Reverse mortgages are bad mortgage products. Reverse mortgages cost too much in closing costs. Reverse mortgages drain the equity from elders' estates. Reverse mortgage originators prey on the weakest among us. Or so pundits that sell houses, annuities and all manner of ignorant self interested "protectors" of the elderly repeat as if a mantra to ward off the evil of reverse mortgages. Of course, the truth could not be further from their fears.
The US Government needs the baby boomers to embrace reverse mortgages. After all, the national debt has more numbers than my Comcast account, Halliburton needs to keep profitable in Iraq and Americans are living (and getting Social Security and Medicaid benefits) longer than ever. The actuaries tell us that it's not the interest on the national debt, foreign aid or war that will bankrupt the US Government, but rather Medicaid has the power to overwhelm the entire GDP. Where is the money that will pay for all of Uncle Sam' hospital bills?
Medicaid is an issue for the reverse mortgage industry, especially for the reverse mortgage originators that don't know their products and underwriting well enough to advise their customers on the traps. I have been featured recently in the Mortgage Press and the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association national teleconference and newsletters as an expert in the intersection of Medicaid regulations and the origination of reverse mortgages.
Here is one of the articles, excerpts from an interview with Atare Agbamu (who writes extensively on reverse mortgage issues):
Traps for the Wary: Reverse Mortgages and Healthcare Benefits -- a conversation with Elder Law Attorney John Gosselin
By Atare E. Agbamu, CRMS
They say old age hardly comes alone. It comes with issues. The same can be said of reverse mortgages, the new pillars of retirement security in these precarious times.
Reverse mortgages come with issues, government healthcare benefits issues. The relationship with government healthcare benefits is deeper and more challenging than most originators and customers suspect.
To help us understand the connection and its implications for originators and customers, I spoke with Winchester, Massachusetts-based elder law attorney John T. Gosselin.
The Managing Attorney of his own law firm, Gosselin & Associates, P C, with offices in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, Mr. Gosselin is one of a few lawyers, in my experience, who really understand reverse mortgages, particularly how they mix with other elder law issues.
Besides overseeing a vibrant probate administration and elder law work, Mr. Gosselin runs a thriving real estate practice, acting as counsel or closing agent in more than 20,000 transactions, advising clients on purchase and sale agreements, mortgages, financial, and title disputes.
A member of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA), Mr. Gosselin has advised and represented lenders in reverse mortgage situations for more than 10 years.
As you will find from our conversation, Mr. Gosselin has thought these issues through. His knowledge, insights, and suggestions will help you serve your customers better. They could help your company avoid some difficult issues too. [Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be considered legal advice. Seek competent counsel for your unique situation.] The following is a transcript of our conversation.
Atare E. Agbamu: John, what is the loss of Medicaid Eligibility risk for the typical reverse mortgage borrower?
John T. Gosselin: The big risk is being over asset. The way you qualify for Medicaid benefits is to be poor. Medicaid is welfare. So in order to qualify for welfare, you need to be poor. And the government defines poor as a combination of assets and resources. And they define it all as available resources. That's the term that is used. If you have more available resources than the limits that are allowed by law, you cannot qualify for benefits.
The first risk is a borrower holds too much cash in their name, by virtue of holding too much cash, either through a lump-sum distribution from a reverse mortgage or drawing too much down from a HECM [government-insured reverse mortgage] or drawing a small amount from a HECM but not spending it. A lot of our borrowers in the reverse world are used to living on very low amounts of money. So when they start drawing from a HECM, they feel uncomfortable spending it. I have seen that happen where the borrower accumulates relatively modest payments over a short period of time to put them over the asset limits.
The asset limit, commonly, for an individual person, is about $2,000 in liquid resources, in addition to their principal residence. They are allowed to have a principal residence, but they can't have more than $2,000 in total liquid assets at the end of any month. So at the end of any month, they can't have more than $2,000 standing in their name and receive Medicaid benefits.
So the risk is that they are going to draw down or borrow more than what is allowed. By doing that, if they are over age 65, as almost all our reverse borrowers would be, it will automatically put them in situations where they are either going to be disqualified for benefits and/or subject to reimbursement for benefits they have already received. That is the risk specific to Medicaid.
There is another risk which is also related, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which is an additional welfare program. It is intended mainly for people who are very poor, who have neither Social Security nor virtually any social security income. This is another scheme which the federal government provides for its poorest people. Generally, these are people who never paid into the system by working at jobs which provide for federal social security and insurance benefits. It is not an insurance program; it is a federal welfare benefit. And that program has very strict income guidelines.
Although a HECM advance doesn't disqualify them as income, there is a risk of going over the asset limits. There is income that is assumed to come from those assets. There is a formula that is done. If they are holding too much in assets, they can be disqualified from SSI. Again, holding too much cash is a problem. Having money in a given month is not a problem. They could draw down tens of thousands of dollars if they spend it for their own personal needs, their care, and their protection. They can really spend it for anything. They are spending an asset that is protected, which is their house. At the end of 30 days, they better get that asset back under $2,000. At the end of each month, their cash has got to be under $2,000. And they could not have accumulated other easily liquidated assets, like buying jewelry, for example. They can't buy more than one motor vehicle for their own use. They can't accumulate collectible assets. They can't go out and buy antique furniture that is going to carry a cash value or easily liquidated value. So they are somewhat restricted in how they use their funds, but not terribly.
One other dimension that people should be aware of (I don't expect this to occur often) is that the tenure payment could be construed as income. We usually say that reverse mortgage payouts are never income, that it is always drawing against the value of the house, but the reality is that when the balance of the mortgage exceeds the value of the collateral, it can be recognized as income; because, effectively, it is no longer a loan because the proceeds are exceeding the value of the collateral. The IRS would recognize that as a form of taxable annuity income. That could run into some problems.
Now why I say it shouldn't come up much is that the tenure payment is fairly conservative. The formula used to come up with the numbers really anticipate someone living quite some time before the loan gets upside down; but, in a declining real estate market, you could, potentially, see that become an issue in the future.
AA: From your experience, how valuable is Medicaid Eligibility to the average senior person? For it to be a serious loss, it has got to be pretty valuable.
JG: For the average senior, they are probably going to be receiving Medicare benefits because that is an insurance program that people pay in when they work, and they work for wages. The vast majority of people over 65 are on Medicare benefits.
The Medicaid benefits we are talking about will affect reverse mortgages. It could be supporting a spouse that is in a nursing home. For example, if we have a wife that is in the community and a husband in a nursing home, the wife in the community (it varies by state) on average, is allowed to keep the principal residence and approximately $100,000 in assets. It does vary. More or less, it is $100,000. If she goes over the asset limit, she can disqualify her spouse for the benefits that they are receiving for the husband's care and possibly be forced to reimburse benefits already received.
Most often, I think, when a spouse of someone who is borrowing on a reverse is in a facility [nursing home], they are disqualifying the spouse often unknowingly. This is one of the traps for originators. They should inquire whether or not a spouse is in a nursing facility and determine how that spouse is paying for their care. Sometimes the spouse will no longer be on title so the topic does not come up unless a direct inquiry is made.
There are other ways to pay for nursing care. One of them could be VA [Veteran Administration]. The VA is very low cost, and it doesn't really impact reverses as it is tied to service record and not only financial need. There are also religious and community organizations that provide unique living situations for elders, many of these require turning over large lump sums in favor of lifetime care contracts. Home care services are also coming along that will essentially enable seniors to have nursing care at home on a somewhat more affordable basis. Another place Medicaid comes in is community Medicaid.
Community Medicaid is a program that supplements Medicare. Again, it is generally for the poorest people, both seniors and those under 65. The people whose income and ability to pay for what Medicare doesn't pay for is compromised, so they would go for Medicaid benefits in the community, or they need some special services or in-home care through a variety of community programs.
There are in-home care programs that are coming up every day now in every state, where instead of going to a nursing home, the state will subsidize a certain amount of in-home care. It is that in-home care we need to be concerned with because if it is under the Medicaid program, it is subject to reimbursement. Think of Medicaid like a loan from the government.
AA: So this is a very valuable program for the average senior because it protects their health, right?
JG: The Medicaid program we are talking about is a community health insurance benefit. This pays for every aspect of medical care. It pays for prescriptions. It pays for hospitalization. It pays for virtually any medical need of an elderly person. You could have reimbursement obligations in the millions of dollars for somebody who has a serious illness.
You could have someone who has MS [multiple sclerosis], Lou Gehrig's disease, or a form of cancer that has received hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars worth of care through the Medicaid system. Yes, it is absolutely a valuable benefit.
To lose the benefit for people who are receiving the benefit would probably be catastrophic. They could put themselves in situations where their medical debt could consume the value of their house. If they have no other means of paying for their medical debt, they could be forced into bankruptcy for their medical debt.
The US government needs to find a way to use the wealth stored in home equity for people's care, I think we'll see a much simpler reverse mortgage product coming very soon, like a low interest rate reverse mortgage that's sold directly or at least wholly subsidized by the US Government to get at people's home equity for elders' medical and home care needs.