The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has released its annual update to Federal Housing Administration loan limits for 2026, increasing both forward mortgage ceiling amounts and the maximum claim amount for Home Equity Conversion Mortgages. The adjustment reflects continued home price growth across much of the country and is intended to preserve access to FHA-insured financing for borrowers in a wide range of housing markets while keeping federal programs aligned with current market realities.
In a much-anticipated move late this week, the Federal Reserve lowered its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point for the third time this year, a decision that financial markets, loan officers and households have been watching closely. The Federal Open Market Committee’s action, which reduced the federal funds rate to a range of roughly 3.5 %–3.75 %, was aimed at supporting a slowing economy and easing borrowing costs.
In a move that could reshape federal housing policy, leaders of the U.S. House Financial Services Committee recently introduced a comprehensive bipartisan legislative package aimed at alleviating America’s persistent affordable housing crisis. The proposal — formally titled the Housing for the 21st Century Act — was revealed ahead of a scheduled committee markup, setting the stage for debate as lawmakers in both parties look for solutions to the nation’s deepening supply and affordability challenges.
FICO has reached an agreement with Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to release the historical datasets for its newer credit‑score model, FICO 10T, paving the way for broader adoption by the major government‑sponsored enterprises (GSEs). In a corporate announcement, FICO said the three national credit bureaus will deliver 10T data connected to single‑family loan‑level records to the GSEs.
Mortgage lenders are seeing better per‑loan revenue in 2025 than in recent years, yet the cost to originate those loans remains stubbornly high, creating a squeeze even as overall profitability improves. According to a new update from Freddie Mac, the average cost to produce a mortgage in the second quarter of 2025 was about $11,800 per loan — a modest improvement from the first quarter’s roughly $13,400 for retail‑only lenders, but still slightly above where costs stood in late 2023.
As we embark on the new age of fully documenting income and assets for each case, it is important to remember that creativity is key. Often we have borrowers that do not fit into the traditional molds therefore making it a little more difficult to completely document their income in the traditional sense.
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.
Rumors and speculation have been rampant in the mortgage industry since March 2007. I will agree that we are all witness to a very troubled housing market, however, we have seen a turn very recently from examining the facts and how it effects how we conduct business to embracing the rumor mill as a way to stay abreast of the ever changing market.
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.
Very recently I have seen the resurgence of the government insured loan. FHA and VA purchase and refinance transactions have been more prevalent over the past few months than their conventional counterparts and as a professed government underwriter, I am very pleased.
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.
Over the course of the most recent few years, underwriting guidelines have steered away from the more traditional assessment of financial risk to the product matrix. If the loan application met all the criteria as set forth in product matrix then the case was approvable for the most part.
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.
As underwriters, we have recently been subjected to a mirage of acceptable underwriting standards since what has been termed as the collapse of the mortgage industry. While three years ago AUS systems were considered the finest tools available to assess mortgage risk, we are now returning to underwriting responsibility.
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.
I was recently discussing an article published in Business Week with an FHA rooster appraiser who personally agreed that mortgage fraud was on the rise. He was concerned that many less than above board brokers and lenders refuse to use honest appraisers in lieu of appraisers that will get them the value they request regardless of what the property is actually worth.
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.
It seems to me that each day I find another reason to practice prudent underwriting principals. I mean old school stuff that reaches beyond the world of automated underwriting. As we all know, we have the ability to reduce documentation requirements when we have the Approve/Eligible or the Accept and in some cases it makes sense but I find more and more that I keep reaching back to documentation requirements of the past.
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.
Just when you think you got it nailed, they go and change everything. For those of you who have no idea what I am talking about, I am talking about RESPA. I recently experienced what I would call a deep satisfaction while thinking that I had the concept of RESPA down to art, but it was short lived.
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.
I was recently hosting a seminar and during a question and answer session, I had an individual ask me what was the greatest deficiency I was seeing in files submitted for underwriting. At the time my answer was incorrect loan amounts due to the changing of rules where the UFMIP was concerned. But after several days of underwriting files, I have changed my mind. The correct answer should have been that the files are simply not processed.
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.
I have recently had some questions regarding maximum Loan to Value guidelines where FHA cash out refinances are concerned. It seems that most people believe that 95% is the rule regardless of the loan parameters so I thought today would be a good day to set the record straight.
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.