide which tax expenditures to include in the tax code” of which mortgage interest for primary residences is specifically mentioned. I’ll highlight a few of the comments I have found around the news wires:

• “For a battered housing industry, which is struggling with a 21 percent unemployment rate among construction workers, this is absolutely the worst time to be considering changes,” said National Association of Home Builders President Bob Jones. Adding that diminishing or ending the deduction would exert further downward pressure on home prices, leaving more homeowners with mortgages larger than the value of their property and fueling even more foreclosures.
• Mortgage Bankers Association Chairman Michael D. Berman said that while his group’s members shared in the growing concern about the federal deficit, limiting the use of the mortgage-interest deduction “will have negative repercussions for consumers and home values up and down the housing chain.” Given “the fragile state” of the housing market, Berman said, “now is not the time to be scaling back incentives for homeownership.”
• Not to be left out, the National Association of REALTORS® has decided to take a wait and see approach.

There are some supports of this action, may of which are in the economics field. “The mortgage-interest deduction is to housing policy what Social Security reform has traditionally been to politics: the third rail,” says Kevin Gillen, vice president at Econsult Corp. in Philadelphia. He shares a consensus among economists is that the deduction is regressive and promotes overconsumption.

Out of pure selfish reasons, it’s no surprise that I oppose anything but a very limited change relating to interest and tax deduction on all types of homeownership. My suggestion would be to eliminate the interest deduction on all mortgages over $1.5 million and all Non-Owner properties as they typically have additional deductions taken with home improvement. This affects the super rich (or over extended) and the “investor”. The fact that it’s mentioned creates a slippery slope down the road should more severe additional cuts are required. The primary-residence tax and interest deduction is the one almost every American homeowner looks forward to as a way to be rewarded for the risks and costs of owning and maintaining a home. With almost half of the recent homebuyers consisting of first-timers, this tax and interest deduction is critical to the on-going recovery. Any changes in my opinion, even my own suggestions should not be implemented until the housing market is operating normally.


THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND REFORM
http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf

Financial Reform Bill Update

Congress moved on multiple fronts last week, bringing the financial regulatory reform bill to the edge of enactment and sending to the President's desk a pair of bills extending the flood insurance program and the settlement deadline for the home buyer tax credit. President Obama signed both bills on Friday.

The House approved the Dodd-Frank bill Wednesday by a 237-192 vote, though the week did not go by without some unexpected drama. While the legislation was expected to be approved by both the House and Senate in time to meet President Obama’s July 4 deadline, last-minute objections over a $19 billion bank tax added in the dead of night led to the bill being reopened in order to remove the provision. The passing early in the week of Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., also changed the vote count for passage.

The Senate is still expected to pass the financial reform package, but not until Congress returns the week of July 12.

House Passes Regulatory Reform Conference Report; Senate Passage Delayed
A week after passing what was thought to be the final Dodd-Frank regulatory reform bill out of the conference committee, prospects for final passage in Congress were complicated by two major events.

First, the death of Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., June 28 cost Senate Democrats a crucial vote for the legislation, and necessitated the Senate adjourning early for memorial services. Byrd’s passing, coupled with an announcement by Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., that he would oppose the legislation after a bank tax was added to the bill at the end of the conference process, left congressional leaders scrambling to wrap up the legislation before the July 4 deadline set by President Obama.

In an attempt to win back Brown’s vote, as well as several other moderate Republicans, the conference committee reconvened on June 29 and removed the bank tax, replacing it with an increase in Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. fees and an earlier sunset of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. With these changes, the House passed the conference report Wednesday evening by a 237-192 vote.

The Senate, however, delayed a final vote on the legislation until after the Independence Day break. That period will be critical to determining if the most recent legislative changes will sway enough Republicans to break the expected filibuster, and it will also provide time for the governor of West Virginia to fill that state’s vacant Senate seat.

MBA sent a letter to the conferees stating that while changes to the conference report modestly improved the legislation, it still believes that additional improvements can be made to limit the negative impact the bill will have on businesses and consumers. MBA will continue to monitor this issue as it develops over the next 10 days.

Most Americans Say Now Is Time to Buy a House

The Efinity Report rarely posts news articles, however; we thought we would the following report from Reuters is a good indication of the mired direction of the housing market.

"Nearly two-thirds of Americans think the time is right to buy a house, with a majority believing prices will be the same or higher over the next year, according to a Fannie Mae survey released Tuesday.

The 64 percent that said it is a good time to buy is just shy of the 66 percent that said the same thing in 2003 as the U.S. housing market was racing higher, said the survey.

However, most of the 3,451 polled said that it would be tougher for them to get a loan than it was for their parents.

The survey comes amid signs that the U.S. housing market is recovering after suffering the worst downturn since the 1930s.

But, while home prices in some regions are rising, soaring delinquency rates across the nation mean foreclosures will keep persistent pressure on the market, according to analysts.

Fannie Mae, the largest U.S. mortgage finance company, said that the public still "strongly believes" in upholding their financial commitments, though that weakens once people know someone who is defaulting.

Those who know someone in default are more than twice as likely to have seriously considered stopping payments on their own mortgage, Fannie Mae said.

The Future of Mortgage Lending

There have been a hundred's of articles written over the last 12 months outlining what might happen to Mortgage Lending Industry if/when the federal government slows it's heavy participation through Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Housing Administration.
To say there would be no housing market without the government is an understatatement. thankfully, Washington has taken extraordinary steps to keep home loans available and affordable over the last 24 months. That caused a tentative housing recovery last year. Home sales reversed their four-year descent, while prices stabilized.

Now comes the hard part. Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Housing Administration are massive entities that purchase home loans, package them into investments and guarantee them against default. The price tag has been huge — $126 billion and growing.

The Obama administration has been surprisingly mute on the subject which makes me all the more neervous. Congress will hold its first today on how to restructure the mortgage system in the wake of the current financial crisis. How to manage change when the housing recovery remains too fragile and feeble for the government to step away. Even staunch free-market advocates who want to get rid of Fannie and Freddie in the long run don't see that happening anytime soon.

"The housing finance system clearly cannot continue to operate as it has in the past," said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in testimony prepared for Tuesday's hearing held by the House Financial Services Committee. He added that any restructuring should wait until "a time of greater market stability."

My interpretation: See National Health Care. Get your cheap mortgage rates now!!!

Housing's Continued Weakness (Existing Home Sales)

Earlier this week the Commerce Department reported a 7.2 percent decline in existing home sales. No surprise to anyone, this reflects continued evidence that high unemployment and tight lending standards are undercutting the government's attempts to prop up the market.

I would like to make a few points regarding the existing lending standards. First, we need to keep in mind that the government is currently buying roughly 93% of all residential mortgage activity in the US via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Without a robust capital markets outlet for mortgage backed securities, politics get to determine who obtains a home and who does not. Given the financial crisis of the last three years and the added negative press surrounding mortgages in general it's not surprising to see credit requirements sitting at their highest points in 15 years. While housing is not the largest employment industries in our nation, it does serve several critical needs of our country and must play a participatory role in our nations recovery. Out of reach lending standards is not going to help matters.

So back to Friday's report. Since the for forecast was so much worse than forecast and suggest the housing recovery will sputter without government support. The government has spent billions to keep mortgage rates low and give buyers tax breaks, but both programs are set to end this spring.


The National Association of Realtors said that home sales fell 7.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.05 million from a downwardly revised pace of 5.44 million in December. Economists expected a slight increase to a rate of 5.5 million.

Home sales have been sluggish this winter even though the deadline for a tax credit for first-time buyers was extended. It had been set to expire on Nov. 30. That caused sales to surge last fall. Then Congress extended the deadline until April 30 and expanded it to existing homeowners who move.

The housing report was another sign that consumers still aren't feeling comfortable making sizable purchases. With jobs still scarce, weak consumer spending is a key reason why economic growth is expected to be feeble this year.

Home sales are still up nearly 12 percent from the bottom, but are down 30 percent from their peak more than four years ago.

Last month, sales declined throughout the country, falling the most — nearly 11 percent — in the Northeast. Sales fell by about 7 percent in the South and Midwest and by more than 5 percent in the West.

Nationally, more than a quarter of buyers last month paid all cash, reflecting a surge of investors buying low-priced foreclosures, the Realtors group said.

Nationwide, the median sales price was $164,700, unchanged from a year earlier and down about 3 percent from December. The inventory of unsold homes on the market was down slightly. There is a 7.8 month supply at the current sales pace, up from a recent low of 6.5 months in November.

The bleak report comes after the government reported Wednesday that sales of newly built homes plunged 11 percent to a record low in January. The report, which measures signed contracts to buy homes rather than completed sales, also came as a surprise to economists.

Another question hanging over the housing market this year is whether interest rates will rise, and by how much. The Federal Reserves $1.25 trillion program to push down mortgage rates is scheduled to expire on March 31. This is a MAJOR concern for us here at Efinity. The affordability of homes right now is critical to this nation's recovery.

FED LOOKING MORE LIKE JP MORGAN CHASE EVERY DAY....

The few remaining banks left on Wall Street aren't the only banks having a banner year. The Federal Reserve made record profits in 2009, as its unconventional efforts to prop up the economy created a windfall for the government.

The Fed will return about $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury for 2009, according to calculations by The Washington Post based on public documents. That reflects the highest earnings in the 96-year history of the central bank. The Fed, unlike most government agencies, funds itself from its own operations and returns its profits to the Treasury.

The numbers are good news for the federal budget and a sign that the Fed has been successful, at least so far, in protecting taxpayers as it intervenes in the economy — though there remains a risk of significant losses in the future if the Fed sells some of its investments or loses money on its stakes in bailed-out firms.

This turn of events comes as the banks that benefited from the Fed's actions are under the microscope: Major banks are expected to announce massive earnings and employee bonuses starting at the end of this week, and anger in Washington is at such a high boil that the Obama administration is likely to propose a fee on financial firms to recoup the cost of their bailout, officials confirmed Monday.

As it happens, the Fed's earnings for the year will dwarf those of the large banks, easily topping the expected profits of Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase combined.

Much of the higher earnings came about because of the Fed's aggressive program of buying bonds, aiming to push interest rates down across the economy and thus stimulate growth. By the end of 2009, the Fed owned $1.8 trillion in U.S. government debt and mortgage-related securities, up from $497 billion a year earlier. The interest income on those investments was a major source of Fed profits — though that income comes with risks, as the central bank could lose money if it later sells those securities to reduce the money supply.

Emergency loans
The Fed also made money on its emergency loans to banks and other firms and on special programs to prop up lending, such as one that supports credit cards, auto loans, and other consumer and business lending. Those programs impose interest and fees on participants, with the aim of ensuring that the Fed does not lose money.

And while the central bank in its most recent financial report had recorded a $3.8 billion decline in the value of loans it made in bailing out the investment bank Bear Stearns and the insurer American International Group, the Fed also logged $4.7 billion in interest payments from those loans. Further losses — or gains — on the two bailouts are possible as time goes by. The Fed also charges fees for operating the plumbing of the financial system, such as clearing checks and electronic payments between banks.

From its revenue, the Fed deducts operating expenses, such as employee salaries, then returns almost all of the earnings that remain to the Treasury. The largest previous refund to the Treasury was $34.6 billion, in 2007.


"This shows that central banking is a great business to be in, especially in a crisis," said Vincent Reinhart, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Fed official. "You buy assets that have a nice yield, and your cost of funds is very low. The difference is profit."

The Fed plans to release its estimate of 2009 earnings Tuesday. The Post's calculation is based on combining data through September from the Fed's monthly balance sheet report with more recent data from the Treasury's daily budget statement.

Fed officials do not make policy with an eye toward maximizing profits. They are charged by law with managing the nation's money supply to keep employment high and prices stable, and earnings fluctuate depending on a wide range of factors as they pursue that goal. In the crisis, the central bank's policy has been to create money and use it to buy a wide variety of assets, which in turn pay interest.

Exotic investments
In effect, the unprecedented range of actions taken to address the crisis has made the Fed's balance sheet more like that of a private bank. A firm such as Bank of America takes money from depositors, whom it pays little or nothing in interest, and lends it out at significantly higher rates. The Fed, similarly, takes money that banks keep on deposit, at a rate of 0.25 percent, and lends it to the U.S. government by buying Treasury securities and, lately, to home buyers and other private borrowers though more exotic investments.

While that resulted in higher earnings in 2009, it exposes the Fed to more risks down the road. "They've moved up the risk-return curve, as they have more long-term assets and more things that involve credit risk," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial.

If the price of Treasury bonds or mortgage-related securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to fall in the years ahead, and Fed leaders decided they need to drain money from the financial system by selling off some of their portfolio, the central bank would lose money. "If they do enough asset sales and rates go high enough, that could eat into future profits pretty substantially," said Michael Feroli, an economist at J.P. Morgan Chase.

Question is, I wonder if the tax payer will recieve a refund?

Foreign Markets a Boon for US Fixed Assets

This evening, Greece's credit rating was lowered by Fitch which has sparked a fairly noticeable change in after hours trading (out of equities). This comes almost one year after S&P lowered the sovereign nation's rating to an A-. As a fledgling recovery takes hold across most of the US and Europe, the deterioration of some government balance sheets represents a continuing risk which may help fuel fixed income trades over the coming days. This is somewhat noteworthy because the Fed has pretty much spent their allotment of $300 billion for the direct purchase of government debt instruments and most recent non farm payroll data showed the economy came with 11,000 jobs of moving into positive job creation mode. These two conditions have many fretting that Uncle Sam will have to offer higher yields on the stacks of 10-year notes and 30-year bonds to attract the capital he is after. We may see foreign funds continue to seek a flight to quality "interestingly enough" just in time.

Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus Estimate
My Analysis

Mon. Dec. 7, 12:45 p.m. ET
Nothing of importance

Tues. Dec. 8, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$40 billion of 3-year notes
The participation levels from domestic and foreign investors was on target.

Wed. Dec. 9, 10:00 a.m. ET
Oct. Wholesale Inventories
-0.5% vs. last -0.9%
This old stale data will likely have little, if any direct impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates today.

Wed. Dec. 9, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$21 billion of 10-year notes
Based on this evening's activities thanks to Fitch', this offering may find more aggressive than the technical indicators were initially flashing as an increased number of signs that an interest rate bottom may be near. If I am right, we may see a fairly strong rally in fixed equities supporting lower interest rates.

Thurs, Dec. 10,
Most mortgage-backed securities “roll” to January delivery.

Thurs. Dec. 10, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the week ended 12/5
Up 3,000
There are few who doubt the labor sector’s recuperation will be excruciatingly slow. The anticipated uptick in last week’s jobless claims will probably be largely shrugged off by mortgage investors resulting in little, if any change to the current level of mortgage
interest rates.

Thurs. Dec. 10, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$13 billion of 30-year bonds
This is a key indicator. Investors will be watching very closely to see how this offering fares now that the Fed won't be a direct buyer of this debt obligation.

Fri. Dec. 11, 8:30 a.m. ET
Nov. Retail Sales
Ex. auto
+0.6% vs. last +1.4%
+0.4% vs. last +0.2%
Consumer spending is a major driving force behind economic growth and it will be virtually impossible for the recovery to gain traction without it. Report numbers that match or fall below the consensus estimate will tend to support steady to perhaps fractionally lower mortgage rates. The risk is that Nov. Retail Sales prove stronger than expected.

Fri. Dec. 11, 10:00 a.m. ET Oct.
Business Inventories
-0.3% vs. last -0.4%
Nothing worth noting here.

What Happened to November?

Better yet, what happened to October? The last 60 days have been a flash and have left the Efinity Report void of updates. Perhaps my New years resolution will include a more time spent on submitting these valuable nuggests. That said, thank you to many of you for the emails inquiring on the Efinity Report.

Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus
Estimate
My Analysis

Mon. Nov. 30
Nothing of any significance.

Tues. Dec. 1, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
55.0 vs. last 55.7
Because auto manufacturing is contributing less to growth this measure of factory activity is expected to post a modest decline. Most mortgage investors will likely show little reaction to this data. This report to exert little, if any influence on the direction of the markets today. I would suggest to see how the Dubai World problem plays itself out. Given the lengthy and continued run up in fixed income pricing, it would not surprise me to see a fairly strong pull pack in late afternoon trading.

Wed. Dec. 2, 2:00 p.m. ET
Fed Beige Book released
This report, named for the color of its cover, is a compilation of economic reports from all 12 Federal Reserve districts. The brighter tones of recovery in most districts will likely be offset by still grim news in terms of employment. The chance any of the data in this report will surprise investors is small. Look for this data to be essentially “toothless” with respect to its impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates.

Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Revised Q3 Productivity & Unit Labor Costs
+8.6% vs. last +9.5%
-4.2% vs. last -5.2%
If the consensus estimate proves correct, this report may be a little unsettling for mortgage investors. A downward adjustment in productivity gains and an upward revision in labor cost is not typically the “stuff” that lower mortgage interest rates are made
of.

Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the
week ended 11/28
Up 14,000
According to data provided by the Dismal Scientist initial jobless claims have shown a tendency to rise in the week including the Thanksgiving holiday in 7 of the past 10 years.
There is little reason to expect this phenomenon will not prevail once again this time around. Look for this data to draw little more than a passing glance from mortgage investors.

Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
Service Sector Index
51.5 vs. last 50.6
The fractional improvement in the month-over-month value for this measure of activity in the largest segment of the economy is broadly anticipated. A reading that matches or lands close to the consensus estimate will likely result in little change to mortgage interest rates. Only in the most unlikely event that the ISM Service Sector Index falls below a reading of 50.0 would mortgage interest rates be expected to move noticeably lower as a direct result of this report.

Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Senate Banking Committee holds confirmation hearing on the nomination of Fed Chairman
Bernanke to a second term as chief of the U.S. central bank. Look for Committee members to attempt to lay complete blame for the swoon in the economy at the feet of Mr. Bernanke (a
hack job on a bureaucratic scapegoat is always a far better political option as opposed to accepting responsibility directly – especially with mid-term elections so close at hand). The exchanges here have the potential to be heated – but nothing in the way of market moving rhetoric is likely.

Fri. Dec. 4, 8:30 a.m. ET Nov.
Nonfarm payrolls
Jobless rate -130,000
10.2% vs. last 10.2%
Businesses accross most channels are still shedding workers. The headline nonfarm payroll number may have improved but the first-quarter average monthly loss still reflects loss of 691,000 jobs. It will likely take a headline job loss of 150,000 or more and/or a jobless rate of 10.3% or more to create enough stir in the markets and interest rates lower.