Category Archives: Regulatory Updates

FHA Appraisal Policy Changes 2025: What the Rollback of Bias Guidelines Means for Mortgage Lenders

What FHA Rolled Back — and Why It Matters Now

FHA appraisal policy changes in 2025 have fundamentally altered what lenders are required to do — and haven’t done — when it comes to monitoring for appraisal bias. For years, FHA-appraised properties carried explicit federal guidance requiring lenders to implement specific bias monitoring protocols. That framework is now gone. Here’s what the rollback means for your compliance posture.

In two separate moves during 2025, HUD revised its appraisal requirements in ways that significantly change the compliance landscape for FHA lenders.

On March 19, 2025, FHA issued Mortgagee Letter 2025-08, rescinding three policy documents:

  • ML 2021-27 — the Appraisal Fair Housing Compliance letter, which had required lenders to implement protocols for identifying and addressing potential appraisal bias
  • ML 2024-07 — the Reconsideration of Value (ROV) guidance, which established formal borrower-initiated ROV procedures
  • ML 2024-16 — related appraisal review and reconsideration requirements

HUD’s stated reason: the policies were duplicative of existing professional standards (USPAP already addresses fair housing competency), and the rescissions were part of a broader regulatory reform effort under Executive Orders 14192 and 14219, aimed at reducing compliance burdens.

Then, on June 27, 2025, HUD issued Mortgagee Letter 2025-18 — “Rescission of Outdated and Costly FHA Appraisal Protocols” — eliminating additional appraisal requirements including the economic life estimate mandate for appraisers and additional appraisal requirements for Section 223(e) mortgages. The stated goal was cost reduction and streamlining.

The Compliance Gap This Creates

Here’s where the situation gets complicated for lenders.

When FHA rescinded the fair housing compliance letter (ML 2021-27), it removed the explicit federal guidance that told lenders specifically what their appraisal bias monitoring obligations were. HUD’s position: appraisers are already bound by USPAP and Fair Housing Act obligations, so the FHA-specific guidance was unnecessary.

That’s a reasonable argument at the individual appraiser level. But it doesn’t fully address what lenders need to do internally.

Consider the exposure:

The Fair Housing Act has not changed. Lenders still have obligations to ensure their appraisal processes don’t result in discriminatory outcomes — regardless of whether FHA publishes specific monitoring guidance.

Other regulators are still watching. State attorneys general, the CFPB, and HUD’s own FHEO office can still investigate appraisal bias claims against lenders. The rescission of FHA guidance doesn’t shield lenders from fair lending enforcement; it just removes the explicit floor FHA had previously established.

State regulators may fill the vacuum. Several states — including California and New York — have been actively expanding fair housing enforcement. Lenders operating in those markets may face stricter expectations than the rescinded FHA guidance ever imposed.

What Still Applies After the Rollback

Even with ML 2021-27 gone, several core obligations remain fully in effect for every FHA lender:

The Fair Housing Act. This is federal law — it doesn’t get rescinded by a mortgagee letter. Lenders must not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability in any aspect of a dwelling-related transaction, including appraisals.

Lender appraisal review obligations. FHA still requires mortgagees to review appraisals for completeness and quality. ML 2025-08 removed the specific ROV protocol guidance — but lenders still need review processes that can catch problematic valuations.

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) / Regulation B. Appraisal-related discrimination claims can be brought under ECOA as well. The CFPB’s updated Regulation B, with its new intent-based fair lending framework taking effect July 21, 2026, makes this particularly relevant.

QM and ability-to-repay considerations. Appraised value still matters for loan-to-value calculations, loan eligibility, and investor delivery requirements.

Why Internal QC Matters More Than Ever

Here’s the practical implication that too many lenders are underestimating: the removal of FHA’s appraisal bias guidance doesn’t reduce your risk — it shifts the burden of managing that risk entirely onto your internal quality control program.

Previously, lenders could point to specific FHA guidance as evidence of their compliance program. Now, without that explicit framework, lenders need to demonstrate that they have their own robust appraisal review processes — processes that can identify when an appraisal may reflect bias, discriminatory patterns, or valuation errors before the loan closes.

This means your QC program needs to do more than check for form completion. It needs to:

  • Monitor appraisal outcomes for patterns — particularly across demographic lines, even without a specific FHA mandate to do so
  • Document your internal review process so you have a defensible record if a fair lending claim ever arises
  • Ensure ROV procedures are still in place even without the specific FHA protocol — borrowers can still request reconsiderations, and you need a consistent, fair process to handle them
  • Update your policies and procedures to reflect that appraisal bias monitoring is now entirely an internal obligation, not an FHA-prescribed one

The Bottom Line

FHA’s 2025 appraisal policy rollbacks reduce some administrative burden — but they create a compliance gap that lenders ignore at their peril. The explicit framework for appraisal bias monitoring is gone. What remains is the broader Fair Housing Act, state enforcement trends, and the lender’s own internal QC program.

If your appraisal quality control process hasn’t been updated to reflect these changes, now is the time to do it.

At Synergy, we help lenders build appraisal QC programs that go beyond form-checking — including fair lending risk monitoring and documentation practices that hold up under regulatory scrutiny.

Want to review your current appraisal QC framework? Contact Synergy for a compliance consultation, or book a demo at SimplifyQC.com.

Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac AI Governance: What Lenders Must Do

Two GSEs, Two Deadlines, One Compliance Reality

The mortgage industry has entered a new era of AI governance — and this shift is coming from the two government-sponsored enterprises, not just federal agencies.

On March 3, 2026, Freddie Mac updated its Seller/Servicer Guide Section 1302.8, establishing formal governance requirements for any seller/servicer using artificial intelligence or machine learning in connection with mortgages sold to Freddie Mac. Then, on April 8, 2026, Fannie Mae issued Lender Letter LL-2026-04 — its own AI/ML governance framework for single-family sellers and servicers — effective August 6, 2026.

Together, these mandates create a dual-layer compliance obligation affecting virtually every lender operating in the conventional space. Whether you sell to Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, or both, your AI governance infrastructure is now under regulatory scrutiny that didn’t exist twelve months ago.

What Freddie Mac Requires (Section 1302.8, Effective March 3, 2026)

Freddie Mac’s guidance, issued under Bulletin 2025-16, sets the baseline. Any seller/servicer using AI or ML in loan origination or servicing must establish a clear, documented governance framework covering:

  • Policies, processes, and procedures governing AI/ML adoption and use throughout the loan lifecycle
  • Risk management actions for AI/ML systems — how the lender identifies, assesses, and mitigates AI-related risk
  • Senior management approval of AI/ML policies — a higher bar than simply documenting them
  • Indemnification obligations — lenders assume full responsibility for AI-driven decisions, including outcomes from vendor-provided AI tools
  • Compliance with applicable law and Freddie Mac Purchase Documents

The indemnification obligation deserves special attention. If a lender’s vendor supplies an AI-driven underwriting tool that produces a discriminatory outcome, the lender — not the vendor — bears accountability to Freddie Mac. Vendor due diligence is no longer optional.

What Fannie Mae Requires (LL-2026-04, Effective August 6, 2026)

Fannie Mae’s Lender Letter LL-2026-04 takes effect August 6, 2026 — giving lenders a longer runway than Freddie Mac’s mandate, but no less urgency.

The framework requires single-family sellers and servicers to maintain a documented, actively maintained AI/ML governance program including:

  • Written policies and procedures covering the full life cycle of any AI/ML system — from development to ongoing maintenance
  • Annual policy reviews with a designated owner responsible for implementing, maintaining, and updating policies
  • Trustworthy and ethical AI principles incorporated into the lender’s governance approach
  • Information security compliance per Fannie Mae’s Information Security and Business Resiliency Supplement
  • Vendor and subcontractor governance — AI/ML risk management standards must extend to any third-party tool, with protections no less robust than the lender’s own
  • On-demand disclosure — upon request by Fannie Mae, lenders must promptly disclose AI/ML technologies deployed, their intended purposes, and risk safeguards in place

Fannie Mae’s requirements are less prescriptive than Freddie Mac’s in some areas — but they compensate with annual review obligations, designated ownership requirements, and explicit disclosure authority that gives Fannie Mae visibility into the AI tools lenders are using.

The Overlap With the New Fair Lending Framework

The timing is not coincidental. The CFPB’s April 2026 Regulation B final rule — shifting fair lending enforcement from a disparate impact to an intent-based standard — takes effect July 21, just weeks before Fannie Mae’s August 6 deadline.

If a lender uses AI-driven underwriting or pricing models and those tools produce discriminatory outputs, intentional use of that tool could constitute intentional discrimination under the new ECOA framework. Fannie Mae’s governance framework, with its emphasis on trustworthy and ethical AI, becomes a lender’s first line of defense — evidence that AI tools were deployed responsibly.

This means your AI governance documentation is no longer just a GSE compliance obligation. It is a fair lending defense. Quality control (QC) programs need to account for this intersection — reviewing whether AI tool outputs are defensible under the new intent-based standard.

Building a Compliant AI Governance Framework: Where to Start

Inventory your AI/ML tools. Identify every AI or machine learning system used in loan origination, underwriting, pricing, or servicing — including vendor-supplied tools.

Establish written policies and procedures. Both GSE frameworks require documented policies covering the full AI/ML lifecycle, reflecting legal requirements, ethical AI principles, and your institution’s risk tolerance.

Designate an owner. Fannie Mae requires a designated owner for annual reviews; Freddie Mac requires senior management approval. These establish internal accountability — and external defensibility.

Extend governance to vendors. Lenders bear responsibility for AI tool outcomes regardless of vendor involvement. Third-party AI vendors must be subject to the same governance standards.

Integrate AI governance into your quality control program. Quality control reviews should assess AI tool outputs, document governance compliance, and verify that AI-driven decisions are defensible under the new fair lending framework.

The Bottom Line: AI Governance Is Now Mortgage Compliance

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have made their position clear: AI governance is not a future consideration — it is a present obligation. With Freddie Mac’s deadline already passed and Fannie Mae’s approaching, lenders without established frameworks are exposed on multiple fronts.

The stakes go beyond GSE compliance. Ungoverned AI tools can expose lenders to fair lending liability, investor repurchase risk, and regulatory enforcement — particularly as the CFPB’s intent-based fair lending standard takes effect.

At Synergy, we help mortgage lenders build and maintain AI governance frameworks that satisfy GSE requirements and hold up under regulatory scrutiny. Our QC platform integrates AI governance assessment into your broader compliance program — so you’re covered on every front.

Need help building or reviewing your AI governance framework before the August 6 deadline? Contact Synergy to speak with a compliance specialist, or book a demo at simplifyqc.com.

CFPB Fair Lending Rule 2026: What Mortgage Lenders Must Do Before July 21 to Stay Compliant

What the CFPB Fair Lending Rule Means for Mortgage Lenders

The CFPB fair lending rule issued April 22, 2026, is one of the most consequential shifts in mortgage fair lending enforcement in decades — and it takes effect July 21. If your QC program hasn’t been updated to reflect the new intent-based standard, you’re behind.

For mortgage lenders, servicers, and quality control professionals, this is not a routine update. It is one of the most consequential regulatory shifts in fair lending enforcement in decades. And with the July 21 effective date approaching fast, lenders who haven’t begun adapting their compliance frameworks need to act immediately.

What Changed: Understanding the Regulation B Final Rule

The End of Disparate Impact Under Regulation B

The most significant change is the removal of the disparate impact standard from Regulation B. For years, lenders could be held liable under ECOA even without evidence of intentional discrimination — if a policy or practice had a “disproportionate adverse impact” on a protected class, and the lender couldn’t demonstrate “business necessity.”

The CFPB’s final rule eliminates this framework. ECOA, as interpreted through Regulation B, is now an intent-based statute. Liability will require showing that a lender intentionally discriminated on a prohibited basis.

It is critical to note: this change applies specifically to Regulation B. Other federal fair lending laws — including the Fair Housing Act — retain their disparate impact frameworks. HUD’s separate rulemaking on the FHA’s disparate impact standard remains ongoing. Lenders must not conflate the two.

Narrowed Discouragement Standard

The rule also tightens what constitutes “discouragement” under Regulation B. The prior standard captured a broad range of statements, practices, and even inaction that could discourage applicants. The new rule limits discouragement to explicit exclusionary messaging — making it harder for regulators to pursue claims based on ambiguous or indirect conduct.

New Restrictions on Special Purpose Credit Programs

Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCPs) — programs designed to address historical discrimination by extending credit to underserved borrowers — remain permitted but face new procedural requirements and limitations under the final rule.

Why the CFPB Issued This Fair Lending Rule

The CFPB under Acting Director Russell Vought framed the rule as a return to “core statutory principles,” arguing that disparate impact liability was not authorized by the text of ECOA. The regulatory relief narrative also fits within the broader policy direction of the March 13, 2026 Executive Order, “Promoting Access to Mortgage Credit,” which signaled an intent to reduce compliance burden on lenders, particularly smaller institutions.

What This Means for Your QC Program

The elimination of disparate impact does not mean fair lending compliance becomes optional — it becomes different.

From Statistical Scrutiny to Intent Review: Your QC processes likely include statistical analysis — HMDA data reviews, denial rate comparisons across demographics, pricing disparities. While these remain valuable compliance tools, the legal standard for liability has shifted. QC teams must pivot toward identifying specific discriminatory intent in individual transactions or clearly discriminatory policies.

Updated Policies and Procedures: Lender fair lending policies must be updated to reflect the new intent-based framework. Discouragement policies, in particular, need to be redrawn to reflect the narrowed standard. Failure to update internal guidance before July 21 creates immediate mortgage compliance risk.

Enhanced Documentation of Intent: When reviewing loan files for fair lending red flags, QC reviewers should document not just statistical patterns but evidence of intent. What was said, what was written, what policy decisions were made — these become the evidentiary basis under the new standard.

AI/ML Accountability Gains New Urgency: Freddie Mac’s AI/ML governance requirements, codified in Guide Section 1302.8 and effective March 3, 2026, remain firmly in force and gain new importance in this environment. If a lender’s AI-driven underwriting or pricing models produce discriminatory outputs, intentional use of that tool could constitute intentional discrimination — regardless of the removed disparate impact standard. Lenders bear full responsibility for AI-driven decisions affecting loan outcomes.

HUD Fair Housing Act Remains Separate: Don’t conflate the Regulation B change with the Fair Housing Act. HUD has signaled a narrower enforcement focus, but the FHA’s disparate impact standard is a separate legal question. Both laws remain active and enforceable.

Key Action Steps Before July 21, 2026

1.Audit your fair lending QC protocols. Identify where your current program is built around disparate impact analysis and adapt accordingly.

2.Update internal policies and procedures. Align policy language with the new intent-based standard and narrowed discouragement definition.

3.Retrain QC staff and underwriting teams. Ensure everyone understands the shift from statistical to intent-based review.

4.Review all SPCPs. Confirm that any special purpose credit programs your institution offers meet the new procedural requirements.

5.Stress-test your AI governance framework. If you use AI or ML in loan origination, underwriting, or servicing, confirm that your governance documentation satisfies Freddie Mac Section 1302.8 requirements.

6.Engage legal counsel. Given the scope of this change, legal review of your compliance program before the effective date is strongly recommended.

The CFPB Fair Lending Rule in the Context of 2026 Regulatory Changes

The Regulation B final rule is one piece of a broader reshaping of mortgage regulation. The March 13 executive order also directs the CFPB to reconsider ATR/QM requirements and potentially modify TRID disclosure rules. HUD has updated fair housing guidance. Annual Regulation Z threshold adjustments took effect January 1, 2026. The volume of change is significant, and lenders who adapt fastest — with sharp, well-informed QC programs — will be best positioned to navigate the months ahead.

Stay Ahead of the Compliance Curve

The mortgage regulatory landscape in 2026 is shifting faster than many anticipated. New fair lending standards, AI governance mandates, executive orders on credit access — the pace of change demands more than static compliance procedures. It demands a proactive, adaptive quality control partner.

At Synergy, we specialize in helping mortgage lenders and servicers stay ahead of these developments. Our quality control and compliance solutions are built to evolve as the regulatory environment shifts — so your team doesn’t have to manage it alone.

Ready to review your QC program ahead of the July 21 effective date? Contact Synergy today to speak with a compliance specialist or book a demo of our quality control platform at simplifyqc.com.

Current State of Housing Market

While the US housing market has remained surprisingly resilient price-wise in the face of 7% mortgage rates, which the Fed has pushed to near-Volcker levels precisely in hopes of accelerating the dis inflationary wave by crushing housing, that single most valuable asset of the US middle class, the reality why prices have not collapsed is that the bid-ask spread for any home currently for sale has ballooned to levels where the market is effectively frozen as there is simply no possibility for the bid and ask to meet somewhere “in the middle” of the range (those who are hoping to buy are already tapped out before being asked to pay even more, while sellers are already wealthy and absent a liquidity crunch see no reason to sell a home at what they view as fires ale prices).

Overnight, real-estate brokerage Redfin calculated just how widespread said paralysis is: it found that just 14 of every 1,000 U.S. homes changed hands during the first six months of 2023. That’s down from 19 of every 1,000 during the same period of 2019 and the lowest turnover rate in at least a decade, since Redfin’s records started. That means prospective homebuyers have 28% fewer homes to choose from than they did before the pandemic upended the U.S. housing market.

Redfin uses turnover as a measure of housing availability; it indicates how often homes change hands in a given area.  This analysis includes overall for-sale housing turnover and breakdowns based on neighborhood type and home type.

The pre-pandemic turnover rate noted above (roughly 20 of every 1,000 sellable homes change hands in the first half of a year) is fairly typical for the modern housing market, but a more active market would have a rate closer to 40 or 50 of every 1,000.

As Redfin adds, the wild pandemic-era housing market has intensified an existing shortage of homes for sale and led to this year’s low turnover rate. In 2018, Freddie Mac estimated that about 2.5 million more homes needed to be built to meet demand, with the shortfall mainly due to a lack of construction of single-family homes. The homebuying boom of late 2020 and 2021, driven by record-low mortgage rates, remote work and a surge in investor purchases, depleted already low inventory levels. Finally, 2022’s soaring mortgage rates–average rates nearly doubled from January to June–exacerbated the shortage by handcuffing homeowners to their comparatively low rates. Some homeowners have opted to renovate their current home, and some are buying another home but hanging onto their first one and renting it out to either a longterm tenant or short-term vacationers. Now, the supply of homes for sale is at a record low.

“The quick increase in mortgage rates created an uphill battle for many Americans who want to buy a home by locking up inventory and making the homes that do hit the market too expensive. The typical home is selling for about 40% more than before the pandemic,” said Redfin Deputy Chief Economist Taylor Marr. “Mortgage rates dropping closer to 5% would make the biggest dent in the affordability crisis by freeing up some inventory and bringing monthly payments down. But there are a few other things that would boost turnover and help make homes more affordable. Building more housing is imperative, and federal and local governments can help by reforming zoning and making the building process easier. Financial incentives, like reducing transfer taxes for home sellers and subsidizing major moves with tax breaks, would also add to supply.”

Suburbs hardest hit

House hunters searching for large homes in the suburbs have seen the biggest drop in their options. Just about 16 of every 1,000 four-bedroom-plus suburban single-family homes sold in the first half of this year, down from 24 of every 1,000 that sold in the same period in 2019. That means buyers of that home type have 33% fewer houses to choose from.

The turnover rate has dropped for every size home in every type of neighborhood over the last four years (though buyers will have an easier time finding something for sale in certain metro areas, as outlined below). That trend can be seen in the chart above, which displays the national post-pandemic housing turnover rate on the left and the pre-pandemic rate on the right. The length of the line between the two dots indicates how much turnover declined from 2019 to 2023, with the biggest declines at the top.

The turnover rate of large single-family suburban homes has shrunk most because that type of home exploded in popularity during the pandemic. Remote workers flocked to the suburbs, untethered from the office, and purchased large properties with space for adults to work from home and children to attend school from home.

“New listings normally hit the market on Thursdays, and I have buyers who are excitedly checking their Redfin app Thursday mornings, only to find nothing new,” said Phoenix Redfin Premier agent Heather Mahmood-Corley. “That goes for buyers in every price range in every type of neighborhood, but what people want most are those move-in ready, mid-sized homes in neighborhoods with highly rated schools. Those are hardest to find because for people to buy one, someone needs to sell one. That’s not happening, because so many of those homeowners have low mortgage rates.”

The turnover rate of condos and townhomes didn’t shrink as much as that of single-family homes during the pandemic, though condo and townhouse buyers are still about 20% less likely to find that type of home than they were in 2019.

Supply of that home type wasn’t depleted as much because there wasn’t as much demand for them during the pandemic. In fact, many remote workers were selling condos and townhouses in favor of single-family homes with more space.

Modestly sized single-family homes in the city are hardest to find: Just 11 of every 1,000 two- and three-bedroom urban houses sold in the first half of this year

Smaller houses in the city have the lowest turnover rate of all the home types in this analysis.  Roughly 11 of every 1,000 two- and three-bedroom single-family homes in urban neighborhoods sold in the first six months of 2023, compared to 14 of every 1,000 during the same period in 2019.

Two- to three-bedroom homes in suburban neighborhoods are essentially tied with their urban counterparts for the lowest turnover rate, with 11 of every 1,000 changing hands this year. That’s down from 16 of every 1,000 in 2019.

Modestly sized single-family homes in all kinds of neighborhoods have long been hard for buyers to find. That’s because builders don’t make many of them anymore, and homeowners tend to hold onto the ones that exist.

Today’s homebuilders tend to focus on the kind of home that’s in demand and profitable: Larger single-family homes, which don’t cost much more to build than smaller ones but sell for more money, and condos and townhouses, which cost less to build. And people who own those starter-type homes often turn them into rental properties rather than selling when they move up to bigger houses.  Homeowners can often cover their mortgage and then some when renting out this type of home, especially in desirable neighborhoods; that income paired with the home’s value increasing over time incentivizes keeping rather than selling.

Homebuyers have the smallest pool of options in the Bay Area: Just 6 of every 1,000 San Jose homes have turned over to a new owner this year

Northern California has the lowest turnover rate in the U.S. Just six of every 1,000 homes in San Jose changed hands in the first half of 2023, the lowest rate of the 50 most populous U.S. metros. It’s followed closely by Oakland, San Diego, Los Angeles, Sacramento and Anaheim, all places where about eight of every 1,000 homes turned over to a new owner.

The pandemic exacerbated the supply shortage throughout California, with the turnover rate dropping by at least 30% in each of those metros from 2019 to 2023.

Zooming in on large, suburban single-family homes, California still has the lowest turnover rate. Six of every 1,000 homes of that type have sold this year in San Jose (-40% since 2019), the lowest rate in the nation. Next come Oakland (7 of every 1,000; -43%), San Diego (8 of every 1,000; -51%), Sacramento (9 of every 1,000; -41%) and Anaheim (9 of every 1,000; -41%).

Homebuyers have the biggest pool of options in Newark, NJ and Nashville, where more than 23 of every 1,000 homes have changed hands this year

Newark, NJ has the highest turnover rate in the U.S., with 24 of every 1,000 homes changing hands during the first six months this year. It’s followed closely by Nashville, TN (23 of every 1,000) and Austin, TX (22 of every 1,000). Nashville and Austin are also two of the three metros (along with Fort Worth, TX) with the highest turnover for large suburban, single-family homes.

Newark buyers still have far fewer homes to choose from than they did before the pandemic, with a 42% drop in turnover since 2019. Only New Brunswick, NJ (-49%) and San Diego (-46%) had bigger declines. Zooming in on large suburban houses, New Brunswick (-55%), Chicago (-54%) and New York (-52%) had the biggest drops in turnover.

But Nashville and Austin are both among the five metros with the smallest declines in turnover since 2019, posting drops of just 10% and 14%, respectively. When it comes to large suburban houses, Nashville and Austin have the second and third smallest declines. That’s partly due to robust new construction in Nashville and Austin: Inventory of single-family homes for sale in both metros is made up of more than 30% newly built homes, compared to 22% nationwide.

Only Milwaukee and Columbus, OH, which both saw overall turnover drop by about 8% from 2019 to 2023, had smaller declines in turnover than Nashville. Indianapolis, IN comes in fourth, with a 14% decline. Milwaukee, Columbus and Indianapolis have relatively stable turnover because they didn’t experience huge homebuying demand swings throughout the pandemic.

Source : https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/complete-paralysis-just-1-us-homes-have-changed-hands-2023-lowest-share-record

HUD Publishes Semiannual Regulatory Agenda

Vol. 83 Monday, No. 112 June 11, 2018 Part IX Department of Housing and Urban Development Semiannual Regulatory Agenda VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:24 Jun 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\11JNP9.SGM 11JNP9 daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS3 27148 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Unified Agenda DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Subtitles A and B [Docket No. FR–6087–N–01] Semiannual Regulatory Agenda AGENCY: Department of Housing and Urban Development. ACTION: Semiannual regulatory agenda. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 4(b) of Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ as amended, HUD is publishing its agenda of regulations already issued or that are expected to be issued during the next several months. The agenda also includes rules currently in effect that are under review and describes those regulations that may affect small entities, as required by section 602 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The purpose of publication of the agenda is to encourage more effective public participation in the regulatory process by providing the public with advance information about pending regulatory activities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aaron Santa Anna, Assistant General Counsel for Regulations, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone number 202–708–3055. (This is not a toll-free number.) A telecommunications device for hearingand speech-impaired individuals (TTY) is available at 800–877–8339 (Federal Relay Service). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended, requires each department or agency to prepare semiannually an agenda of: (1) Regulations that the department or agency has issued or expects to issue, and (2) rules currently in effect that are under departmental or agency review. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) requires each department or agency to publish semiannually a regulatory agenda of rules expected to be proposed or promulgated that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of ‘‘small entities,’’ meaning small businesses, small organizations, or small governmental jurisdictions. Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act permit incorporation of the agenda required by these two authorities with any other prescribed agenda. HUD’s regulatory agenda combines the information required by Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act. HUD’s complete Unified Agenda is available online at www.reginfo.gov, in a format that offers users a greatly enhanced ability to obtain information from the Agenda database. The Department is subject to certain rulemaking requirements set forth in the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3531 et seq.). Section 7(o) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(o)) requires that the Secretary transmit to the congressional committees having jurisdictional oversight of HUD (the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Committee on Financial Services), a semiannual agenda of all rules or regulations that are under development or review by the Department. A rule appearing on the agenda cannot be published for comment before or during the first 15 calendar days after transmittal of the agenda. Section 7(o) provides that if, within that period, either committee notifies the Secretary that it intends to review any rule or regulation that appears on the agenda, the Secretary must submit to both committees a copy of the rule or regulation, in the form that it is intended to be proposed, at least 15 calendar days before it is to be published for comment. The semiannual agenda posted on www.reginfo.gov is the agenda transmitted to the committees in compliance with the above requirements. HUD has attempted to list in this agenda all regulations and regulatory reviews pending at the time of publication, except for minor and routine or repetitive actions, but some may have been inadvertently omitted, or may have arisen too late to be included in the published agenda. There is no legal significance to the omission of an item from this agenda. Also, where a date is provided for the next rulemaking action, the date is an estimate and is not a commitment to act on or by the date shown. In some cases, HUD has withdrawn rules that were placed on previous agendas for which there has been no publication activity. Withdrawal of a rule does not necessarily mean that HUD will not proceed with the rulemaking. Withdrawal allows HUD to assess the subject matter further and determine whether rulemaking in that area is appropriate. Following such an assessment, the Department may determine that certain rules listed as withdrawn under this agenda are appropriate. If that determination is made, such rules will be included in a succeeding semiannual agenda. In addition, for a few rules that have been published as proposed or interim rules and which, therefore, require further rulemaking, HUD has identified the timing of the next action stage as ‘‘undetermined.’’ These are rules that are still under review by HUD for which a determination and timing of the next action stage have not yet been made. The purpose of publication of the agenda is to encourage more effective public participation in the regulatory process by providing the public with early information about the Department’s future regulatory actions. HUD invites all interested members of the public to comment on the rules listed in the agenda. J. Paul Compton, Jr., General Counsel. OFFICE OF HOUSING—COMPLETED ACTIONS Sequence No. Title Regulation Identifier No. 137 ……………….. 24 CFR 3280 Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards 3rd Set (FR–5739) ……………………. 2502–AJ34 VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:24 Jun 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11JNP9.SGM 11JNP9 daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Unified Agenda 27149 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) Office of Housing (OH) Completed Actions 137. Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards 3rd Set (FR–5739) E.O. 13771 Designation: Regulatory. Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) Abstract: This proposed rule would amend the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards by adopting certain recommendations made to HUD by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC). The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (the Act) requires HUD to publish all proposed revised construction and safety standards submitted by the MHCC. This proposed rule is based on the third set of MHCC recommendations to update and improve various aspects of the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards. HUD has reviewed those proposals and has made several editorial revisions to the proposals which were reviewed and accepted by the MHCC. This rule proposes to add new standards that would establish requirements for carbon monoxide detection, stairways, fire safety considerations for attached garages, and for duplexes. Completed: Reason Date FR Cite Withdrawn ……….. 04/04/18 Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes. Agency Contact: James Martin, Phone: 202 708–6423. RIN: 2502–AJ34 [FR Doc. 2018–11248 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210–67–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:24 Jun 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\11JNP9.SGM 11JNP9 daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS3

Source: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-06-11/pdf/2018-11248.pdf

Fannie Mae Selling Guide Announcement SEL-2018-05

Selling Guide Announcement SEL-2018-05

June 5, 2018

Selling Guide Updates The Selling Guide has been updated to include changes to the following:

MH Advantage™ Properties

Inspection of Manufactured Homes with Structural Modifications

Project Standards Updates

Flash Settlement for MBS

Desktop Underwriter® (DU®) Bankruptcy and Mortgage Delinquency Assessment

HomeStyle® Energy in DU

HomeStyle Renovation Forms

Miscellaneous Selling Guide Updates

Each of the updates is described below. The affected topics for each policy change are listed on the Attachment. The Selling Guide provides full details of the policy changes. The updated topics are dated June 5, 2018. The highlighted Selling Guide PDF is back by popular demand! Beginning with the June 2018 Selling Guide update, Fannie Mae is again providing a highlighted version of the Selling Guide PDF to enable a simple way to quickly identify the most recent significant updates made to the Selling Guide. The topic title and edited paragraphs are highlighted in yellow to help you identify where changes were made. (Note that deleted topics and paragraphs are not identified.) The highlighted Selling Guide PDF is intended to be used as a companion tool in conjunction with your review of the corresponding Selling Guide Update Announcement. MH Advantage Properties We are pleased to introduce the MH Advantage initiative. MH Advantage is manufactured housing that is designed to meet specific construction, architectural design, and energy efficiency standards that are more consistent with site built homes. The goal of this initiative is to help bridge the gap in affordable housing by encouraging more consumers to consider manufactured homes as an alternative to site built homes. Loans secured by MH Advantage properties are afforded a number of flexibilities over standard manufactured housing, including higher LTV ratios, standard mortgage insurance, and reduced loan-level price adjustments. Examples of the physical characteristics for MH Advantage include  specific architectural and aesthetic features, such as distinctive roof treatments (eaves and higher pitch roofline), lower profile foundation, garages or carports, porches, and dormers;  construction elements including durability features, such as durable siding materials; and  energy efficiency standards (minimum energy ratings apply). MH Advantage is open to all manufacturers. Participating manufacturers will enter into an agreement with us allowing them to attach an “MH Advantage Sticker” to the home in proximity to the home’s HUD Data Plate. The Sticker identifies the home as having been designed to accommodate the physical characteristics for an MH Advantage property. The lender will confirm the presence of the Sticker, and additional information about site improvements to the property, but is not responsible for confirming the physical characteristics of the home.

 

Requirements for Loans Secured by MH Advantage Properties The following table describes the requirements for delivery of loans secured by MH Advantage properties. Requirements Property Eligibility The lender must confirm the following by reviewing photographs in the appraisal report:  the property is MH Advantage as evidenced by MH Advantage Sticker;  the HUD Data Plate and HUD certification labels are present;  the presence of a driveway leading to the home (or to the garage or carport, if one is present); and  the presence of a sidewalk connecting either the driveway, or a detached garage or carport Appraisal  Manufactured Home Appraisal Report (1004C), and  Completion Report (1004D), if applicable Eligible Transactions  MH Advantage loans follow the same DU eligibility requirements as manufactured homes, with the exception that the maximum LTV ratio is increased to 97% for certain purchases and limited cash-out refinances. All requirements that pertain to loans with LTV ratios 95.01 – 97% apply.  The CLTV ratio may be up to 105% with Community Seconds.  Loans may be originated as HomeReady and subject to all HomeReady requirements.  HomeStyle Renovation and HomeStyle Energy may also be combined with MH Advantage. Underwriting  Lenders must use DU to underwrite.  The “Manufactured Home: MH Advantage” Subject Property Type must be used (even if the property is in a project). Mortgage Insurance MH Advantage loans are subject to standard mortgage insurance coverage requirements; the deeper coverage required for manufactured homes does not apply. Delivery A new Special Feature Code (SFC) 859 is required at delivery in addition to SFC 235. There are no other new requirements related to loan delivery. MH Advantage loans are delivered using:  ConstructionMethodType (Sort ID 51): “Manufactured”  ManufacturedHomeWidthType (Sort ID 33): “MultiWide” or “SingleWide”  If the property is located in a condo, co-op, or PUD, the related project data points are also required. Loan-Level Price Adjustments (LLPA) The 50 basis point LLPA that is applicable to manufactured housing does not apply to MH Advantage. All other standard requirements that apply to manufactured housing apply to MH Advantage. NO T E : The Eligibility Matrix, Loan-Level Price Adjustment Matrix, and Special Feature Codes documents have all been updated to reflect these changes. For more information about MH Advantage, see our website. Effective Dates Beginning today, lenders can:  underwrite MH Advantage loans in DU Version 10.2,  submit MH Advantage loans to EarlyCheck to validate the data via a new set of MH Advantage edits,  deliver whole loans to us, and © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 3 of 8  deliver loans in an MBS with pool issue dates after May 1, 2018. Inspection of Manufactured Homes with Structural Modifications Currently, the Selling Guide requires that when a manufactured home has an addition or a structural modification and is not located in a state with an agency responsible for inspecting these modifications, then the property must be inspected by a licensed professional engineer. The engineer must certify that the addition or structural change was completed in accordance with the HUD Manufactured Home Construction Safety Standards. With this update, if the state does not have this requirement, then the structural modification must be inspected and the structural modifications be deemed structurally sound by a third party who is regulated by the state and is qualified to make the determination. Certification of compliance with HUD Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards is no longer required. Effective Date Lenders can take advantage of this change immediately. Project Standards Updates In response to lender feedback, we have made several updates to our condo, co-op, and PUD project policies. These updates will simplify our policies and increase flexibilities when originating loans secured by units in a project. The following table describes the updates. Refer to the Selling Guide for additional details and clarifications. Summary of Project Standards Updates Single-Entity Ownership  Waive the single-entity ownership requirement when the purchase transaction will result in a reduction in the single-entity ownership concentration (maximum single entity ownership 49%, no delinquent dues, no pending or active special assessments)  Exempt units held by non-profits, affordable housing programs (including units subject to non-eviction rent regulation codes), or institutions of higher education from the percentage of single entity ownership calculation  Allow single-entity ownership in projects with 21 or more units to increase to 20% Commercial Space  Exempt commercially owned or operated parking spaces from the project’s commercial space calculations  Increase commercial space to 35% Established Project Definition  Allow a new condo project to be reviewed as an “established” project if it meets all the requirements for an established project other than the 90% unit conveyance policy. Allow 80% conveyance if the developer is holding back units as rental stock if additional requirements are met. Investment Property Transactions  Allow investor transactions to be eligible for Limited Review for LTV, CLTV, and HCLTV to 75% FHA Project Review  Allow delivery of conventional loans secured by units in established condo projects approved by FHA’s HUD Review and Approval Process (HRAP) Two-to Four-Unit Condo Projects  Waive project review requirements, with the exception of some basic requirements that apply Projects Consisting of Manufactured Homes  Allow Full Review of established condo projects  Condo and PUD projects subject to community land trusts, deed restrictions, leasehold estates, or shared equity arrangements may be eligible under the Fannie Mae Project Eligibility Review Service (PERS) Legal Non-Conforming Zoning  Align project standards policy to standard appraisal policy that requires the appraiser to comment on the market response to legal non-conforming zoning © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 4 of 8 Projects Operating as a Hotel or Motel (“Condotel” Policy) Clarify criteria for identifying projects that operate as hotels or motels. The HOA and/or project cannot:  be licensed or managed/operated as a commercial hotel, motel, resort, or hospitality entity  restrict owners ability to occupy the unit during any part of the year  require owners to make their unit available for rental pooling (daily or otherwise)  require that the unit owners share profits from the rental of units to the HOA, management company, or resort or hotel rental company Live-Work Condo Projects  Simplify current policy with the requirement that live-work projects be primarily residential in nature and must be in compliance with local zoning or development regulations for live-work projects Limited Equity Co-ops  Allow limited-equity co-ops to be evaluated through the PERS process for project approval (both streamlined PERS and standard PERS) – limited equity feature must be related to an affordable housing preservation program and is in compliance with our requirements on resale restrictions when applicable In addition to these changes, we also took the opportunity to streamline and reorganize some of the content. For example, we removed the topic pertaining to detached condos. It was replaced with a new topic that clearly describes the requirements that apply to projects and transactions for which a project review is waived. We also removed duplicate content that appeared in multiple topics, such as Project Type Codes. These are now listed in their entirety in only one topic. Effective Dates Lenders may apply these changes when reviewing projects immediately. The weekend of June 23, 2018 the following systems will be updated to support these changes:  DU Version 10.2,  Collateral Underwriter® (CU®),  Uniform Collateral Data Portal® (UCDP®),  EarlyCheck™, and  Loan Delivery – Whole loans can be delivered beginning June 23, 2018, and loans in MBS with pool issue dates on or after July 1, 2018 Condo Project Manager (CPM) will be updated to align with these changes in August 2018. In the interim, lenders may continue to use CPM for projects that do not require the additional flexibilities described in this announcement. For projects that are newly eligible under these expanded eligibility requirements, lenders may complete the applicable project review outside of CPM. Flash Settlement for MBS Last year we eliminated Flash MBS processing fees and instead offered Flash MBS as an acceptable, standard, and no cost delivery option. This has reduced selling costs and increased flexibility for same month pooling and allowed lenders to receive book-entry delivery on Fannie Mae MBS as soon as 72 hours. In our continuing effort to increase pooling flexibility, we will now allow lenders to receive book-entry delivery on Fannie Mae’s published Majors as soon as 48 hours after we receive the Loan Delivery submission. This reduced time-line for book-entry turnaround is only applicable for Fannie Mae’s published Majors. Single issuer MBS must still be delivered 72 hours prior to book-entry. © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 5 of 8 Additionally, we are updating the Pool Settlement Calendars to reflect the 5 th business day before the end of the month as the last date to submit Single Family MBS, allowing for an additional day of pooling. Effective Date The change to Flash Majors will occur with MBS delivered on or after July 1, 2018. The change to the Pool Settlement Calendars will begin with the July Calendar. Desktop Underwriter Bankruptcy and Mortgage Delinquency Assessment The Selling Guide has been updated to include the policies related to bankruptcy and mortgage delinquency assessment that were described in the DU Version 10.2 June Update Release Notes. When inaccurate information exists in a credit report, lenders will have the ability to instruct DU to disregard (in the eligibility assessment) inaccurate bankruptcy or mortgage delinquency information, or disregard a bankruptcy that was due to extenuating circumstances. Effective Date These changes will apply to new loan casefiles submitted or resubmitted to DU on or after the weekend of June 23, 2018. See the DU Version 10.2 June Update Release Notes for additional information. HomeStyle Energy in DU The Selling Guide has been updated to align with updates to DU regarding HomeStyle Energy mortgage loans. Because these updates will allow DU to identify transactions having energy-related improvements, the Selling Guide policy requiring lenders to manually confirm HomeStyle Energy requirements outside of DU has been removed. Effective Date These changes will apply to new loan casefiles submitted or resubmitted to DU on or after the weekend of June 23, 2018. See the DU Version 10.2 Release Notes for additional information. NO T E : As specified in the DU Version 10.2 Release Notes, two new fields are being added to DU to identify HomeStyle Energy loan submissions: Energy Improvement Amount and PACE Loan Payoff Amount. An amount must be entered in one or both of these fields for DU to be able to underwrite the loan casefile as HomeStyle Energy. If a lender’s loan origination system cannot be updated with these two new fields by June 23, the lender can access the DU user interface to enter the data. Alternatively, we will allow lenders to continue to manually apply the HomeStyle Energy policies to DU loan casefiles until their systems have been updated. HomeStyle Renovation Forms We have posted model Renovation Loan documents and related Summary Pages that may be used in connection with HomeStyle Renovation Loans. The following special purpose model documents are now available:  Multistate Renovation Contract – Fannie Mae Model Document (Form 3730), and  Multistate Renovation Loan Agreement – Fannie Mae Model Document (Form 3731). Also, the following model riders are now available:  Multistate Renovation Loan Rider to Security Instrument – Fannie Mae Model Document (Form 3732), and  Multistate Renovation Loan Investor Rider to Security Instrument – Fannie Mae Model Document (Form 3733). © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 6 of 8 The Selling Guide has been updated to include references to these new forms. Effective Date These documents may be used immediately; however, because they are model documents, usage is strictly optional. Miscellaneous Selling Guide Updates Multiple Appraisals. Earlier this year, we clarified the policy in B4-1.3-12, Quality Assurance regarding second appraisals. With this update, we moved a similar policy that existed in B4-1.1-02, Lender Responsibilities, to a more appropriate location in the Guide, B4-1.2-02, Appraisal Age and Use Requirements. The multiple appraisal policy is now clearly described in the two topics where lenders are most likely to look for that information. Primary Mortgage Insurance Absence Reason Code 97. Currently, if a loan is delivered without mortgage insurance, one of two codes is required:  MI Code 95 – No MI Based on Original LTV  MI Code 97 – MI Canceled Based on Current LTV We have updated the Approved Mortgage Insurers and Related Identifiers, published on our website and referenced in the Selling Guide, to reflect that Primary MI Absence Reason Code 97 may only be used for non-flow deliveries. This code is only appropriate for non-flow deliveries because it indicates that even though the original LTV ratio was greater than 80%, no mortgage insurance is required because mortgage insurance was canceled based on a new value obtained after origination. (Note that this update did not result in a direct change to the Selling Guide text.) ***** Lenders who have questions about this Announcement should contact their Customer Delivery Team. Carlos T. Perez Senior Vice President and Chief Credit Officer for Single-Family © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 7 of 8 Attachment Section of the Announcement Updated Selling Guide Topics MH Advantage Properties  B2-1.2-01, Purchase Transactions  B2-1.2-02, Limited Cash-Out Refinance Transactions  B2-2-04, Guarantors, Co-Signers, or Non-Occupant Borrowers on the Subject Transaction  B2-3-02, Special Property Eligibility and Underwriting Considerations: Factory-Built Housing  B4-1.2-01, Appraisal Report Forms and Exhibits  B4-1.4-01, Factory-Built Housing: Manufactured Housing  B4-1.4-10, Property Inspection Waivers  B4-2.2-05, Requirements for Review of Detached Condos (Topic deleted)  B4-2.2-08, Additional Requirements for Review of Condo, Co-ops, and PUD Projects Comprised of Manufactured Homes (Topic deleted)  B5-2-01, Manufactured Housing  B5-2-03, Manufactured Housing Underwriting Requirements  B5-2-04, Manufactured Housing Pricing, Mortgage Insurance, and Special Feature Code Requirements  B5-5.1-02, Community Seconds Loan Eligibility  B5-6-02: HomeReady Mortgage Loan and Borrower Eligibility  B7-1-02, Mortgage Insurance Coverage Requirements Inspection of Manufactured Homes with Structural Modifications  B2-3-02, Special Property Eligibility and Underwriting Considerations: Factory-Built Housing Project Standards Updates  B2-3-01, General Property Eligibility  B2-3-02, Special Property Eligibility and Underwriting Considerations: Factory-Built Housing  B2-3-03, Special Property Eligibility and Underwriting Considerations: Leasehold Estates  B4-1.4-01, Factory-Built Housing: Manufactured Housing  B4-2.1-01, General Information on Project Standards  B4-2.1-02, Waiver of Project Review  B4-2.1-03, Ineligible Projects  B4-2.2-01, Limited Review Process  B4-2.2-02, Full Review Process © 2018 Fannie Mae. Trademarks of Fannie Mae. SEL- 2018-05 8 of 8 Section of the Announcement Updated Selling Guide Topics  B4-2.2-03, Full Review: Additional Eligibility Requirements for Units in New and Newly Converted Condo Projects  B4-2.2-04, Geographic-Specific Condo Project Considerations  B4-2.2-05, FHA-Approved Condo Review Eligibility  B4-2.2-06, Project Eligibility Review Service (PERS)  B4-2.3-01, Eligibility Requirements for Units in PUD Projects  B5-2-02, Manufactured Housing Loan Eligibility  B5-5.1-04, Community Land Trusts Flash Settlement for MBS  C3-7-06, Settling the Trade Desktop Underwriter® Bankruptcy and Mortgage Delinquency Assessment  B3-5.3-09, DU Credit Report Analysis HomeStyle Energy in DU  B4-1.4-10, Property Inspection Waivers  B5-3.3-01, HomeStyle Energy for Improvements on Existing Properties HomeStyle Renovation Forms  B5-3.2-06, HomeStyle Renovation: Renovation Contract, Renovation Loan Agreement, and Lien Waiver  B8-4-01, Riders and Addenda  B8-5-03, HomeStyle Renovation Mortgage Documentation Requirements

Source:https://www.fanniemae.com/content/announcement/sel1805.pdf 

VA Provides Lender’s Certification Requirement for VA-Guaranteed Loans

Lender’s Certification Requirement for VA-Guaranteed Loans 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Circular is to provide clarification on the regulatory requirement that all Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) guaranteed loans require lender certifications. 2. Background. Recently, VA Regional Loan Centers and Lenders have inquired as to the validity of the Lender Certification in conjunction with Interest Rate Reduction Refinance Loans (IRRRLs). The Lender Certification is required on IRRRLs whether or not underwriting is required. This is supported in 38 CFR 36.4340(k). This section states that: “Lenders originating loans are responsible for determining and certifying to VA on the appropriate application or closing form that the loan meets all statutory and regulatory requirements. Lenders will affirmatively certify that loans were made in full compliance with the law and loan guaranty regulations as prescribed in this section.” 3. Action. Lender’s certification applies to all VA-guaranteed loans, and is not contingent upon the type of VA loan. 4. Rescission: This Circular is rescinded July 1, 2020. By Direction of the Under Secretary for Benefits Jeffrey F. London Director Loan Guaranty Service Distribution: CO: RPC 2021 SS (26A1) FLD: VBAFS, 1 each (Reproduce and distribute based on RPC 2021)

Source: https://www.benefits.va.gov/homeloans/documents/circulars/26_18_14.pdf

HMDA Reporting – Getting It Right

A Guide to HMDA Reporting: Getting It Right! will assist you in complying with the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) as implemented by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Regulation C, 12 CFR Part 1003 (Regulation C). The purpose of this Guide is to provide an easy-to-use summary of certain key requirements. This Guide does not provide detailed information about the HMDA submission process, or file, data, and edit specifications. Information about those topics may be found on the FFIEC’s Resources for HMDA Filers website, available at www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/hmda/for-filers and www.ffiec.gov/hmda/. The Foreword and Summary of Requirements sections of the Guide were developed by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) — the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board), the CFPB the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the State Liaison Committee (SLC) — and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The appendices include, in addition to Regulation C and its Official Interpretations, certain HMDA compliance materials developed and issued exclusively by the CFPB and not by the FFIEC or its other member agencies. Financial institutions may wish to consult and rely upon additional compliance resources that their Federal supervisory agencies may offer. Contact information for each agency is available in Appendix H. This edition of the Guide incorporates the amendments made to HMDA in the DoddFrank Act. 1 The Dodd-Frank Act amended HMDA, transferring rulewriting authority to the Bureau and expanding the scope of information that must be collected, reported, and disclosed under HMDA, among other changes. In October 2015, the Bureau issued the 2015 HMDA Final Rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act amendments to

Regulation C. 2 On August 24, 2017, the Bureau issued a final rule further amending Regulation C to make technical corrections and to clarify and amend certain requirements adopted by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.3 The 2015 HMDA Final Rule modified the types of institutions and transactions subject to Regulation C, the types of data that institutions are required to collect, and the processes for reporting and disclosing the required data.4 The Summary of Requirements reviews HMDA’s purposes and data collection, reporting, and disclosure requirements. It provides a high level summary of:  The institutions covered by Regulation C.  The transactions covered by Regulation C.  The information that covered institutions are required to collect, record, and report.  The requirements for reporting and disclosing data. This Guide is not a substitute for HMDA or Regulation C. Regulation C and its official interpretations (also known as the commentary) are the definitive sources of information regarding their requirements. Regulation C is available in Appendix F and G of this Guide and at www.consumerfinance.gov/regulatory-implementation/hmda/.

Additionally, this Guide is not a substitute for the requirements for filing the reportable data. The Filing Instructions Guide is the definitive source for information regarding the filing requirements and is available at www.consumerfinance.gov/dataresearch/hmda/for-filers.

Feedback The FFIEC welcomes suggestions for changes or additions that might make this Guide more helpful.

Write to: FFIEC, 3501 Fairfax Drive Room B-7081a Arlington, VA 22226

Send an e-mail to: GettingItRightGuide@cfpb.gov

If, after reviewing the resources in this Guide, you have a question regarding a specific provision of the regulation, or have questions about how to file HMDA data, please email HMDAHELP@cfpb.gov with your specific question, identifying the filing year you are referencing, and, when applicable, the section(s) of the regulation related to your question. You can also submit the inquiry online using the form available at hmdahelp.consumerfinance.gov. The information you provide will permit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to process your request or inquiry. You may also contact your appropriate Federal HMDA reporting agency (see Appendix H to this Guide.)

Generally, this Guide will point you to the relevant resources that discuss:

The institutions covered by Regulation C.

The transactions covered by Regulation C.

The information that covered institutions are required to collect, record, and report.

The requirements for reporting and disclosing data. The material can be found after the introduction in the referenced appendix section.

Institutional Coverage: Who Must Report? INSTITUTIONAL COVERAGE GENERALLY An institution is required to comply with Regulation C only if it is a “financial institution” as that term is defined in Regulation C. The definition of financial institution includes both depository financial institutions and nondepository financial institutions, as those terms are separately defined in Regulation C. 12 CFR 1003.2(g). An institution uses these two definitions, which are outlined below, as coverage tests to determine whether it is a financial institution that is required to comply with Regulation C. For the purposes of this Guide, the term “financial institution” refers to an institution that is either a depository financial institution or a nondepository financial institution that is subject to Regulation C.

INSTITUTIONAL COVERAGE TESTS DEPOSITORY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS A bank, savings association, or credit union is a depository financial institution and subject to Regulation C if it meets ALL of the following: 1. Asset-Size Threshold. On the preceding December 31, the bank, savings association, or credit union had assets in excess of the asset-size threshold published annually in the Federal Register, included in the official interpretations, 12 CFR Part 1003, Comment 2(g)-2, and posted on the Bureau’s website. 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(i). The phrase “preceding December 31” refers to the December 31 immediately preceding the current calendar year. For example, in 2018, the preceding December 31 is December 31, 2017. Comment 2(g)-1. 2. Location Test. On the preceding December 31, the bank, savings association, or credit union had a home or branch office located in a metropolitan statistical area (MSA). 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(ii). For purposes of this location test, a branch office for a bank, savings association, or credit union is an office: (a) of the bank, savings association, or credit union (b) that is considered a branch by the institution’s Federal or State supervisory agency. For purposes of Regulation C, an automated teller machine or other free-standing electronic terminal is not a branch office regardless of whether the supervisory agency would consider it a branch. 12 CFR 1003.2(c)(1). A branch office of a credit union is any office where member accounts are established or loans are made, whether or not an agency has approved the office as a branch. Comment 2(c)(1)-1. 3. Loan Activity Test. During the preceding calendar year, the bank, savings association, or credit union originated at least one home purchase loan or refinancing of a home purchase loan secured by a first lien on a one-to four-unit dwelling. 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(iii). For more information on whether a loan is secured by a dwelling, is a home purchase loan, or is a refinancing, see 12 CFR 1003.2(f), (j), and (p) and associated commentary; and Sections 4.1.1.2 and 5.7 of the HMDA Small Entity Compliance Guide available in Appendix B of this Guide. 4. Federally Related Test. The bank, savings association, or credit union: a. Is federally insured; or b. Is federally regulated; or c. Originated at least one home purchase loan or refinancing of a home purchase loan that was secured by a first lien on a one- to-four-unit dwelling and also (i) was insured, guaranteed or supplemented by a Federal agency or (ii) was intended for sale to the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(iv). 5. Loan-Volume Threshold. The bank, savings association, or credit union meets or exceeds either the closed-end mortgage loan or the open-end line of credit loanvolume threshold in each of the two preceding calendar years. Effective January 1, 2018 and through December 31, 2019, a bank, savings association, or credit union that originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years, or originated at least 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years meets or exceeds the loan-volume threshold. When the bank, savings association, or credit union determines whether it meets these loan-volume thresholds, it does not count transactions excluded by 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(1) through (10) and (13). 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(v). Closed-end mortgage loans, open-end lines of credit, and these excluded transactions are discussed below in TRANSACTIONAL COVERAGE: WHAT IS REPORTED?.

When determining if it meets the loan-volume thresholds, a bank, savings association, or credit union only counts closed-end mortgage loans and open-end lines of credit that it originated. Only one institution is deemed to have originated a specific closedend mortgage loan or open-end line of credit under Regulation C, even if two or more institutions are involved in the origination process. Only the institution that is deemed to have originated the transaction under Regulation C counts it for purposes of the Loan-Volume Threshold. Comment 2(g)-5; see also Comments 4(a)-2 through -4. These requirements are discussed below in TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING MULTIPLE ENTITIES. Regulation C also includes a separate test to ensure that financial institutions that meet only the closed-end mortgage loan threshold are not required to report their open-end lines of credit, and that financial institutions that meet only the open-end line of credit threshold are not required to report their closed-end mortgage loans. 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(11) and (12).6 For more information, see HMDA Small Entity Compliance Guide, Section 4.1.2 available in Appendix B of this Guide.

NONDEPOSITORY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Under Regulation C, a for-profit mortgage-lending institution other than a bank, savings association, or credit union is a nondepository financial institution and subject to Regulation C if it meets BOTH of the following: 1. Location Test. The institution had a home or branch office in a metropolitan statistical area (MSA) on the preceding December 31. 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(2)(i). The phrase “preceding December 31” refers to the December 31 immediately preceding the current calendar year. For example, in 2018, the preceding December 31 is December 31, 2017. Comment 2(g)-1 For purposes of this location test, a branch office of a nondepository financial institution is any one of the institution’s offices at which the institution takes from the public applications for covered loans. A nondepository financial institution is also deemed to have a branch office in an MSA if, in the preceding calendar year, it received applications for, originated, or purchased five or more covered loans related to property located in that MSA, even if it does not have an office in that MSA. 12 CFR 1003.2(c)(2). Covered loans and applications for covered loans are discussed below in TRANSACTIONAL COVERAGE: WHAT IS REPORTED?. 2. Loan-Volume Threshold. The institution meets or exceeds either the closed-end mortgage loan-volume threshold or the open-end line of credit loan-volume threshold in each of the two preceding calendar years. Effective January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2019, an institution that originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years, or originated at least 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years meets or exceeds the loanvolume threshold.

When an institution determines whether it meets the loan-volume thresholds, it does not count transactions excluded by 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(1) through (10) and (13). 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(2)(ii). Closed-end mortgage loans, open-end lines of credit, and these excluded transactions are discussed below in TRANSACTIONAL COVERAGE: WHAT IS REPORTED?. When determining if it meets the loan-volume thresholds, an institution only counts closed-end mortgage loans and open-end lines of credit that it originated. Only one institution is deemed to have originated a specific closed-end mortgage loan or openend line of credit under Regulation C, even if two or more institutions are involved in the origination process. Only the institution that is deemed to have originated the transaction under Regulation C counts it for purposes of the loan volume threshold. Comment 2(g)-5; see also Comments 4(a)-2 through -4. These requirements are discussed below in TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING MULTIPLE ENTITIES. Regulation C also includes a separate test to ensure that financial institutions that meet only the 25 closed-end mortgage loan threshold are not required to report their open-end lines of credit, and that financial institutions that meet only the 500 open-end line of credit threshold are not required to report their closed-end mortgage loans. 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(11) and (12).7 For more information, see the HMDA Small Entity Compliance Guide, Section 4.1.2 available in Appendix B of this Guide.

Source: https://www.ffiec.gov/hmda/pdf/2018guide.pdf

Fannie Mae Updates Mortgage Loan Rating Classifications and Servicer Watchlist Submissions

Multifamily Mortgage Business Guide Update 18-03

Effective May 14, 2018, Fannie Mae is updating Part V, Chapter 6 – Watchlist Management, of the Multifamily Selling and Servicing Guide (“Guide”) to: • clarify that Mortgage Loans that would otherwise by identified as Pass Watch Mortgage Loans are not eligible for identification as Special Mention; and • remove from the definition of a Mortgage Loan identified as Special Mention the existence of unanticipated deferred maintenance at the Property requiring attention by the Borrower

Changes Fannie Mae is clarifying the definitions of Mortgage Loans identified as Pass Watch and rated as Special Mention. The Mortgage Loans identified as Special Mention must only be Mortgage Loans that would otherwise be identified as Pass. Additionally, Mortgage Loans with unanticipated deferred maintenance at the Property requiring attention by the Borrower are no longer identified as Special Mention. Please see the actual Guide chapter for full details and other minor editorial changes.

Effective Date This Guide Update is effective May 14, 2018. Questions Please contact David Miller at david_w_miller@fanniemae.com or (202) 752-6297, or John Collins at john_p_collins@fanniemae.com or (617) 345-8041, with any questions. Associated Documents On the Effective Date, the updated Guide chapter will be published on AllRegs. • Part V, Chapter 6 – Watchlist Management (clean and blackline)

Source: https://www.fanniemae.com/content/announcement/gu1803.pdf

FFIEC Issues Examination Procedures Regarding Customer Due Diligence and Beneficial Ownership

Beneficial Ownership Requirements for Legal Entity Customers – Overview Objective. Assess the bank’s written procedures and overall compliance with regulatory requirements for identifying and verifying beneficial owner(s) of legal entity customers. Under the Beneficial Ownership Rule, 1 a bank must establish and maintain written procedures that are reasonably designed to identify and verify beneficial owner(s) of legal entity customers and to include such procedures in its anti-money laundering compliance program. Legal entities, whether domestic or foreign, can be used to facilitate money laundering and other crimes because their true ownership can be concealed. The collection of beneficial ownership information by banks about legal entity customers can provide law enforcement with key details about suspected criminals who use legal entity structures to conceal their illicit activity and assets. Requiring legal entity customers seeking access to banks to disclose identifying information, such as the name, date of birth, and Social Security number of natural persons who own or control them will make such entities more transparent, and thus less attractive to criminals and those who assist them. Similar to other customer information that a bank may gather, beneficial ownership information collected under the rule may be relevant to other regulatory requirements. These other regulatory requirements include, but are not limited to, identifying suspicious activity, and determining Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned parties. Banks should define in their policies, procedures, and processes how beneficial ownership information will be used to meet other regulatory requirements. Legal Entity Customers For the purposes of the Beneficial Ownership Rule, 2 a legal entity customer is defined as a corporation, limited liability company, or other entity that is created by the filing of a public document with a Secretary of State or other similar office, a general partnership, and any similar entity formed under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction that opens an account. A number of types of business entities are excluded from the definition of legal entity customer under the Beneficial Ownership rule. In addition, and subject to certain limitations, banks are not required to identify and verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of a legal entity customer when the customer opens certain types of accounts. For further information on exclusions and exemptions to the Beneficial Ownership Rule, see Appendix 1. These exclusions and exemptions do not alter or supersede other existing requirements related to BSA/AML and OFAC sanctions. Beneficial Owner(s) Beneficial ownership is determined under both a control prong and an ownership prong. Under the control prong, the beneficial owner is a single individual with significant

responsibility to control, manage or direct a legal entity customer.3 This includes, an executive officer or senior manager (Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, President), or any other individual who regularly performs similar functions. One beneficial owner must be identified under the control prong for each legal entity customer. Under the ownership prong, a beneficial owner is each individual, if any, who, directly or indirectly, through any contract, arrangement, understanding, relationship or otherwise, owns 25 percent or more of the equity interests of a legal entity customer.4 If a trust owns directly or indirectly, through any contract, arrangement, understanding, relationship or otherwise, 25 percent or more of the equity interests of a legal entity customer, the beneficial owner is the trustee.5 Identification of a beneficial owner under the ownership prong is not required if no individual owns 25 percent or more of a legal entity customer. Therefore, all legal entity customers will have a total of between one and five beneficial owner(s) – one individual under the control prong and zero to four individuals under the ownership prong. Banks may rely on the information supplied by the legal entity customer regarding the identity of its beneficial owner or owners, provided that it has no knowledge of facts that would reasonably call into question the reliability of such information.6 However, bank staff who know, suspect, or have reason to suspect that equity holders are attempting to avoid the reporting threshold may, depending on the circumstances, be required to file a SAR.7 More information on filing of SARs may be found in the “Suspicious Activity Reporting Overview” section on page 60 of the FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual. Identification of Beneficial Ownership Information A bank must establish and maintain written procedures detailing the identifying information that must be obtained for each beneficial owner of a legal entity customer opening a new account after May 11, 2018. At a minimum, the bank must obtain the following identifying information for each beneficial owner of a legal entity customer: • Name. • Date of birth. • Address.8

• Identification number.9 A bank may obtain identifying information for beneficial owner(s) of legal entity customers through a completed certification form10 from the individual opening the account on behalf of the legal entity customer, or by obtaining from the individual the information required by the form by another means, provided the individual certifies, to the best of the individual’s knowledge, the accuracy of the information. A bank may rely on the information supplied by the individual opening the account on behalf of the legal entity customer regarding the identity of its beneficial owner(s), provided that it has no knowledge of facts that would reasonably call into question the reliability of such information. If a legal entity customer opens multiple accounts a bank may rely on the pre-existing beneficial ownership records it maintains, provided that the bank confirms (verbally or in writing) that such information is up-to-date and accurate at the time each account is opened.11 Banks must have procedures to maintain and update customer information, including beneficial ownership information for legal entity customers, on the basis of risk. Additionally, banks are not required to conduct retroactive reviews to obtain beneficial ownership information on legal entity customers that were existing customers as of May 11, 2018. However, the bank may need to obtain (and thereafter update) beneficial ownership information for existing legal entity customers based on its ongoing monitoring. For further guidance on maintaining and updating of customer information including beneficial ownership information, please see the “Ongoing Monitoring of Customer Relationship” section of the “Customer Due Diligence Overview” section of the FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual. 12 Verification of Beneficial Owner Information A bank must establish and maintain written risk-based procedures for verifying the identity of each beneficial owner of a legal entity customer within a reasonable period of time after the account is opened. These procedures must contain the elements required for verifying the identity of customers that are individuals under 31 CFR 1020.220(a)(2), provided, that in the case of documentary verification, the bank may use photocopies or other reproductions of the documents listed in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of 31 CFR 1020.220. Guidance on documentary and non-documentary verification methods may be found in the core overview section “Customer Identification Program,” of the FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual. 9 An identification number for a U.S. person is a taxpayer identification number (TIN) (or evidence of an application for one), and an identification number for a non-U.S. person is one or more of the following: a TIN; a passport number and country of issuance; an alien identification card number; or a number and country of issuance of any other unexpired government-issued document evidencing nationality or residence and bearing a photograph or similar safeguard. TIN is defined by section 6109 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 USC 6109) and the IRS regulations implementing that section (e.g., Social Security number (SSN) or individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN), or employer identification number (EIN)). See 31 CFR 1010.220(a)(2)(i)(4) 10 See 31 CFR 1010.230, Appendix A, Certification Regarding Beneficial Owners of Legal Entity Customers (2016) 11 FinCEN, FIN-2018-G001, Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Customer Due Diligence Requirements for Financial Institutions, Question #10, April 2018. 12 FFIEC, Core Examination Overview and Procedures, Customer Due Diligence Overview, May 201

A bank need not establish the accuracy of every element of identifying information obtained, but must verify enough information to form a reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of the beneficial owner(s) of the legal entity customer. The bank’s procedures for verifying the identity of the beneficial owners must describe when it uses documents, non-documentary methods, or a combination of methods. Lack of Identification and Verification of Beneficial Ownership Information Also consistent with 31 CFR 1020.220, the bank should establish policies, procedures, and processes for circumstances in which the bank cannot form a reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of the beneficial owner(s) of a legal entity customer. These policies, procedures, and processes should describe:

• Circumstances in which the bank should not open an account.

• The terms under which a customer may use an account while the bank attempts to verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of a legal entity customer.

• When the bank should close an account, after attempts to verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of a legal entity customer have failed.

• When the bank should file a SAR in accordance with applicable law and regulation.

Recordkeeping and Retention Requirements A bank must establish recordkeeping procedures for beneficial ownership identification and verification information. At a minimum, the bank must maintain any identifying information obtained, including without limitation the certification (if obtained), for a period of five years after the date the account is closed. The bank must also keep a description of any document relied on (noting the type, any identification number, place of issuance and, if any, date of issuance and expiration), of any non-documentary methods and the results of any measures undertaken, and of the resolution of each substantive discrepancy for five years after the record is made. Reliance on Another Financial Institution A bank is permitted to rely on the performance by another financial institution (including an affiliate) of the requirements of the Beneficial Ownership Rule with respect to any legal entity customer of the covered financial institution that is opening, or has opened, an account or has established a similar business relationship with the other financial institution to engage in services, dealings, or other financial transactions, provided that:

• Reliance is reasonable, under the circumstances.

• The relied-upon financial institution is subject to a rule implementing 31 USC 5318(h) and is regulated by a federal functional regulator.

The other financial institution enters into a contract requiring it to certify annually to the bank that it has implemented its AML program, and that it will perform (or its agent will perform) the specified requirements of the bank’s procedures to comply with the requirements of the Beneficial Ownership Rule

ExaminationProcedures Beneficial Ownership Objective: Assess the bank’s written procedures and overall compliance with regulatory requirements for identifying and verifying beneficial owner(s) of legal entity customers. 1. Determine whether the bank has adequate written procedures for gathering and verifying information required to be obtained, and retained (including name, address, taxpayer identification number (TIN), and date of birth) for beneficial owner(s) of legal entity customers who open an account after May 11, 2018. 2. Determine whether the bank has adequate risk-based procedures for updating customer information, including beneficial owner information, and maintaining current customer information. Transaction Testing 3. On the basis of a risk assessment, prior examination reports, and a review of the bank’s audit findings, select a sample of new accounts opened for legal entity customers since May 11, 2018 to review for compliance with the Beneficial Ownership Rule. The sample should include a cross-section of account types. From this sample, determine whether the bank has performed the following procedures:

• Opened the account in accordance with the requirements of the Beneficial Ownership Rule (31 CFR 1010.230).

• Obtained the identifying information for each beneficial owner of a legal entity customer as required (e.g. name, date of birth, address, and identification number).

• Within a reasonable time after account opening, verified enough of the beneficial owner’s identity information to form a reasonable belief as to the beneficial owner’s true identity.

• Appropriately resolved situations in which beneficial owner’s identity could not be reasonably established.

• Maintained a record of the identity information required by the Beneficial Ownership Rule, the method used to verify identity, and verification results (31 CFR 1010.230(i)).

• Filed SARs as appropriate. 4. On the basis of the examination procedures completed, including transaction testing, form a conclusion about the adequacy of procedures for complying with the Beneficial Ownership Rule Beneficial Ownership — Appendix 1 FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual 7 05/05/2018

Appendix 1 – Beneficial Ownership Exclusions from the definition of Legal Entity Customer Under 31 CFR 1010.230(e)(2) a legal entity customer does not include:
• A financial institution regulated by a federal functional regulator14 or a bank regulated by a state bank regulator;
• A person described in 31 CFR 1020.315(b)(2) through (5): o A department or agency of the United States, of any state, or of any political subdivision of any State; o Any entity established under the laws of the United States, of any state, or of any political subdivision of any state, or under an interstate compact between two or more states, that exercises governmental authority on behalf of the United States or any such state or political subdivision; o Any entity (other than a bank) whose common stock or analogous equity interests are listed on the New York Stock Exchange or the American Stock Exchange (currently known as the NYSE American) or have been designated as a NASDAQ National Market Security listed on the NASDAQ stock exchange (with some exceptions); o Any subsidiary (other than a bank) of any “listed entity” that is organized under the laws of the United States or of any state and at least 51 percent of whose common stock or analogous equity interest is owned by the listed entity, provided that a person that is a financial institution, other than a bank, is an exempt person only to the extent of its domestic operations;

• An issuer of a class of securities registered under section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or that is required to file reports under section 15(d) of that Act;

• An investment company, investment adviser, an exchange or clearing agency, or any other entity that is registered with the SEC;

• A registered entity, commodity pool operator, commodity trading advisor, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, or major swap participant that is registered with the CFTC;

• A public accounting firm registered under section 102 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act;

• A bank holding company or savings and loan holding company;

• A pooled investment vehicle that is operated or advised by a financial institution that is excluded under paragraph (e)(2);

• An insurance company that is regulated by a state;

A financial market utility designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council;

• A foreign financial institution established in a jurisdiction where the regulator of such institution maintains beneficial ownership information regarding such institution;

• A non-U.S. governmental department, agency, or political subdivision that engages only in governmental rather than commercial activities;

• Any legal entity only to the extent that it opens a private banking account subject to 31 CFR 1010.620. Trusts Trusts are not included in the definition of legal entity customer, other than statutory trusts created by a filing with a Secretary of State or similar office.15 Exemptions from the Ownership Prong Certain legal entity customers are subject only to the control prong of the beneficial ownership requirement, including:

• A pooled investment vehicle operated or advised by a financial institution not excluded under paragraph 31 CFR 1010.230(e)(2); and

• Any legal entity that is established as a nonprofit corporation or similar entity and has filed its organizational documents with the appropriate state authority as necessary. Exemptions and Limitations on Exemptions Subject to certain limitations, banks are not required to identify and verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of a legal entity customer when the customer opens any of the following categories of accounts:

• Accounts established at the point-of-sale to provide credit products, including commercial private label credit cards, solely for the purchase of retail goods and/or services at these retailers, up to a limit of $50,000;

• Accounts established to finance the purchase of postage and for which payments are remitted directly by the financial institution to the provider of the postage products;

• Accounts established to finance insurance premiums and for which payments are remitted directly by the financial institution to the insurance provider or broker;

• Accounts established to finance the purchase or leasing of equipment and for which payments are remitted directly by the financial institution to the vendor or lessor of this equipment. These exemptions will not apply:

• If the accounts are transaction accounts through which a legal entity customer can make payments to, or receive payments from, third parties.

• If there is the possibility of a cash refund on the account activity opened to finance the purchase of postage, to finance insurance premiums, or to finance the purchase or leasing of equipment, then beneficial ownership of the legal entity customer must be identified and verified by the bank as required either at the initial remittance, or at the time such refund occurs

Source: https://www.ffiec.gov/press/pdf/Beneficial%20Ownership%20Requirements%20for%20Legal%20Entity%20CustomersOverview-FINAL.pdf

Web Statistics