ronnie0479
03-31 02:39 PM
Immigration and Tax Filing are not at all related.
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
wallpaper nightmare before christmas
SmileyFace
03-18 11:08 PM
Hi guys,
My wife doesnt have SSN yet. We both have our 485's pending. I have my SSN.
To get the Economic stimulus amount, we both have to file taxes with our SSNs. Since we dont her SSN, we cannot file before APR 17th.
So,
I am going to apply for a tax filing extension (which gives me 6 mths)
Simultaneously, I am going to apply for her EAD
Hopefully EAD takes 4 mths
Then I will apply for SSN
and then file our taxes with both our SSNs
hopefully, we get our economic stimulus after that.
Does this sound reasonable? or is there any other way I can do this?
Thanks.
Good luck to everybody.
My wife doesnt have SSN yet. We both have our 485's pending. I have my SSN.
To get the Economic stimulus amount, we both have to file taxes with our SSNs. Since we dont her SSN, we cannot file before APR 17th.
So,
I am going to apply for a tax filing extension (which gives me 6 mths)
Simultaneously, I am going to apply for her EAD
Hopefully EAD takes 4 mths
Then I will apply for SSN
and then file our taxes with both our SSNs
hopefully, we get our economic stimulus after that.
Does this sound reasonable? or is there any other way I can do this?
Thanks.
Good luck to everybody.
bluez25
08-26 02:41 PM
Hi guestforgc,
If you have applied for CP while you applied for 140 then you can do as I have described. But in case you have applied for AOS after you have applied for 140 you CP will automatically get canceled and converted to AOS. If you want to go back to CP , contact your attorney to do so since I know for sure there is a form to do that. But why are you confusing your self and confusing USCIS and making your case over complicated?
Contact your attorney and see what are your options.
If you have applied for CP while you applied for 140 then you can do as I have described. But in case you have applied for AOS after you have applied for 140 you CP will automatically get canceled and converted to AOS. If you want to go back to CP , contact your attorney to do so since I know for sure there is a form to do that. But why are you confusing your self and confusing USCIS and making your case over complicated?
Contact your attorney and see what are your options.
2011 The Nightmare Before Christmas
ramus
08-15 12:07 PM
Great.. please contribute to DC rally in anyway you can.
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
more...
GCBy3000
12-28 12:56 PM
My friend who filed his 485 in June, got his GC two months back. His PD was 2001. How did he get his GC within 3 months of filing 485 when the 485 processing time not even showed June 07 till now?
These dates are for mere reporting purposes. I think even if they have one application with 1999 date, they might show 1999 as processing date. With my experience with these dates and USCIS, I cannot figure out the rationale behind these reports from USCIS. Someone might be sitting there in USCIS with 20-30 randomn dates and play inky... pinky...ponky... father ...has a.. donkey... bla bla bla and then pick a date for this report. All BS.
These dates are for mere reporting purposes. I think even if they have one application with 1999 date, they might show 1999 as processing date. With my experience with these dates and USCIS, I cannot figure out the rationale behind these reports from USCIS. Someone might be sitting there in USCIS with 20-30 randomn dates and play inky... pinky...ponky... father ...has a.. donkey... bla bla bla and then pick a date for this report. All BS.
gcisadawg
04-30 01:37 AM
Man, this guy is a GC holder. He is going to marry a girl in India. At some point, he would become citizen and ask his wife to move with him. This is a natural process. Why is USCIS putting an unnecessary delay of several years by not allowing one's spouse to join him/her? It is beyond my understanding to think how lawmakers missed this simple reasoning!
Sorry, I don't have helpful suggestion for you but am just purely frustrated that a GC holder who wants to start a family can't do whenever he/she is ready.
-GCisaDawg
Sorry, I don't have helpful suggestion for you but am just purely frustrated that a GC holder who wants to start a family can't do whenever he/she is ready.
-GCisaDawg
more...
shankar_thanu
08-03 10:01 PM
I applied in July, RD Jul 2nd. TSC
Havent seen any changes on my case status. my name check hasn't cleared yet. I called and spoke with an IO, she said name check wasnt cleared, wouldnt tell how long its been with FBI. I asked about the 180 day name check rule and she said it doesnt matter they still woudnt work on the case till NC was cleared.
Havent seen any changes on my case status. my name check hasn't cleared yet. I called and spoke with an IO, she said name check wasnt cleared, wouldnt tell how long its been with FBI. I asked about the 180 day name check rule and she said it doesnt matter they still woudnt work on the case till NC was cleared.
2010 Wedding Cake Gallery
.jpg "Wedding Cakes, Cupcakes")
Rockford
09-11 10:59 AM
My 485 application was filed on July 1st, 2007. Yesterday I received an email from my lawyer indicating that they have received the receipts for 485, 765 & 131 for all the applicants in my family.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
There is no hard and fast rule but this is general trend:
Texas service center is sending EAD and AP almost along with the receipt or even before the receipt in some cases.
The NSC is sending the FP for those the notice date is around 8/10.
NSC is processing EAD for those files AOS in first week of Jun. Again as I said this is general trend. There are a few lucky Jul 2nd filers that got EAD from NSC.
FP notice will be sent to your home address with appointment details. No one knows howlong it takes to get EAD from NSC. Your guess is as good as any body else's. Hope is that some of the Huly 2 nd filers get their EADs in a month's time.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
There is no hard and fast rule but this is general trend:
Texas service center is sending EAD and AP almost along with the receipt or even before the receipt in some cases.
The NSC is sending the FP for those the notice date is around 8/10.
NSC is processing EAD for those files AOS in first week of Jun. Again as I said this is general trend. There are a few lucky Jul 2nd filers that got EAD from NSC.
FP notice will be sent to your home address with appointment details. No one knows howlong it takes to get EAD from NSC. Your guess is as good as any body else's. Hope is that some of the Huly 2 nd filers get their EADs in a month's time.
more...
Nagireddi
07-16 04:53 PM
Admin :
This kind of question should be banned. You should have some self-respect and show the same towards your native country. If you know you can do it, whats the point of making it public. Go get it done. Are you asking IV to pay the sum on your behalf also ?
I agree with you strongly, with microfrost. I have heard people talking about their country men are stupid, driving on the wrong side and bla bla...... Comeon guys have some self respect and watch out, when you speak.
Somebody gave you red, I just turnred it to green.
This kind of question should be banned. You should have some self-respect and show the same towards your native country. If you know you can do it, whats the point of making it public. Go get it done. Are you asking IV to pay the sum on your behalf also ?
I agree with you strongly, with microfrost. I have heard people talking about their country men are stupid, driving on the wrong side and bla bla...... Comeon guys have some self respect and watch out, when you speak.
Somebody gave you red, I just turnred it to green.
hair nightmare before christmas
reachinus
12-24 11:07 AM
Nope - it does not legally bind you though it hurts your credibility.
As per H1 rules he must have paid you all the months since you joined him. If he is not going to give you the pay stubs then it will be a problem for you when you apply for your GC. Ask him politely to pay what even he owes you and that too with paystubs. If he creates any problem then tell him that you are going to file a complaing with DOL and also since he will not give you the correct pay stubs that you will report to IRS and will use subsititute W2.
Hope this helps.
As per H1 rules he must have paid you all the months since you joined him. If he is not going to give you the pay stubs then it will be a problem for you when you apply for your GC. Ask him politely to pay what even he owes you and that too with paystubs. If he creates any problem then tell him that you are going to file a complaing with DOL and also since he will not give you the correct pay stubs that you will report to IRS and will use subsititute W2.
Hope this helps.
more...
Humpakistani
03-26 02:13 AM
its processing time is not more then a week
hot Nightmare Before Christmas
smuggymba
03-07 11:26 AM
You will retain your PD.
If your employer recalls the 140 it could casue potential disruptions. If you have an EAD, just port your employment to some other employer. That way you will be dealing with less hassles.
I haven't file 485 and have no EAD.
Just an approved 140 with looming layoffs.
If your employer recalls the 140 it could casue potential disruptions. If you have an EAD, just port your employment to some other employer. That way you will be dealing with less hassles.
I haven't file 485 and have no EAD.
Just an approved 140 with looming layoffs.
more...
house Nitghtmare efore christmas
WaitingForMyGC
06-25 09:56 AM
Bumping up.
tattoo This Nightmare Before
TomPlate
12-12 03:56 PM
I am there file in July 2007.
more...
pictures Nightmare Before Christmas
Mayra75
12-31 07:29 AM
Guys ,
Is there anyone know whether H1 increasing issue will be introduced again in Congress or not ?
Is there anyone know whether H1 increasing issue will be introduced again in Congress or not ?
dresses Nightmare Before Christmas
nashim
08-15 03:49 PM
Congrats
more...
makeup Nightmare Before Christmas
saveimmigration
12-06 02:22 PM
After seeing so much activism on Dream Act in the news, I think Dream Act deserves to be passed. Recapture does not. We are responsible for it for not doing anything if Dream Act passes. Just Google Dream Act and you will see so much work done on this. Compare it to Recapture bill. Reporters will also write about issues where they see lot of activity. We are simply not doing enough.
DREAM act is a political issue if passed will get Democrats millions and millions of hispanic votes and possibly help them in 2012 election. Republicans will also want those votes. So there is a possibility that DREAM will pass some day. It is unfortunate illegal aliens get path to citizenship and legal immigrants like us have to wait on an untimed line with a hope to get green card. It is all politics my friends. Bottom line is they are illegal when they came here. If they are students they should get F1 visas if they are working should get work permits. Giving them citizenship is ridiculous. No one supports our cause, not even the Hispanic community. Dude we should oppose illegal immigration that has kept legal immigration at hostage. Jai Hind!1
DREAM act is a political issue if passed will get Democrats millions and millions of hispanic votes and possibly help them in 2012 election. Republicans will also want those votes. So there is a possibility that DREAM will pass some day. It is unfortunate illegal aliens get path to citizenship and legal immigrants like us have to wait on an untimed line with a hope to get green card. It is all politics my friends. Bottom line is they are illegal when they came here. If they are students they should get F1 visas if they are working should get work permits. Giving them citizenship is ridiculous. No one supports our cause, not even the Hispanic community. Dude we should oppose illegal immigration that has kept legal immigration at hostage. Jai Hind!1
girlfriend Nightmare Before Christmas
InTheMoment
07-17 09:32 PM
XM0625 is the officer id.
hairstyles Before Christmas Cake.
nrakkati
08-15 12:28 PM
Congrats and welcome to IV, hope you become an active member and contribute your efforts to IV.
Sure...Just contributed $100, will do more in coming months.
Sure...Just contributed $100, will do more in coming months.
getgreensoon1
04-07 01:26 PM
Tech firms warn of impacts of tight visa quota - MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tech-firms-warn-of-impacts-of-tight-visa-quota-2011-04-07?siteid=rss&rss=1)
The problem is most of the visas are taken by indian bodyshops such as infosys, TCS, LT to bring underskilled computer operators to the US. Intel, MS and other good companies that hire from reputed US universities have hard time getting the visas due to the cap. The cap should work the other way round. 20K for bodyshops and 65K for people from US universities.
The problem is most of the visas are taken by indian bodyshops such as infosys, TCS, LT to bring underskilled computer operators to the US. Intel, MS and other good companies that hire from reputed US universities have hard time getting the visas due to the cap. The cap should work the other way round. 20K for bodyshops and 65K for people from US universities.
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
No comments:
Post a Comment