Election-year Housing Industry Debates Heat Up

Election-year Housing Industry Debates Heat Up

Written By: Joel Palmer, Op-Ed Writer

In case you weren’t aware, 2024 is a presidential election year. That means the usual campaigning and debating is ramped up many times beyond the usual rhetoric of non-election years.

Though not as prevalent as other political topics, the housing and mortgage industries are not immune from legislators and policymakers trying to score political points.

Earlier this month, President Joe Biden outlined a number of initiatives in his State of the Union address to make housing more affordable.

One of the more controversial measures is a pilot program proposed by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to waive the requirement for lender’s title insurance on certain refinances.

FHFA Director Sandra Thompson said the pilot will waive the requirement for lender’s title insurance or a legal opinion on certain low-risk refinance transactions where there is confidence that the property is free and clear of any prior lien or encumbrance.

The American Land Title Association (ALTA) provided immediate criticism of the proposal. It called the pilot “a purely political gesture offering a false promise of savings for homeowners while exposing consumers, lenders, and taxpayers to greater financial risk.By announcing this only hours before the State of The Union address, without outreach to, or engagement with, the title insurance industry, the Administration has reduced the crucial role of the industry to nothing more than a politicized talking point.”

Since then, several Republican members of the House Financial Services Committee have also expressed their concerns about the pilot. In a March 15 letter to Thompson, committee members Warren Davidson of Ohio, Bill Huizenga of Michigan, and Andrew Garbarino of New York wrote:

“Your decision to allow Fannie Mae to circumvent taxpayer protections regarding the use of lender’s title insurance on refinanced loans unnecessarily inserts new risks into the housing market and broader financial system.”

The committee members also claimed the pilot violates the “Prior Approval for Enterprise Products” final rule implemented last year. The rule “was created to ensure any pilot program could be examined in an open and transparent process.”

“Equally disturbing,” the letter continues, “this decision directly contradicts your previous statements to Congress. In your May 23, 2023 testimony to the House Financial Services Committee, you indicated that FHFA had neither seen such a proposal from Fannie Mae, nor would it ever approve such a pilot program in a manner inconsistent with the Prior Approval for Enterprise Products rule.”

In a separate issue, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice earlier this month requesting an investigation of The Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO). Hawley wrote that FICO’s “recent actions” demand an investigation of potentially “anticompetitive practices.”

He wrote: “The credit score market is dominated by FICO, a for-profit company operated under a sweetheart deal from the federal government…most home buyers are forced to obtain their mortgage from a lender who uses FICO’s services. Because of this government-granted monopoly, FICO enjoys a 90% market share in the business-to-business credit scoring market. It is the only real competitor in the space. In an apparent abuse of this market power, FICO has astronomically hiked its prices.”

FICO imposed credit report price increases on lenders in January 2023.

The price increase affected lenders differently based on size, according to the National Consumer Reporting Association (NCRA). FICO established three pricing tiers. The wholesale price increase was only 10 percent for the top tier of approximately 46 lenders. FICO increased its credit reporting price by 200 percent for six lenders in a middle tier. The remaining lenders were hit with a 400 percent price increase, according to NCRA.

In October 2022, FHFA announced the validation and approval of the FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0 credit score models for use by the enterprises to replace the Classic FICO model. FHFA recently announced a new transition schedule for new crediting reporting requirements and new credit score models.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues to announce initiatives to promote affordable housing.

Last week, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) announced new loan limits for its Title I Manufactured Home Loan Program. FHA said the increased amounts use new methodologies for calculating and updating the program’s limits, which were announced in a final rule published on February 29, 2024.

“This is the first update to the Title I program loan limits since 2008 and supports the Biden-Harris Administration’s efforts to increase the supply and use of manufactured homes as an affordable housing source,” the agency said.

Effective for FHA case numbers assigned on or after March 29, 2024, the new nationwide Title I Manufactured Home Loan Program loan limits are as follows:

  • Combination Loan (Single-section), $148,909

  • Combination Loan (Multi-section), $237,096

  • Manufactured Home Loan (Single-section), $105,532

  • Manufactured Home Loan (Multi-section), $193,719

  • Manufactured Home Lot Loan, $43,377

FHA said it will recalculate the program’s loan limits on an annual basis so that they keep pace with home price changes over time.


About the Author

As an NAMU® Opinion Editorial Contributor, Joel Palmer is a freelance writer who spent 10 years as a business and financial reporter and another 10 years in marketing for the insurance and financial services industries. He regularly writes about the mortgage industry, as well as residential and commercial real estate, investments, and retirement income planning. He has also ghostwritten books on starting a business, marketing, and retirement income planning.


Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMU® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMU® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMU® 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 NAMU®. Nothing contained in this articles should be considered legal advice.