%1

Heeding the call of some of the largest mortgage lenders in the industry, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is moving to back the elimination of debt-to-income (DTI) requirements in mortgage underwriting, Bankrate.com reported. In a letter CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger sent to Congress yesterday, the CFPB asked to amend the Ability to Repay/Qualified Mortgage rule (ATR/QM rule) in order to remove DTI as a qualifying factor in mortgage underwriting. This rule was created in response to the financial crisis of a decade ago as a way to prevent lending money to borrowers who might not be able to afford the loan. The ATR/QM rules includes eight separate borrower qualifications that lenders must examine when approving a loan. The rule includes things like verification of income, credit history and DTI, among others. The only portion the CFPB is asking to amend is the DTI requirement as a powerful coalition of lenders deems the rule unfair and constraining.

The Trump administration will propose a new rule as early as Monday that would reduce the burden on local governments to meet their fair housing obligations, further scaling back civil rights enforcement, the Washington Post reported. Among the changes sought by the Department of Housing and Urban Development: redefining what it means to promote fair housing, eliminating the assessment used to address barriers to racial integration, and encouraging cities to remove regulations that stand in the way of affordable housing, according to the proposed rule obtained by The Washington Post. Fair housing advocates say that the proposal reduces the financial pressure on local governments to end residential segregation, as required by the 1968 Fair Housing Act, and is the latest erosion of Obama-era regulations designed to enforce the landmark legislation. The 2015 regulations required communities to take meaningful action against long-standing segregation by analyzing housing patterns, concentrated poverty and disparities in access to transportation, jobs and good schools. HUD Secretary Ben Carson has characterized those steps as “overly burdensome” and “too prescriptive,” saying that transforming segregated living patterns and poor neighborhoods into areas of opportunity is often not within a community’s control.

The Trump administration will propose a new rule as early as today that would reduce the burden on local governments to meet their fair housing obligations, the Washington Post reported. Among the changes sought by the Department of Housing and Urban Development: redefining what it means to promote fair housing, eliminating the assessment used to address barriers to racial integration, and encouraging cities to remove regulations that stand in the way of affordable housing. Fair housing advocates say that the proposal reduces the financial pressure on local governments to end residential segregation, as required by the 1968 Fair Housing Act, and is the latest erosion of Obama-era regulations designed to enforce the landmark legislation. The 2015 regulations required communities to take meaningful action against long-standing segregation by analyzing housing patterns, concentrated poverty and disparities in access to transportation, jobs and good schools. HUD Secretary Ben Carson has characterized those steps as “overly burdensome” and “too prescriptive,” saying that transforming segregated living patterns and poor neighborhoods into areas of opportunity is often not within a community’s control.

It’s been three months since the Trump administration released its plan to end government control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Democratic lawmakers still have unanswered questions, Bloomberg News reported. In a yesterday letter, Senate Banking Committee Democrats put almost two dozen queries to the Treasury Department and Federal Housing Finance Agency, the companies’ regulator. Topics ranged from the potential impact releasing Fannie and Freddie will have on the trillions of dollars in mortgage securities that the companies backstop to whether housing costs will rise. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats who signed the letter said that their questions are crucial in assessing whether the administration’s proposals will ensure “housing access and affordability, and the continued success of the secondary mortgage market.” The lawmakers urged a “prompt response” to their letter, which reflects ongoing concerns that President Donald Trump might try to bypass Congress in freeing Fannie and Freddie. Treasury’s September plan suggested dozens of reforms to protect Fannie and Freddie from another housing crash, shrinking their dominant market shares and creating new entities to compete with the companies. But specific details, such as determining how much capital Fannie and Freddie will need to survive a financial crisis and how they will raise it, still need to be ironed out.

Banks that have long lamented rules requiring them to do some of their business in less wealthy areas would get a break under a proposal released on Dec. 12 by two regulatory agencies. But the industry’s most prominent regulator, the Federal Reserve, isn’t on board, the New York Times reported. The central bank did not join in a proposal from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation that would give the Community Reinvestment Act its first major overhaul in a quarter-century. Joseph Otting, the comptroller of the currency, who spearheaded the effort, said that regulators had worked for 18 months on a plan, “but not all three agencies could move forward together at this time.” The Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, had signaled his disapproval on Wednesday, saying that the central bank had worked hard to get on the same page. “My hope is that we can still do that. I don’t know whether that will be possible or not,” he said. “If we can’t, I’m not sure what the path forward would be.” Should the changes be enacted without the Fed’s support, it would create two sets of rules: One for those overseen by the central bank and one for those overseen by the other two agencies. Banks have long called the Community Reinvestment Act’s requirements burdensome and impractical, but shirking them is not an option. Banks that do not meet the requirements face heavy regulatory scrutiny and can have difficulty getting approval for mergers or expansions.