The U.S. Federal Reserve will issue new rules next week aimed at protecting future homebuyers from questionable lending practices.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke provided a preview of the Fed's new rules during a speech Tuesday at the FDIC Forum on Mortgage Lending for Low/Moderate Income Households in Arlington, Va. Under the Fed's authorities, the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act, the rules -- which will apply to all lenders, not just banks -- are expected to, among other reforms:

• Restrict lenders from penalizing high-risk borrowers who pay off loans early.
• Bar lenders from making loans without proof of a borrower's income.
• Require lenders to make sure that borrowers set aside money to pay for taxes and insurance.

'Front end' / 'back end' ratios deemed key

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks he's taking "a wait-and-see approach" regarding the Fed's mortgage regulation revisions. "This set of revised regulations could be, arguably, the most important federal regulation change, in financial terms, since the last plan to maintain the solvency of the Social Security trust fund," Dawson said.

The ever-incisive FT columnist Martin Wolf offers prudent and timely advice concerning the reforms needed to ease credit market doldrums and right the global financial state of things.

One key practice Wolf would like to see addressed is bank / mortgage lender selling of mortgages they originate.

Designers of the practice had good intentions: It was designed to free-up capital so banks / mortgage lenders could have more money available for future homebuyers. A noble intention.

Unfortunately, as tradition reminds us, the road to perdition (and record housing sector slumps) is paved with good intentions. The problem, Wolf notes, is that the originate-and-distribute model encouraged banks / mortgage lenders to originate (in many cases for handsome fees) high-risk, very-poor-credit-quality mortgages with reckless abandon, because originators knew that the loan would be sold, and its status as a performing asset would be entirely someone else's problem. Save the best (mortgages), get rid of the rest.

It's not surprising, Wolf notes, that the originate-and-distribute model became laden with sloppy, irresponsible and even fraudulent loans. Wolf's reform: originators must be required to retain a portion of the equity of securitized loans. Hence, if / when they go bad, the originator loses money too.

Economic Analysis: Wolf's proposed financial / bond market reform is on the mark. If every party, including the originator, has a stake in a mortgage's repayment status, that will lead to higher-quality loans, while at the same time retaining the secondary market's benefit of freeing-up capital for new mortgages.

Merrill Lynch and Co., Inc. (NYSE: MER) CEO John Thain said today that the risk in the housing market is "much lower" than it has been recently as the credit crisis in the U.S. is "getting better." Leave it to the leader of a company which has written off over $30 billion in mortgage lending investment to make this claim. But the thing is, could he be right?

Although Thain said "economic pressure" will remain high over the next year, he expressed confidence that the end of the housing bubble, which is still popping in many parts of the country, is now in sight. Thain also indicated that food prices and shortages as well as higher unemployment will continue to have an impact on the U.S. economy. Of course Merrill has had three quarters of disastrous results like other large investment banks, and the company is still toiling with the idiocy of incredibly risky investments that have left it weakened financially.

Even if Thain had been hired by Citigroup, Inc. (NYSE: C) last year, he'd be in the same mess in the same industry. I'm not sure what "much lower" risk in the housing market means, although he's probably talking about his company's reduced exposure to those SIVs and other vehicles from the Flintstone era that start off fast before the wheels fall off.

I hope Thain is correct in his assessments, and Merrill Shareholders are probably wanting the same thing, just much more badly than myself.

The perceptive and common sense-rooted Ben Stein, in a business column in The New York Times, has weighed-in on the credit crisis, and for market absolutists, it's an argument they probably don't want to hear.

Stein, like many of us, has pondered how the massively well-paid men and women of Wall Street could create such a catastrophe. How did some of the smartest, talented executives, Stein ruminates, generate such immense losses that "they made banks clam up on lending -- at great risk to the economy?"

Compelling questions

Stein asks: Where were the fail-safe devices? The government watchdogs? The ratings agencies? A speech by Greenlight Capital hedge fund manager David Einhorn at a Grant's Interest Rate Observer event, provided the answers -- the unfortunate truths of the recent housing/credit boom -- which Stein summarized:

Financial eras, like social periods, are often defined by moments or epiphanies when decision makers and/or citizens realized that a serious flaw/mistake/problem was occurring through time, and across space, and needed to be corrected.

The ever-incisive FT columnist and economist Martin Wolf describes one contemporary concern that's likely to be addressed: the failure to align the interests of managers with those of investors.

My BloggingStocks colleagues Peter Cohan and Zac Bissonnette have also written on the subject on several occasions in this space, and now the FT's Wolf has assembled additional data that may very well lead to public policy changes, both in Wolf's United Kingdom and in the United States.

The $150 billion fiscal stimulus package that's winding its way through the U.S. Congress will not represent a panacea for the U.S.'s economic ills, an economist argued, but it will represent modest good news for one segment -- the beleaguered housing sector.

The fiscal stimulus bill currently under discussion in the U.S. Senate calls for raising Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's conforming loan limit to $729,750 through 2008 from the current $417,000.

Conforming loans are conventional, fixed-rate mortgages for good credit borrowers that banks make that are eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE). When Freddie and Fannie purchase these loans from banks, it "frees-up" money that the banks can use to grant mortgages to future borrowers, thus expanding the pool of funds available for mortgages.

Economist Steve Affinito told BloggingStocks Thursday that while it's important to underscore that the higher conforming loan ceiling will not eliminate the U.S. housing sector's recession, it is "a critical, essential step in the right direction," in his interpretation.

Key regulators at the New York State Insurance Department met Wednesday with U.S. banks to discuss raising new capital for bond insurers, a department spokesman said, Bloomberg News reported late Wednesday afternoon.

Talks in New York with unnamed banks are part of New York Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo's effort to stabilize the bond guarantors and bolster the market's financial condition, New York State Insurance Department spokesman Andrew Mais told Bloomberg News.

Market rallies on insurer meeting

Word of the meeting sparked a remarkable 600-point reversal rally on Wall Street, with the Dow closing the day up 298.98 points to 12270.17. The Dow had been down more than 300 points earlier in the day. The broader markets also rallied.

Billionaire investor George Soros said a major casualty from the U.S. subprime crisis will be the 60-year reign of the dollar-based credit boom, which he says will come to an end, Bloomberg News reported Wednesday.

"The current crisis is not only the bust that follows the housing boom, it's basically the end of a 60-year period of continuing credit expansion based on the dollar as the reserve currency,'' Soros said in a debate today at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Bloomberg reported. "Now the rest of the world is increasingly unwilling to accumulate dollars.''

However, Soros was careful to point out that he believes the dollar is still the most important reserve currency in the world and will remain so, according to Bloomberg.

The global markets' sell-off that has resulted in more than a 5% decline in regional markets during the past two days has called into question a nascent theory regarding the global economy. Namely, that developing nations -- robust-growth economies in Asia, Latin America and Europe -- are "decoupled" from U.S. economic and financial conditions, with their growth rates independently achieved.

Markets from Tokyo to Shanghai to London slumped more than 5% over the past two days -- with some markets falling more than 7% -- on concerns that U.S. subprime mortgage and related asset defaults would send the U.S. economy into a recession. The Dow Jones Industrial Average today plunged more than 400 points in the initial hour of trading.

Amid the Dow's sell-off, the U.S. Federal Reserve, in an emergency monetary policy action, cut key interest rates Tuesday morning -- cutting both the Fed Funds rate and the discount rate by 75 basis points, setting the Fed Funds rate at 3.50% and the discount rate at 4.00%.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in a speech delivered Monday said the Bush Administration was weighing how to provide stimulus to the U.S. economy - - including a possible fiscal stimulus package - - but added that the administration does not want to rush a package.

Paulson, speaking at an event sponsored by the New York Society of Securities Analysts, said the administration's immediate goal is to minimize the impact of the housing correction on the U.S. economy.

Paulson said the nation was facing an "unprecedented wave" of 1.8 million subprime mortgages scheduled to reset to sharply higher rates, and underscored that the administration's negotiated deal with the mortgage industry to freeze selected mortgage rate five years will help the housing market recover, and avert a possible market failure.

Once again, the ever-incisive Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf, an economist, identifies with laser-accuracy what ills the current market. The problem, Wolf argues, is not a lack of solvency but a lack of liquidity (i.e. 'panic').

Wolf does not deny that there have been bad loans (there have been) or that no companies will go out of business (some will). But the circumstance that froze credit markets, that caused quality corporate bonds to fail to price, and that leads to 100-point spreads between the LIBOR rate (what banks charge each other) and the ECB's benchmark interest rate, is rooted more in a lack of confidence, than a lack of sound economic fundamentals or a lack of resources.

A lack of liquidity

And a lack of liquidity or 'panic' is something that central bankers can address. With the above in mind, the U.S. Federal Reserve's plan, in consultation with the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the Swiss National Bank, and the Bank of Canada, to inject $40 billion via auctions into the financial system is appropriate and prudent. (Further, in addition to reciprocal currency arrangements, the companion central banks will take related actions, including the Bank of England's decision to accept a wider range of collateral on 3-month loans).

The U.S. Federal Reserve is likely to continue to cut benchmark short-term interest rates by another quarter-point Tuesday, but in the view of some economists and analysts, it would not be totally unreasonable for the Fed to implement a half-point cut.

Economist David H. Wang told BloggingStocks that recent Fed data "seems to be indicating a clear risk of a recession, which is the argument for a 50-basis point [half-point] cut."

Wang noted that while the futures market is pricing in two more 25 basis-point cuts at the Fed's January and March 2008 meetings, and also pricing in 100% odds of a 25 basis-point cut and 28% odds of a 50-basis point cut Tuesday, recent negative economic news/data points may weigh on the Fed on Tuesday, and perhaps carry the day, producing a half-point cut.

In a surprise decision, the European Central Bank Thursday left its key interest rate unchanged, keeping its refinance rate a 4% due to inflation risks.

Confounds chatter

The ECB's decision went against growing chatter in Wall Street circles Wednesday that the ECB, the Bank of England and the U.S. Federal Reserve would all cut short-term interest rates, as well as implement other coordinated measures, to counteract the contraction effects of subprime mortgage and related asset defaults on the world's largest industrialized economies, the European Union and the United States.

"The decision to stay flat was a bit of a surprise, but that doesn't mean there won't be a future cut," Andrew Resnick, independent currency trader, told BloggingStocks Thursday. "I think we'll still see coordinated action by the ECB and the Federal Reserve to maintain liquidity and keep overnight rates at typical levels. Also keep in mind that the Bank of England cut its rate, so maybe they're doing it sequentially to prepare the market for the new monetary policy."

There are days when the U.S. Federal Reserve probably feels like it's part of a well-researched, coordinated public policy effort to both keep the U.S. economy growing at an acceptable rate with low inflation, and serve as an engine for global growth. Then there are days like today, when the Fed undoubtedly feels like it's out there on its own, like that well-known bald eagle -- a solitary guardian amid ever-present risks and dangers.

The Fed meets December 11 to decide whether to continue to ease monetary policy. The consensus among economists and Wall Street analysts is that the Fed will lower key short-term interest rates by a quarter-percentage point to 4.5%, with some analysts predicting a half-percentage point cut by the Fed.

In an effort to stimulate domestic demand amid a U.S. economy slowed by subprime mortgage defaults, the Fed has twice lowered key interest rates this year, cutting the Fed funds rate -- the rate banks charge each other -- to 4.50%, and the discount rate -- the rate the Fed charges banks for short-term loans -- to 5.00%.

True, no one on the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange Friday yelled, "It's a return to the 'Roaring 90s,' " but given the way the U.S. economy and the stock market have gone in 2007, it's a start.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed Friday up 59.98 points to 13,371.71 - - hardly the stuff of a headline, but it was a technically-significant day.

The Dow's accomplishment? On Friday the Dow closed above the critical 200-day moving average at 13,250.10 - - the toughest moving average to break - - for the third consecutive day. Technical analysts argue that three consecutive closes above the 200-day moving average is a bullish sign. [For background on the Dow and the 200-day moving average, click on this bloggingstocks link: "Fed be nimble, Fed be quick."]

Hence, the Dow has cleared a major technical hurdle. The 'three closes above 200' does not guarantee that the rally will continue, but it is a step in the right direction.