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.
A few days ago a friend and I were laughing over the fact that most people, including mortgage industry professionals, wonder if underwriters really exist. I myself have had staff from various brokers offices (which I do visit from time to time) say to me, “We have heard about underwriters but have never really seen one.
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 recently ran across a list of FHA appraisal and valuation questions and answers from HUD as I was actually searching for something on a completely different topic. I found these FAQs so helpful and informative I feel the need to pass them on in hopes they will be useful to you as well!
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 there have been a few issues lately with regard to Total Scorecard findings and validity as well as misconceptions with validity periods for both appraisals and credit documents (credit reports) on FHA insured mortgage types so I thought it not a bad idea to clear a couple of things up.
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.
Call it portfolio retention or risk management, but as of Wednesday, I had several of my investors pull out of the market where non-credit qualifying (streamline’s without appraisal) FHA streamline refinance transactions were concerned. Several have said they would only purchase them if they were currently servicing the loan and I now have one other who has changed guidelines on credit qualifying streamline refinance transaction to require a minimum median credit score of 700 for loan amounts less than 417,000 and 720 for loan amounts greater than 417. All of this just as everyone rev’s up for the reduction in UFMIP to .01%.
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.
Residential mortgage underwriting is defined as the overall credit and valuation analysis of a particular borrower or borrowers with regard to overall financial health as well as the evaluation of collateral that might be used to secure the mortgage and as underwriters we relate this particular evaluation to calculation of housing to income and debt to income ratio’s, the evaluation of a borrower’s credit history as well as the review of a property appraisal.
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 5 years I have had many conversations with people regarding the housing market which invariably becomes a discussion as to who is at fault for the collapse in 2007. Depending on who you are talking too, the blame is laid at the feet of big banks or mortgage brokers, Wall Street, FNMA or FHLMC and of course the diagnosis is generally that one or all of the aforementioned groups did it out of greed.
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 asked a few underwriters what their top gripes are lately with the files they receive for underwriting. Based on the underwriter responses, I was able to establish a few items worth mentioning.
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.
FHA issued a bulletin on April 18, 2012 informing the industry about HUD approved nonprofit participation in FHA loan financing. Basically HUD allows approved nonprofit agencies to act as a mortgagor utilizing FHA insured financing to purchase homes which will be designated for resale to low to moderate income families or in some instances rented to low moderate income families and as you can imagine where the affordable housing program concerned as it pertains to the rental units, the nonprofits may actually have more than one FHA insured mortgage.
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.
There seems to be confusion out there in regards to a few of the recent changes announced by FHA in Mortgagee Letters 2012-3 and Mortgagee Letter 2012-4. The purpose of this week’s article is to provide you with further clarity on a few of the recent changes here.
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.
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.
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.