InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
FHFA announces new public disclosure requirements for GSEs
On May 26, FHFA announced a final rule that amends the Enterprise Regulatory Capital Framework by introducing new public disclosure requirements for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs). The final rule adds new quarterly quantitative and annual qualitative disclosures related to risk management, corporate governance, capital structure and capital requirements and buffers under the standardized approach. The final rule also aligns the GSEs’ disclosure requirements with many of the public disclosure requirements for large banking organizations under the regulatory capital framework adopted by banking regulators, and is intended to ensure the GSEs operate in a safe and sound manner “in particular during periods of financial stress.” “By allowing market participants to assess key information about the [GSEs] risk profiles and associated levels of capital, this final rule will promote transparency and encourage sound risk management practices at the [GSEs],” acting Director Sandra L. Thompson said.
White House plan aims to increase housing supply, ease housing costs
On May 16, President Biden released a plan intended to “help close” the housing supply gap and lower housing costs. The White House’s Housing Supply Action Plan is structured to ease the burden of housing costs over five years by increasing the supply of quality, affordable housing units in the next three years. “When aligned with other policies to reduce housing costs and ensure affordability, such as rental assistance and down payment assistance, closing the gap will mean more affordable rents and more attainable homeownership for Americans in every community,” the Administration said in a statement. “This is the most comprehensive all of government effort to close the housing supply shortfall in history.”
Under the Plan, the Administration would:
- Reward jurisdictions that have reformed zoning and land-use policies with higher scores in certain federal grant processes, including by immediately leveraging transportation funding to encourage state and local governments to boost housing supply (where consistent with current statutory requirements), integrating affordable housing into Department of Transportation programs, and including land use within the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s investment priorities. These actions build on strategies that the Administration has called on Congress to pass such as establishing a grant program to “help states and localities eliminate needless barriers to affordable housing production” and creating a mandatory spending proposal to provide billions of dollars in grants to reward states and localities that have taken action to reduce affordable housing barriers.
- Pilot new financing mechanisms for housing production and preservation where financing gaps currently exist. Immediate action will include supporting production and availability of manufactured housing (including with chattel loans that the majority of manufactured housing purchasers rely on), accessory dwelling units, 2-4 unit properties, and smaller multifamily buildings.
- Expand and improve existing forms of federal financing, including for affordable multifamily development and preservation. Immediate actions include strengthening Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac financing for multifamily development and rehabilitation by “making Construction to Permanent loans (where one loan finances the construction but is also a long-term mortgage) more widely available by exploring the feasibility of Fannie Mae purchase of these loans.” The Administration also plans to promote the use of state, local, and Tribal government American Rescue Plan recovery funds to increase affordable housing supply; finalize the Low Income Housing Tax Credit “Income Averaging” proposed rule, whereby developers commit to creating affordable housing for households that meet specific income thresholds; reauthorize and update guidance for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which provides grants to states and localities that communities use to fund a range of housing activities; and improve “the alignment of federal funds to reduce transaction costs and duplications and accelerate development” by having the White House, HUD, Treasury, and USDA “convene state housing agencies to discuss best practices on the alignment of applications, reviews, and funding.”
- Preserve the availability of affordable single-family homes for owner-occupants by ensuring that more government-owned homes and other housing goes to owners who will live in them or mission-driven entities instead of large investors. The Administration will also encourage the use of CDBG for local acquisition and local sales to owner-occupants and mission-driven entities.
- Address supply chain disruptions by working with the private sector to address challenges. The Administration will also promote modular, panelized, and manufactured housing, as well as construction research and development to increase housing productivity and supply.
“Rising housing costs have burdened families of all incomes, with a particular impact on low- and moderate-income families, and people and communities of color,” the Administration stressed, noting that it has urged Congress to pass investments in housing production and preservation. The Administration’s 2023 budget includes investments that would lead to production or rehabilitation of another 500,000 homes.
FHFA: SCIF mandatory for loans sold to GSEs
On May 3, FHFA announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) are requiring lenders to use the Supplemental Consumer Information Form (SCIF) as part of the application process for loans that will be sold to the GSEs. According to the announcement, the SCIF is intended to collect information on the borrower’s language preference, and on any homebuyer education or housing counseling that the borrower received, so that lenders can increase their understanding of borrowers’ needs throughout the home buying process. The changes will require lenders to present the SCIF questions to borrowers and to report any data collected from the SCIF to the GSEs purchasing the loan. Lenders will be required to adopt these changes and reporting requirements for loans with application dates on or after March 1, 2023. The announcement also noted that response by borrowers on the preferred language question in the SCIF will be voluntary. The SCIF will be available via Mortgage Translations later this summer.
FHFA orders stress tests for Fannie and Freddie
On March 16, FHFA published orders applicable March 10 for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) with respect to stress test reporting as of December 31, 2021, under Dodd-Frank as amended by the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act. Under Dodd-Frank, certain federally regulated financial companies with total consolidated assets of more than $250 billion are required to conduct periodic stress tests to determine whether the companies have the capital necessary to absorb losses as a result of severely adverse economic conditions. The orders are accompanied by Summary Instructions and Guidance, which include stress test scenarios and revised templates (baseline, severely adverse, and variables and assumptions) for regulated companies to use when reporting the results of the stress tests (orders and instructions are available here). According to the Summary Instructions and Guidance, the GSEs have until May 20 to submit baseline and severely adverse results to FHFA and the Federal Reserve Board, and must publicly disclose a summary of severely adverse results between August 1 and 15.
FHFA releases AI/ML risk management guidance for GSEs
On February 10, FHFA released Advisory Bulletin (AB) 2022-02 to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) on managing risks related to the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML). Recognizing that while the use of AI/ML has rapidly grown among financial institutions to support a wide range of functions, including customer engagement, risk analysis, credit decision-making, fraud detection, and information security, FHFA warned that AI/ML may also expose a financial institution to heightened compliance, financial, operational, and model risk. In releasing AB 2022-02 (the first publicly released guidance by a U.S. financial regulator that specifically focuses on AI/ML risk management), FHFA advised that the GSEs should adopt a risk-based, flexible approach to AI/ML risk management that should also be able “to accommodate changes in the adoption, development, implementation, and use of AI/ML.” Diversity and inclusion (D&I) should also factor into the GSEs’ AI/ML processes, stated a letter released the same day from FHFA’s Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which outlined its expectations for the GSEs “to embed D&I considerations throughout all uses of AI/ML” and “address explicit and implicit biases to ensure equity in AI/ML recommendations.” The letter also emphasized the distinction between D&I and fairness and equity, explaining that D&I “requires additional deliberation because it goes beyond the equity considerations of the impact of the use of AI/ML and requires an assessment of the tools, mechanisms, and applications that may be used in the development of the systems and processes that incorporate AI/ML.”
Additionally, AB 2022-02 outlined four areas of heightened risk in the use of AI/ML: (i) model risk related to bias that may lead to discriminatory or unfair outcomes (includes “black box risk” where a “lack of interpretability, explainability, and transparency” may exist); (ii) data risk, including concerns related to the accuracy and quality of datasets, bias in data selection, security of data from manipulation, and unfamiliar data sources; (iii) operational risks related to information security and IT infrastructure, among other things; and (iv) regulatory and compliance risks concerning compliance with consumer protection, fair lending, and privacy laws. FHFA provided several key control considerations and encouraged the GSEs to strengthen their existing risk management frameworks where heightened risks are present due to the use of AI/ML.
FHFA sets targeted fee increases for certain loans
On January 5, FHFA announced targeted increases to the upfront fees for certain high-balance loans and second home loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs). Upfront fees for high-balance loans will increase between 0.25 percent and 0.75 percent, tiered by loan-to-value ratio. Upfront fees for second home loans will increase between 1.125 percent and 3.875 percent, also tiered by loan-to-value ratio. In order to continue to provide support for affordable housing, certain loans, including HomeReady, Home Possible, HFA Preferred and HFA Advantage, will not be subject to the increased fees. Additionally, “loans to first time homebuyers in high cost areas with incomes at or below 100 percent of area median income will have no specific high balance upfront fees.” The new fees will take effect April 1, to “minimize market and pipeline disruption,” FHFA stated. Acting Director Sandra Thompson said the fee increases are another step FHFA is taking to strengthen the GSEs’ safety and soundness, while also ensuring access to credit for first-time homebuyers and low- and moderate-income borrowers. “These targeted pricing changes will allow the [GSEs] to better achieve their mission of facilitating equitable and sustainable access to homeownership, while improving their regulatory capital position over time,” Thompson said.
FHFA announces GSE equitable housing goal plans
On September 7, FHFA announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) will submit Equitable Housing Finance Plans to FHFA by the end of 2021. According to FHFA the GSEs will identify and address barriers to sustainable housing opportunities, including their goals and plans of action to advance equity in housing finance for the next three years. In addition, FHFA will require the GSEs to submit annual progress reports regarding which actions were taken to implement their plans. FHFA is issuing a Request for Input, which invites public input through October 25, to aid the GSEs in preparing their first plans and to aid FHFA in overseeing the plans. Acting Director Sandra L. Thompson noted that by identifying and addressing the barriers to equitable housing finance opportunities, the GSEs “can responsibly reduce the racial and ethnic disparities in homeownership and wealth that still exist today.”
FHFA expands use of interest rate reduction
On June 30, FHFA announced changes to loan modification terms for borrowers impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic with mortgages backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac who need payment reduction. According to FHFA, flex modification terms will be adjusted for Covid-19 hardships, which will make “interest rate reduction possible for eligible borrowers, regardless of the borrower’s loan-to-value ratio.” Previously, only borrowers with mark-to-market loan-to-value ratios (which compare the balance remaining on a mortgage to the current market value of a home) greater than or equal to 80 percent were eligible for an interest rate reduction. FHFA acting Director Sandra L. Thompson noted that more families qualifying for interest rate reduction will “prevent unnecessary foreclosures, help strengthen the Enterprises’ books of business, and make sustainable homeownership a reality for more families currently living with the uncertainty of forbearance.”
1st Circuit holds Fannie, Freddie not “government actors” despite FHFA control
On June 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit stated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) can continue non-judicial foreclosures in states that permit them, holding that the GSEs are not “government actors” despite being controlled by FHFA. According to the opinion, the plaintiffs obtained mortgages that were later sold to Fannie Mae. After the borrowers defaulted on their loans, Fannie Mae, consistent with Rhode Island law, conducted non-judicial foreclosure sales of the properties. The plaintiffs filed suit, arguing that Fannie Mae and FHFA (which acts as Fannie Mae’s conservator) are government actors and that the nonjudicial foreclosure sales violated their Fifth Amendment procedural due process rights. The district court disagreed, however, and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss on the grounds that “because FHFA stepped into Fannie Mae’s shoes as its conservator and its ability to foreclose was a ‘contractual right inherited from Fannie Mae by virtue of its conservatorship,’ FHFA was not acting as the government when it foreclosed on the plaintiffs’ mortgages and was not subject to the plaintiffs’ Fifth Amendment claims.” The court further determined that FHFA’s conservatorship over Fannie Mae did not make Fannie Mae a government actor subject to the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims because FHFA “does not exercise sufficient control” over the GSE. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing, among other things, that the FHFA’s nearly 13-year conservatorship of the GSEs makes its control permanent and renders them governmental actors.
On appeal, the appellate court concluded that in its role as conservator, “FHFA is not a government actor because it has ‘stepped into the shoes’ of the private GSEs” and assumed all of their private contractual rights, including the right to perform non-judicial foreclosures. The appellate court also refuted the plaintiffs’ argument that FHFA’s 13-year conservatorship made its control permanent, pointing out that the “housing and mortgage financial markets are highly complex, as are the various indicators of their financial health, so the fact that FHFA has maintained the conservatorship for almost thirteen years does not mean that the government’s control is permanent.” As such, because the GSEs are not government actors they are also not subject to the plaintiffs’ due process claims, the appellate court concluded.
FHFA finalizes GSE resolution plan requirements
On May 3, FHFA published a final rule requiring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) to develop “credible resolution plans” (also known as “living wills”) to facilitate their rapid and orderly resolution in the event FHFA is appointed receiver per the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Similar to the living wills that other large financial institutions are required to develop under resolution planning rules issued by the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC, the resolution plans will create a roadmap for preserving business continuity should the GSEs fail again. FHFA Director Mark Calabria stressed that the rule “helps create a stronger, more resilient housing finance system by protecting taxpayers and the mortgage market from harm.”
As previously covered by InfoBytes, last December FHFA published a notice of proposed rulemaking seeking to, among other things, implement liquidity and funding requirements for the GSEs. According to FHFA’s fact sheet, public input was incorporated into the final rule’s key components, which include the following requirements:
- The resolution planning process will start with the identification of core business lines.
- Initial resolution plans must be submitted “two years after the effective date of the final rule” with “subsequent resolution plans to be submitted every two years thereafter.”
- Resolution plans must include the following required and prohibited assumptions: (i) an assumption of severely adverse economic conditions; (ii) a prohibition on assuming that the U.S. government will provide or continue to provide “extraordinary support”; and (iii) the reflection of statutory provisions stating “that obligations and securities of the [GSE] issued pursuant to its charter are not guaranteed by the [U.S.] and do not constitute a debt or obligation of the [U.S.].”
- Resolution plans must identify “potential material weaknesses or impediments to rapid and orderly resolution as conceived in its plan,” along with any actions or steps to address the identified weaknesses or impediments.
- Resolution plans must ensure confidentiality of certain information but also make portions available to the public.
- Resolution plans will be reviewed by FHFA to identity whether additional information is needed, as well as any deficiencies or “shortcomings” (defined as supervisory concerns that do not rise to the level of “deficiencies”). Feedback will be provided along with an opportunity for resubmission.
Additionally, FHFA added a 12-month notification requirement to the final rule should the agency decide to alter the resolution plan submission date. FHFA also reserved the authority to further refine submission requirements. The final rule is effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.