subprime mortgage crisis

During 2007, nearly 1.3 million U.S. housing properties were subject to foreclosure activity, up 79% from 2006

Major banks and other financial institutions around the world have reported losses of approximately U.S. $435 billion as of 17 July 2008.

The amount of commercial paper issued as of 18 October 2007 dropped by 25%, to $888 billion, from the 8 August level. In addition, the interest rate charged by investors to provide loans for commercial paper has increased substantially above historical levels.

This demand helped fuel housing price increases and consumer spending. Between 1997 and 2006, American home prices increased by 124%.[30] Some homeowners used the increased property value experienced in the housing bubble to refinance their homes with lower interest rates and take out second mortgages against the added value to use the funds for consumer spending. U.S. household debt as a percentage of income rose to 130% during 2007, versus 100% earlier in the decade.[31] A culture of consumerism is a factor "in an economy based on immediate gratification"


Speculation in real estate was a contributing factor. During 2006, 22% of homes purchased (1.65 million units) were for investment purposes, with an additional 14% (1.07 million units) purchased as vacation homes. During 2005, these figures were 28% and 12%, respectively. In other words, nearly 40% of home purchases (record levels) were not primary residences. NAR's chief economist at the time, David Lereah, stated that the fall in investment buying was expected in 2006. "Speculators left the market in 2006, which caused investment sales to fall much faster than the primary market."


Role of financial institutions

A variety of factors have caused lenders to offer an increasing array of higher-risk loans to higher-risk borrowers. These high risk loans included the "No Income, No Job and no Assets" loans, sometimes referred to as Ninja loans. The share of subprime mortgages to total originations was 5% ($35 billion) in 1994 [50] , 9% in 1996 [51], 13% ($160 billion) in 1999 [50] , and 20% ($600 billion) in 2006.[51][52] A study by the Federal Reserve indicated that the average difference in mortgage interest rates between subprime and prime mortgages (the "subprime markup" or "risk premium") declined from 2.8 percentage points (280 basis points) in 2001, to 1.3 percentage points in 2007. In other words, the risk premium required by lenders to offer a subprime loan declined. This occurred even though subprime borrower and loan characteristics declined overall during the 2001–2006 period, which should have had the opposite effect. The combination is common to classic boom and bust credit cycles.