The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), under the direction of Bill Pulte, is charting a new course for its 2026–2030 strategic plan—one that shifts its focus from broad housing access and equity initiatives to a more risk-based supervisory framework. This pivot comes in direct response to recent executive orders issued by President Donald Trump, which have reprioritized regulatory approaches across federal agencies.
The Federal Reserve is increasingly sounding the alarm about growing risks in the U.S. housing and labor markets. In its latest meeting minutes, officials emphasized that a “more substantial deterioration in the housing market” could spill over into broader economic weakening, with particular concern for employment.
Mortgage industry data reveal signals pointing toward an uptick in home‑sales activity in 2026, driven largely by shifts in borrower behavior, equity patterns, and the unwinding of the “rate‑lock” effect. While affordability remains a headwind, the evolving mortgage landscape suggests increased turnover and sales opportunities on the horizon.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) has unveiled its proposed housing goals for the 2026–2028 cycle, revealing a shift toward easing affordable housing mandates on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The changes reflect growing concerns that current benchmarks may be distorting market behavior and placing undue strain on lenders.
President Donald Trump has publicly challenged Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to catalyze a surge in homebuilding activity, asserting that developers are sitting on a record number of vacant lots. His remarks, made on October 5, signal renewed pressure on the government‑backed mortgage firms to play a more active role in alleviating housing shortages.
As I am sure everyone is aware, just about every lender out there is utilizing 3rd party tax transcripts for all mortgage transactions. When we began to utilize the service there were generally limited to self employed borrowers, however, over the past year or two most lenders have determined that they were a very useful tool when trying to detect income fraud.
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 Just recently read an article regarding new legislation that was introduced in Congress on Monday which would increase the minimum required down payment on an FHA insured mortgage from 3.5% to 5% and I thought this would be a good time not only to discuss the issue but also indicate why I am firmly against the increase.
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.
Seems like just yesterday all anyone was concerned about was what the AUS had to say. General rule of thumb was if the case was approved by AUS then closes the loan. New underwriters learned not so much how to underwrite but how to validate findings and if your documentation checklist didn’t ask for it then you didn’t need it.
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.
Beginning of the new year in store for use where the FHA mortgage insurance program is concerned. Yes, I am referring to the changes to appraisal requirements per mortgagee letter 2009-30 and changes to how we will process and ultimately underwrite FHA streamline refinance transactions which have been set forth in mortgagee letter 2009-32 and are effective November 18, 2009.
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 had a conversation with a HUD underwriter who expressed serious concern over what appears to be most Direct Endorsement Underwriters inability to accurately validate their AUS findings.
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 we are all aware, there will be some upcoming changes to RESPA in addition to the most recent disclosure changes were Regulation Z is concerned. Give the current confusion on what to expect and were we need to be by January 2010, I thought I would provide some information which might help ease the way.
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 past couple of months, I have a few conversations with underwriters who have conveyed to me that they have been getting their buts kicked during post endorsement technical reviews.
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.
Since the 203k program has become wildly popular again, I thought I would provide some best practices that in my opinion help get the cases closed as quickly as possible.
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.
Regardless of the transactions type, I am underwriting, one of the thing that I always want to see is a borrowers’ bank statements. It does not matter the transaction type, cash out or rate/term or if or not the borrower will need cash to close, I still want to see the borrowers’ bank statements
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 that, I have never ending conversations with individuals who still want to believe that automated underwriting in and of itself is the only acceptable means of determining loan approval.
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.