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.
After several years of rapid appreciation that strained household budgets and sidelined many potential buyers, the U.S. housing market is expected to enter a period of slower home price growth that could gradually improve affordability by 2026. Economists and housing analysts say cooling price trends, combined with stabilizing interest rates and modest income growth, may help restore balance to a market that has remained stubbornly out of reach for many would-be homeowners.
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.
Every lender operation is different. Some are operations friendly and others sales friendly and fortunately some are in between. As an industry educator as well as underwriter, I have many opportunities to talk to be originators and underwriters and as you can well imagine, many of those conversations end up being discussions about unreasonable underwriters asking for unnecessary file documentation and if I am speaking with underwriters, they always go in the direction of how management does not support them as underwriters and that they
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 could be wrong but I don’t think I am when I say this program is a bad idea. To substantiate that statement I will quote one that I read on a LinkedIn post a couple days whereas one blogger posted the question “Is HARP 2.0 real, is anyone really closing them?” just to be answered by another blogger who posted, “yes, laughing all the way to the bank”. The sad truth is that I am sure that he is, unfortunately.
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 don’t know about anyone else but I can honestly say this is the absolute busiest and most overwhelmed I’ve personally felt in the near 25 years I’ve been in this crazy business of ours! I’ve never seen so many products changing and being added, so many differences between lender product overlays, so many crackdowns on compliance or so many major regulatory changes as we’ve been experiencing recently.
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 know, it sound pretty elementary, we underwrite to see if the borrower qualifies, it’s that simple right? Actually it’s not that simple nor is the task of underwriting a basic exercise in calculating ratio’s, cash to close and making sure the borrower’s credit score is sufficient to meet investor criteria.
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.
Last week I outlined upcoming changes to FHA’s mortgage insurance premium structure based on preliminary communication from HUD but subject to the release of an official Mortgagee Letter. Since then Mortgagee Letter 2012-4 has been issued which communicates the finalized changes to FHA’s mortgage insurance premium structure.
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 know this statement will be relatively unpopular but I am going to say it anyway, thank goodness for the return of the FHA mortgage insurance program” In a HUD Public Affairs publication, No. 12-037, issued on February 27, 2012, HUD announced its intentions of again raising the UFMIP and MMI premiums to not only protect their capital reserves but also to encourage the return of private capital into the residential mortgage 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.
Anyone who is familiar with my article writing over the past several years probably knows I am a huge advocate for training and education in our industry whether it be for those coming in to the lending environment fresh with no prior experience or for the most seasoned veteran such as myself who have been working in the lending environment for well over 20 years or more.
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.
The past few weeks have been quite interesting around the office for me, not because I have had opportunity to learn new things or underwriting interesting cases, but because I have had to endure a whole new level of customer complaints. It seems like more and more these days, when I pick up the phone it’s my boss saying to bring some loan officer to her office because again, she had just gotten chewed by another customer or real estate agent and in a time of dwindling business not to mention fees, this is never a good thing.
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.
At the end of 2011, HUD finally released a long-awaited current version of the TOTAL Scorecard User Guide. The prior version had not been updated since 2004. FHA requires that all loans be scored through TOTAL except for those transactions involving borrower’s with no traditional credit scores and streamline refinance transactions.
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.
When I hear those words, they immediately evoke images of a world in which mortgage underwriting decisions are determined by AUS systems that have no capacity to either employ common sense underwriting principals or fairly or adequately assess overall risk. They are simply three more numerical values used by a computer model to “recommend” if a loan should be approved and just like its partner, the AUS, I think credit scoring as rule has outlived its usefulness.
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.