Bradley T. Borden & David J. Reiss, “Dirty REMICs, Revisited,” Probate & Property (2013 Forthcoming)
5 Pages Posted: 20 Jul 2013 Last revised: 13 Oct 2014
Date Written: July 19, 2013
We review the differences between two visions for the residential mortgage markets, one driven by the goal of efficiency and the other driven by the goals of efficiency and consumer protection. Both visions advocate for structural reform, but one advocates for industry-led change and the other advocates for input from a wider array of stakeholders. Broader input is not only important to ensure that a broad range of interests are represented but also to ensure the long-term legitimacy of the new system. This is a response to Joshua Stein, Dirt Lawyers Versus Wall Street: A Different View, Probate and Property (2013 Forthcoming), which in turn is a response to Bradley T. Borden & David J. Reiss, Dirt Lawyers and Dirty REMICs, Probate and Property 12 (May/June 2013).
Keywords: mortgage-backed securities, MBS, Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit, REMIC, dirt lawyers, Joshua Stein, MERS
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Reiss, David J. and Borden, Bradley T., Dirty REMICs, Revisited (July 19, 2013). Bradley T. Borden & David J. Reiss, “Dirty REMICs, Revisited,” Probate & Property (2013 Forthcoming); Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 347. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2295970