View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Home | En EspaƱol | Contact Us | A to Z

Subprime Lending Report
Unequal Burden: Subprime Lending in New York
Income and Racial Disparities in Subprime Lending
This study is part of a series that is constructing a national look at the growth in subprime lending. Over the last
decade, the amount of money available for home mortgages to borrowers with blemished or insufficient credit histories
has grown at a tremendous rate. From 1993 to 1998, the number of subprime refinance loans reported under HMDA
increased ten-fold - from 80,000 subprime refinance loans in 1993 to 790,000 in 1998. In 1994, the $35 billion in
subprime refinance mortgages represented less than 5 percent of all mortgage refinance originations. By 1999,
subprime refinance lending had increased to $160 billion, almost 13 percent of the mortgage refinance origination
market.
Securitization of subprime mortgages contributed significantly to the rapid growth of the subprime mortgage market.
Issuance of securities backed by subprime mortgages increased from $11 billion in 1994 to almost $83 billion in 1998,
before dropping back to $60 billion in 1999. (See Figure 1.) As the primary securities underwriters, Wall Street firms
have become increasingly involved in the subprime market during the last decade. In 1999, the top eight Wall Street
underwriters of subprime securities accounted for three-fourths of all subprime issues. Recently, Wall Street firms have
also become significant issuers of subprime securities, accounting for two of the top five issuers in 1999.
The growth in subprime lending over the last several years has been a beneficial development for borrowers with
impaired or limited credit histories. Subprime lenders have allowed such borrowers to access credit that they could not
otherwise obtain in the prime credit market. However, there is a growing body of anecdotal evidence that a subset of
these subprime lenders, who in many cases are not subject to federal regulation, engage in abusive lending practices
that strip borrowers' home equity and place them at increased risk of foreclosure. For this reason, this series of HUD
reports is examining patterns in subprime lending to understand where the risk and impact of predatory practices may
be highest.
AN OVERVIEW
As part of the series, this study presents a preliminary analysis of mortgage originations in the New York metropolitan
area in 1998 using data reported under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). This analysis covers all refinance
loans originated in the New York metropolitan area, which includes the five boroughs and Westchester County.
Nationwide, the HMDA data demonstrate the rapid growth of subprime refinance lending during the 1990s and the
disproportionate concentration of such lending in the nation's low-income and minority neighborhoods. These same
conclusions hold in the New York metropolitan area.
By providing loans to borrowers who do not meet the credit standards for borrowers in the prime market, subprime
lending can and does serve a critical role in urban areas such as New York. Some borrowers may have blemishes in
their credit record, insufficient credit history, or non-traditional credit sources. Thus, the subprime loan market offers
these borrowers opportunities to obtain loans that they would be unable to realize in the prime loan market.
But there are two sides to this story. Since subprime lending is not subject to federal regulation, it may be a fertile
ground for predatory lending activities. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these practices may include imposing and
financing excessive fees, bundling high-cost loans with lump-sum credit life insurance, and requiring prepayment
penalties. Predatory lending can have disastrous consequences for less financially savvy borrowers. Equity may be
stripped from their homes, and in more egregious cases, they may lose their homes altogether.
Some prime lenders have made significant progress in reaching underserved communities. A recent report for the
Treasury Department showed that banks and thrifts increased the share of their mortgage originations to low-income
borrowers and borrowers in low-income communities from 25 percent in 1993 to 28 percent in 1998. However, as the
evidence in this report suggests, there are many New York neighborhoods that could benefit from increased competition
from lenders in the home refinancing market. Such increased competition would give borrowers in these communities
alternative options to lenders that may engage in abusive lending practices.
The first step to ensuring that subprime lending enhances the economic health of the borrowers' families without
exposing them to predatory practices is to learn more about how and where it operates in America. To further
understand geographic disparities, HUD has analyzed the problem nationwide and has now taken a look at the data on
subprime lending in New York.
THE FINDINGS FOR NEW YORK

In general, HUD's analysis shows that subprime lending is more prevalent in lower-income and minority neighborhoods
than in higher-income and white neighborhoods. This likely indicates that because of their lower incomes, lenders may
consider these borrowers to be a higher credit risk, and these borrowers may therefore be less likely to qualify for
prime loans. However, a lack of competition from lenders in these markets to find creditworthy borrowers may increase
the chances that borrowers are exposed to the predatory practices of a subset of subprime lenders. There is also
evidence suggesting that after controlling for income, black borrowers and their neighborhoods may be comparatively
underserved by prime lenders.
The importance of subprime lending to minorities and low-income Americans, which is documented in what follows,
demonstrates how important it is to these communities that subprime lending not include any lenders engaging in
predatory practices.
1. From 1993 to 1998, the number of subprime refinance loans originated in New York increased by
about 350 percent. The number of refinance mortgages reported under HMDA by lenders specializing in
subprime lending in the New York metropolitan area increased from 3,674 loans in 1993 to 16,584 loans in 1998.
2. Subprime loans are over three times more likely in low-income neighborhoods in New York than in
upper-income neighborhoods. In low-income neighborhoods, subprime loans accounted for 53 percent of all
refinance loans originated during 1998 - compared with only 15 percent in upper-income neighborhoods.
3. Subprime loans are over four times more likely in black neighborhoods in New York than in white
neighborhoods. In predominantly black neighborhoods in New York, subprime lending accounted for 60 percent
of home refinance loans originated during 1998 - compared with only 13 percent in predominantly white
neighborhoods.
4. Homeowners in upper-income black neighborhoods are over two times more likely than
homeowners in middle-income white neighborhoods to refinance in the subprime market. In 1998,
52 percent of homeowners in upper-income black neighborhoods relied upon subprime refinance loans, which was
over two times the 24 percent of homeowners in middle-income white neighborhoods who have subprime loans.
5. The findings are similar when borrowers (rather than neighborhoods) throughout the New York
metropolitan area are examined. Two-thirds of low-income black borrowers in the New York metropolitan area
rely upon subprime loans. In 1998, 67 percent of the refinance loans for low-income black borrowers were
subprime loans, compared with 26 percent of loans for low-income white borrowers.
THE ANALYSIS
Subprime mortgage lending provides credit to borrowers with past credit problems, often at a higher cost or less
favorable terms than loans available in the conventional prime market. In most cases, these lenders offer credit to
borrowers who would not qualify for a loan in the prime market, thus expanding access to credit and helping more
families to own their own homes. The higher costs of these loans may serve to offset the increased risk that these
lenders assume in lending to these borrowers.
In some cases, however, subprime lenders engage in abusive lending practices known as "predatory lending", which
hits homeowners with excessive mortgage fees, interest rates, penalties and insurance charges that raise the cost of
refinancing by thousands of dollars for individual families.
HUD's study of subprime lending focuses mainly on subprime refinance lending, which accounts for nearly 80 percent of
total (home purchase and refinance loans combined) subprime mortgage lending nationwide and for 76 percent of
subprime lending in New York. HUD's study of subprime loans in the New York metropolitan area found that:
1. From 1993 to 1998, the number of subprime refinance loans originated in New York increased by
about 350 percent.
The number of refinance mortgages reported under HMDA by lenders specializing in subprime lending in the New York
metropolitan area increased from 3,674 loans in 1993 to 16,584 loans in 1998. (See Figure 2.)
The magnitude and speed of the increase in subprime lending creates a critical need for greater scrutiny. The rapid
growth of subprime lending may help expand credit access for more borrowers; however, some portion of subprime
lending may be occurring with borrowers whose credit would qualify them for conventional loans. Subprime lending
may expose borrowers to higher up-front fees and interest rates than they would bear if they had obtained prime loans.
2. Subprime loans are over three times more likely in low-income neighborhoods in New York than in
upper-income neighborhoods.
HUD's analysis reveals that subprime lending is being provided increasingly to low- and very low-income families and
their communities. In New York, 25 percent of all refinance mortgages in 1998 were subprime, but in low-income
neighborhoods, the percentage of refinances in the subprime market was over twice as large - 53 percent. (See Figure
3). In the poorest communities, where families make 50 percent or less of the area median income, subprime

refinances accounted for almost 60 percent of all refinance loans. In middle-income neighborhoods, 35 percent of
refinancing families relied on a subprime loan, as did only 15 percent in upper-income neighborhoods. In 1993, only
13 percent of refinance mortgages in low-income neighborhoods and 4 percent in upper-income neighborhoods were
subprime.
3. Subprime loans are over four times more likely in black neighborhoods in New York than in white
neighborhoods.
In predominantly black neighborhoods in New York, subprime lending accounted for 60 percent of home refinance loans
in 1998 - compared with only 13 percent in predominantly white areas. Thus, while subprime refinance mortgages
accounted for only one in eight refinance loans originated in predominantly white neighborhoods, they accounted for
three-out-of-five of the refinance loans originated in predominantly black neighborhoods. (See Figure 4.) Comparable
1993 figures were 18 percent in black neighborhoods and 4 percent in white neighborhoods.
4. Homeowners in upper-income black neighborhoods are over two times more likely than
homeowners in middle-income white neighborhoods to refinance in the subprime market.
Notably, even after controlling for differences in neighborhood income, homeowners in black communities are more
likely than homeowners in white communities to refinance in the subprime market. (See Figure 5.) Among homeowners
living in the middle-income black neighborhoods, 59 percent turned to subprime lenders, compared with 24 percent of
homeowners living in middle-income white neighborhoods. In fact, the subprime share (52 percent) for upper-income
black neighborhoods is over twice the subprime share (24 percent) for middle-income white neighborhoods.
The map of the New York metropolitan area summarizes the neighborhood concentration of subprime refinance loans.
(See Figure 6.) In 1998, subprime mortgages accounted for at least 25 percent of all refinance mortgages in 1,265 (or
52 percent) of the 2,420 census tracts in the New York metropolitan area refinance market. Census tracts where Blacks
comprised more than 30 percent of the population (Black neighborhoods) accounted for 598 of these 1,265 census
tracts. On a market share basis, Black neighborhoods accounted for 23 percent of all refinances in the New York
metropolitan area but for 49 percent of all subprime refinances.
5. The findings are similar when borrowers (rather than neighborhoods) throughout the New York
metropolitan area are examined. Two-thirds of low-income black borrowers in the New York
metropolitan area rely upon subprime loans.
This section analyzes the New York data by individual borrowers instead of entire neighborhoods; the impacts are
similar. Subprime refinances accounted for 54 percent of all refinancing by low-income borrowers throughout the New
York metropolitan area; only 11 percent of upper income borrowers relied upon subprime refinancing. (See Figure 7.)
The borrower data show that blacks in the New York metropolitan area are still carrying a large proportion of subprime:
in 1998, 46 percent of refinance mortgages for black borrowers were subprime, compared with only 11 percent for
white borrowers.
Combining data on the income and racial characteristics of the borrower shows large disparities between black and
white borrowers with similar incomes. Subprime loans accounted for two-thirds (67 percent) of refinance loans
originated for low-income black borrowers, compared with only 26 percent for low-income white borrowers. (See Figure
8.) Similarly, subprime loans accounted for 47 percent of refinance loans for middle-income black borrowers, compared
with only 13 percent for middle-income white borrowers. In fact, upper-income black borrowers were more than twice
as likely as middle-income white borrowers to rely on the subprime market (31 percent of upper-income blacks versus
13 percent of middle-income whites); and were slightly more likely than low-income white borrowers to rely on the
subprime market (31 percent for upper-income blacks versus 26 percent for low-income white borrowers).
The refinancing patterns for Hispanic borrowers can be compared to those discussed above for black and white
borrowers. As shown in Figure 7, subprime loans accounted for 28 percent of refinance loans originated for Hispanic
borrowers during 1998; this compares with 46 percent for black borrowers and 11 percent for white borrowers.
Additional analysis is needed to understand why subprime lending has played a larger role for black borrowers than for
Hispanic borrowers.
CONCLUSIONS
HUD's analysis of refinance mortgages originated in the New York metropolitan area during 1998 clearly demonstrates
the exponential growth in subprime lending and its growth for lower-income and, particularly, minority homeowners and
communities. As noted above, two-thirds of low-income black borrowers in the New York metropolitan area rely upon
the subprime market for their refinance loans. While this growth in subprime lending has expanded access to credit for
many borrowers with impaired or limited credit histories, these borrowers may also be vulnerable to predatory lending
practices.
Despite the progress made by prime lenders in reaching these markets, the growth of subprime lending in both lowerincome and minority communities strongly suggests that much more can be done by both primary and secondary
market participants to expand access to the prime lending market.

Content Archived: January 20, 2009

FOIA

Privacy

Web Policies and Important Links

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
451 7th Street S.W.
Washington, DC 20410
Telephone: (202) 708-1112 TTY: (202) 708-1455