U.S. President Donald Trump has instructed his economic advisers and political representatives to prepare for a sweeping plan to purchase as much as $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities in 2026, signaling a renewed willingness to use federal market intervention to support the U.S. housing sector. The directive, confirmed by people familiar with the matter, represents one of the most aggressive housing finance proposals floated in recent years and underscores the growing political focus on affordability and mortgage rate pressures.
A proposed increase to mortgage fees tied to the Department of Veterans Affairs home loan program has been temporarily put on hold after industry groups raised concerns about its potential impact on veteran borrowers. Lawmakers on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee delayed a planned markup of legislation that would have raised VA loan fees, signaling a willingness to reassess the proposal amid warnings that higher costs could undermine affordability for those the program is designed to serve.
Mortgage industry advocates are renewing calls for the Federal Housing Administration to eliminate its long-standing requirement that many borrowers pay mortgage insurance premiums for the life of their loan, arguing that the policy has become an unnecessary barrier to sustainable homeownership. The National Association of Mortgage Brokers has formally urged FHA officials to revisit the rule, contending that lifetime mortgage insurance premiums increase costs for borrowers long after the original risk has diminished.
The idea of introducing 50-year mortgages as a potential tool to address housing affordability has hit a pause, as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development signals that more research is needed before pursuing such a significant change to federal housing policy. HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge recently indicated that while extended-term mortgages have been discussed as a way to lower monthly payments, the agency is not prepared to move forward without a deeper understanding of the long-term implications for borrowers and the housing market.
As the Federal Reserve signals that interest rate cuts are likely ahead, many prospective homebuyers are wondering what those changes could mean for mortgage rates and housing affordability in 2026. After years of elevated borrowing costs that reshaped the housing market, economists and housing experts say rate cuts may offer some relief — but not the dramatic reset many buyers are hoping for.
The past year has seen sweeping changes in almost every area of loan origination, underwriting guidelines, and loan disclosures. USDA and FHA have both created new handbooks that came with completely new guidelines. The CFPB introduced the Loan Estimate and Closing Disclosures which replaced the Good Faith Estimate, TIL, and HUD-1. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac introduced new guidelines for many topics including review of Schedule-A Unreimbursed Expenses and required reserves for borrowers retaining their home as a secondary or rental property.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
In the days of CFPB debt ratio thresholds and tighter lending restrictions, every underwriter needs to have a few tricks up their sleeve for saving debt ratios. Usually we try to use the more conservative income calculation to avoid investor push-back. However, there are a few perfectly provable income sources that we can use to support a lower debt ratio and return an approve/eligible or accept finding
.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
In response to the CFPB’s Ability to Repay (ATR) and Qualified Mortgage (QM) rules, leading investors have instituted a Debt, Income, and Asset Verification Worksheet. This worksheet was created to provide consistency and uniformity in the reporting of underwriter rationale in determining the borrower’s ability to repay. Some lenders are adding this form (or a screen) into their loan origination system.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
One of the hottest topics in the mortgage industry today is the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau’s (CFPB) sweeping regulatory reforms. Many are questioning how the new rules will impact the industry and whether the reforms are positive or negative. Some have concerns for our ability to remain productive and profitable with so many new restrictions.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Written By: Bonnie Wildt
I have said it before and I will say it again and that is, do not believe everything you hear or read for that matter. In this particular instance I am referring to AUS Findings. I have had countless conversations with processors and loan officer who want to know why I am asking for documentation that the AUS findings have clearly stated wasn’t needed or worse, they can’t believe I am turning a loan down that has an Approve/Eligible. So here it is again and pay particular attention to the details because just because you have an Approve/Eligible or Accept doesn’t necessarily mean you have a done deal.