Mortgage Relief Program Benefits Banks More Than Homeowners

A new revision of a government program designed to aid struggling homeowners will also provide revenue for big banks. The program will help homeowners refinance when they owe more on their homes than their properties are actually worth. But the program could earn lenders up to $12 billion for their involvement.

The new version of the Home Affordable Refinance Program, dubbed HARP 2.0 after its announcement last year, was meant to provide an avenue of relief for debt-troubled homeowners who were current on their payments. However, by introducing steep fees and interest rates that lie high above the market, banks have been able to term the process into a steady source of income, even as they refinance mortgages they already handle. According to the Wall Street Journal, homeowners stand to save $2.5 billion in payments, while banks may rake in almost five times that.

Currently, about 20 percent of homeowners fall into the category of “underwater,” owing more in mortgage payments than their homes are worth, according to a study by CoreLogic. Those same underwater homeowners are more likely to default than those treading it. HARP borrowers are also subject to higher interest rates than existing borrowers.

Responsibility for mortgages that default under the HARP 2.0 program has been shifted as well, from the big banks to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Prior to the program’s expansion, banks were required to pay for the losses of refinanced loans that fell into default, but now the government-sponsored Fannie and Freddie will foot the bill.

While banks may be finding new ways to earn huge paychecks off government aid, HARP can still provide relief for individual homeowners trying to climb out of debt. It just won’t prevent them from being a victim.

Independent journalism still matters.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top