The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) has introduced proposed housing goals for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that would cover the 2026–2028 period, prompting a sharp divide in reaction among industry leaders and housing advocates. Under the new proposal, the FHFA plans to significantly lower key benchmarks tied to affordable lending.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two cornerstone institutions of the U.S. housing finance system, are once again drawing Wall Street’s attention amid growing speculation that both could return to public markets by the end of 2025. A potential initial public offering (IPO) for either entity would mark a seismic shift in the mortgage industry—and one not seen since they were placed under federal conservatorship during the 2008 financial crisis.
The Federal Reserve’s move toward ending quantitative tightening (QT)—its large‑scale reduction of Treasury and mortgage‑backed security holdings—is sparking interest in how the housing finance market might respond. According to commentary in the industry, the conclusion of QT could potentially pave the way for lower mortgage rates, though timing and magnitude remain uncertain.
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.
We have been listening to the gossip (most of which I started), since November, 2010 about how HUD has discussed lifting the moratorium on the 203k program designed for investors. Believe it not, the program actually did exist at one point and was quite successful from a utilization standpoint, but do to program abuse which included mass property flip schemes in the 1990’s, HUD was forced to eliminate the program for use in 1996.
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.
Yes, it is, grim that is, and I am not referring to Wilhelm & Jacob Grimm. But just as they composed those fairy tales in the 1800’s, representing what might have been described as the capricious and cruel reality of daily life for most Europeans of that time, we to continue to face a housing and mortgage market that can also be described capricious. Unlike the tales of Brothers Grimm however, the ails of the current housing market do not seem to be getting softer or sweeter with time.
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.
This week I’m looking through my originator eyes. I tend to think of myself more as a Mortgage Loan Advisor than a Loan Officer. As I have already mentioned, probably more than once, I never set out to be a loan originator and I am the first to admit that I am not a “salesman”. I do love this part of the process however and for one reason.
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.
If you blinked you might have missed it but HUD recently communicated guidance to lenders on how to evaluate disputed credit accounts for FHA loans. The information was included in an outgoing announcement from Jerrold Mayer to the HUD email subscription list. The following guidance was not in the form of a Mortgagee Letter as one might expect:
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.
Strong word revolution and I am seeing it everywhere. The dawning of something new and powerful that has profound effects on certain aspects of our daily lives. Revolution has been with man since the dawn of time and has had both positive and negative effects on perceived acceptable behavior none of which we as individuals unanimously agree upon but often times accept as the norm.
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 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.
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.