Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Risk Management Initiatives: New Manual Underwriting Requirements, 75238-75245 [2013-29170]
Download as PDF
75238
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C.
1715z–13a), except for mortgage
transactions exempted under
§ 203.19(c)(2), is a safe harbor qualified
mortgage that meets the ability-to-repay
requirements in 15 U.S.C. 1639c(a).
PART 1007—SECTION 184A LOAN
GUARANTEES FOR NATIVE
HAWAIIAN HOUSING
7. The authority citation for part 1007
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715z–13b; 15 U.S.C.
1639c; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
8. A new § 1007.80 is added to read
as follows:
■
§ 1007.80
Qualified mortgage.
A mortgage guaranteed under section
184A of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992 (1715z–13b),
except for mortgage transactions
exempted under § 203.19(c)(2), is a safe
harbor qualified mortgage that meets the
ability-to-repay requirements in 15
U.S.C. 1639c(a).
Dated: December 5, 2013.
Shaun Donovan,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–29482 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Chapter II
[Docket No. FR–5595–N–01]
RIN 2502–AJ07
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
Risk Management Initiatives: New
Manual Underwriting Requirements
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final notice of new manual
underwriting requirements.
AGENCY:
On July 15, 2010, HUD issued
a document seeking comment on three
initiatives that HUD proposed would
contribute to the restoration of the
Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund
capital reserve account. This document
implements one of these proposals.
Specifically, through this document,
FHA is providing more definitive
underwriting standards for mortgage
loan transactions that are manually
underwritten.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
Effective date: This document
will be effective for FHA case numbers
assigned on or after a date to be
established by Mortgagee Letter
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
following publication of this document.
The effective date shall be no earlier
March 11, 2014. HUD will publish a
document in the Federal Register
announcing the effective date. Comment
due date: February 10, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
the revised credit score threshold for
use of compensating factors to the
Regulations Division, Office of General
Counsel, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW.,
Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410–
0500. Communications must refer to the
above docket number and title. There
are two methods for submitting public
comments. All submissions must refer
to the above docket number and title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
2. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic
submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare
and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to
make them immediately available to the
public. Comments submitted
electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile
(FAX) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications
submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying between
8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above
address. Due to security measures at the
HUD Headquarters building, an
appointment to review the public
comments must be scheduled in
advance by calling the Regulations
Division at 202–708–3055 (this is not a
toll-free number). Individuals with
speech or hearing impairments may
access this number via TTY by calling
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the Federal Relay Service at 800–877–
8339. Copies of all comments submitted
are available for inspection and
downloading at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karin Hill, Director, Office of Single
Family Program Development, Office of
Housing, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW.,
Room 9278, Washington, DC 20410;
telephone number 202–708–2121 (this
is not a toll-free number). Persons with
hearing or speech impairments may
access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Relay
Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Legal Authority
Under the National Housing Act (12
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), which authorizes
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
mortgage insurance, HUD has a
responsibility to ensure that the Mutual
Mortgage Insurance Fund (MMIF)
remains financially sound. During times
of economic volatility, FHA has
maintained its countercyclical
influence, supporting the private sector
when access to housing finance capital
is otherwise constrained. FHA played
this role in the recent housing crisis,
and the volume of FHA insurance
increased rapidly as private sources of
mortgage finance retreated from the
market. However, the growth in the
MMIF portfolio over such a short period
of time contributed significantly to the
projected losses to, and financial
soundness of, the Fund.1 Consistent
with the Secretary’s responsibility
under the National Housing Act to
ensure that the MMIF remains
financially sound, FHA has taken steps
to improve the health of the Fund.
Therefore, HUD published a July 15,
2010, notice, and sought public
comment on three proposals designed to
address features of FHA mortgage
insurance that have resulted in high
mortgage insurance claim rates and risk
of loss to FHA.
At the close of the public comment
period on August 16, 2010, HUD
received 902 public comments in
response to the July 15, 2010, notice.
The majority of the public comments
focused on the proposal to reduce
allowable seller concessions. In order to
provide itself with the necessary
additional time to consider the issues
1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Annual Report to Congress Regarding
the Financial Status of the FHA Mutual Mortgage
Insurance Fund, Fiscal Year 2012. See https://
portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/
huddoc?id=F12MMIFundRepCong111612.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
raised by the commenters, HUD decided
to separately implement the proposals
contained in the July 15, 2010, notice.
B. Summary of Major Changes
This final document implements the
revised manual underwriting
requirements, and takes into
consideration the public comments
received on this proposal. Through this
final document, FHA is providing more
definitive underwriting standards for
mortgage loan transactions that are
manually underwritten. In response to
comment, HUD has made five changes
to the proposed manual underwriting
requirements at this stage. First, HUD
has taken the opportunity to address the
issue of borrowers who exceed the 31
percent housing-to-income ratio, yet
carry little or no discretionary debt and,
therefore, do not exceed the maximum
43 percent debt-to-income ratio. Second,
HUD has addressed the relationship
between compensating factors and
‘‘stretch ratios’’ that permit borrowers to
exceed the housing payment and total
debt-to-income ratios under certain FHA
mortgage insurance programs. Third,
this document establishes additional
compensating factors that can be used to
qualify borrowers who exceed FHA’s
standard housing payment and debt to
income ratios. Fourth, HUD has reduced
the credit score (from 620 to 580) below
which compensating factors may not be
cited and the standard ratio guidelines
may not be exceeded. Fifth, HUD has
extended the applicability of these
underwriting policies to FHA-to-FHA
rate and term refinance transactions (no
cash-out) and credit-qualifying FHA
streamline refinance transactions.
Manually underwritten loans are
required to have reserves equal to at
least one full monthly mortgage
payment (1–2 unit properties) or three
full monthly mortgage payments (3–4
unit properties). FHA currently has
standard guidelines for the debt-toincome ratios. The mortgage paymentto-income ratio (the front-end ratio) may
not exceed 31 percent, and the total
fixed payment-to-income ratio (the
back-end ratio) may not exceed 43
percent. Either or both of these ratios
may be exceeded provided that there are
compensating factors. This document
establishes for manually underwritten
loans a maximum front ratio and a
maximum back ratio that may not be
exceeded based on the borrower’s credit
score. Borrowers with no credit score 2
2 For manually underwritten loans with
insufficient credit references and with greater than
31/43 ratios, HUD currently does not to allow for
compensating factors. Under this document, HUD
will continue not to allow for compensating factors
for these borrowers.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
or with credit scores below 580 may not
exceed the standard 31/43 ratios.
Borrowers with credit scores of 580 or
higher may be approved for ratios as
high as 37/47 with one compensating
factor, and 40/50 with two
compensating factors. In addition, the
final document restricts the use of
compensating factors to borrowers with
credit scores of 580 or higher. Borrowers
not meeting this standard are limited to
maximum ratios of 31/43 unless they
meet the Energy Efficient Mortgage
requirements which provide maximum
stretch ratios of 33/45.
The manual underwriting
requirements are applicable for
purchase transactions and all credit
qualifying FHA refinance transactions
C. Requests for Comments on Credit
Score Threshold for Use of
Compensating Factors
As noted above, and discussed in
more detail in the response to comments
that follows, HUD has reduced the
credit score (from 620 to 580) below
which compensating factors may not be
cited and the standard ratio guidelines
may not be exceeded. This change will
expand the pool of eligible borrowers
who may qualify for the use of such
compensating factors. Although this
document is being issued for effect,
HUD nonetheless invites public
comment on this one change. HUD is
not soliciting comments on other
aspects of the document. Comments on
the revised credit score threshold for
use of compensating factors are due on
or before February 10, 2014, and
submitted in accordance with the
procedures described in the ADDRESSES
section of this document. HUD will
publish a follow-up document
addressing the comments received on
the revised credit score threshold.
D. Benefits and Costs
The effect of the document is to
reduce underwriting losses by
strengthening manual underwriting
guidelines and thereby increase revenue
per loan for FHA as a result of more
rigorous underwriting practices that
reduce the number of claims. FHA can
control costs through risk management
practices. The lower costs are a gain to
FHA. The target of the document is low
net-revenue loans, which have higher
claim rates and higher loss rates. HUD
expects the net revenue per loan to
increase by $2,300 (discounted at 3
percent) primarily because the expected
claim amount falls. At a 7 percent
discount rate, the increase in net
revenue per loan is $1,900. Any gain to
the FHA is a transfer. Whether there are
net transfers to FHA depends on the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75239
impact of the rule on volume and thus
the proportion of the current borrowers
excluded from receiving a loan. When
10 percent of applicants are excluded,
the gain (transfer) to FHA ranges from
$35 to $42 million. Under certain
circumstances, reducing the riskiest of
loans will allow FHA to return
additional revenues to the U.S.
Treasury.
The new underwriting guidelines will
postpone (perhaps indefinitely for
some) the purchase of a home or the
refinancing of a loan until the excluded
households can satisfy more specific
requirements. As noted by many of the
public commenters on the July 15, 2010,
notice, the policy changes being made
by FHA have already been adopted by
the private mortgage lending industry.
Accordingly, the borrowers excluded by
the document would not be able to
purchase mortgage insurance from a
private mortgage insurance company.
Many of the borrowers who would not
qualify under the underwriting
requirements may adjust their financial
situation in order to meet the
requirements. If the front-end ratio is
the disqualifying factor, then a borrower
could adjust by purchasing a less
expensive home. Longer term solutions
include saving to build reserves and
repaying non-housing debt to meet the
back-end ratio. A household could work
to repair their credit score which would
raise the allowable debt ratios. Once the
borrower reaches a credit score of 580
or greater, compensating factors such as
3 months of reserves or the purchase of
an energy-efficient home will raise the
qualifying ratios even further. Thus, not
all of the 16,000–19,000 borrowers
affected by the document will be
excluded from an FHA loan. Some will
be able to adjust immediately and others
within a year or two.
Another consideration in measuring
the costs of the document is that by
excluding potential borrowers from the
benefits of an FHA loan guarantee, the
new manual underwriting requirements
may lead to a reduction in the social
benefits of homeownership. HUD
assumed two potential outcomes: that
homeownership has positive net public
benefits or that there are no public
benefits of homeownership. The first
scenario is motivated by economic
theory and the second by recent
empirical evidence. One study
estimated the public benefits of
homeownership to be $443 ($341
adjusted to the 2013 price level).
Assuming that homeowners leave their
current homes every seven years, the
annualized benefit per loan is $70 (at a
3 percent discount rate) or $80 (at a 7
percent discount rate). The exclusion of
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
75240
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
homeowners may reduce these public
benefits of homeownership. However,
HUD also notes that some studies find
that a negative social effect of home
ownership is reduced mobility, which
leads to rigidity in the labor market and
thus lengthens economic downturns. In
addition, a full analysis of the expected
cost to society of excluding a household
from homeownership would account for
the expected social costs of foreclosure
for every homeowner created.
The aggregate economic impact of the
document is found by examining the
aggregate changes to FHA’s net revenue,
the total impact on consumers (rejected
applicants and accepted borrowers), and
the public benefits of homeownership.
HUD quantifies the revenue impacts and
discusses qualitatively the impacts on
consumers and social benefits. The predocument number of loans is estimated
to be 18,000. HUD assumes that some
proportion of those loans will be
excluded as a direct result of the
document. The implications of raising
the number of loans that cannot make
the transition into higher quality loans
are that the gain to the FHA will decline
and the total cost to borrowers will rise
(since the loss due to exclusion is
assumed to be greater than the loss due
to compliance). As long as not more
than 13 percent of applications are
excluded, the net transfers to FHA
outweigh the burdens of the document
regardless of the discount rate.
The aggregate revenue impacts of the
document for a variety of assumptions
concerning key parameters are
summarized in the table below.
ANNUAL AGGREGATE IMPACTS OF THE FINAL DOCUMENT
[In millions of dollars]
0% of loans excluded
Category
10% of loans excluded
20% of loans excluded
100% of loans excluded
discount rate of
discount rate of
discount rate of
discount rate
3%
Transfers
FHA Gain ..................
7%
3%
7%
3%
7%
3%
7%
+42
+35
+20
+16
¥17
¥3
¥176
¥156
II. Background
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
On July 15, 2010, at 75 FR 41217,
HUD submitted for public comment
three policy changes that HUD proposed
would contribute to the restoration of
the MMIF capital reserve account. The
volume of FHA insurance has increased
rapidly as private sources of mortgage
finance retreated from the market.
FHA’s share of the single-family
mortgage market was estimated at 17
percent (33 percent for home purchase
mortgages) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, up
from 3.4 percent in FY 2007, and the
dollar volume of insurance written has
jumped from the $77 billion issued in
FY 2007 to $319 billion in FY 2010. The
growth in the MMIF portfolio over such
a short period of time coincided with
worsening economic conditions that
have seen high levels of defaults and
foreclosures, and consequently FHA has
had to balance its social mission, which
includes meeting the needs of
homebuyers with low down payments
and first time homebuyers, with the risk
of incurring unexpected losses that
could deplete capital reserves in the
MMIF.3 The National Housing Act,
3 While the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990
requires that FHA (and all other government credit
agencies) estimate and budget for the anticipated
cost of mortgage loan guarantees, the National
Housing Act imposes a special requirement that the
MMIF hold an additional amount of funds in
reserve to cover unexpected losses. FHA maintains
the MMIF capital reserve in a special reserve
account, which the National Housing Act mandates
maintain a 2 percent ratio of reserve relative to the
amount of outstanding insurance in force. The
capital ratio generally reflects the reserves available
(net of expected claims and expenses) as a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
which authorizes FHA mortgage
insurance, envisions that FHA will
adjust program standards and practices,
as necessary, to operate the MMIF, on a
financially sound basis.
Consistent with HUD’s responsibility
under the National Housing Act to
ensure that the MMIF remains
financially sound, HUD published the
July 15, 2010, notice and sought public
comment on three proposals designed to
address features of FHA mortgage
insurance that have resulted in high
mortgage insurance claim rates and risk
of loss to FHA. Specifically, HUD
proposed to reduce the amount of
closing costs a seller may pay on behalf
of a homebuyer purchasing a home with
FHA-insured mortgage financing for the
purposes of calculating the maximum
mortgage amount; to introduce a credit
score threshold as well as reduce the
maximum loan-to-value (LTV) for
borrowers with lower credit scores who
represent a higher risk of default and
mortgage insurance claim; and to
provide more definitive underwriting
standards for mortgage loan transactions
that are manually underwritten.
The proposed changes were
developed to preserve both the
historical role of the FHA in providing
a home financing vehicle during periods
of economic volatility and HUD’s social
mission of helping underserved
borrowers. Interested readers are
referred to the July 15, 2010, notice for
details regarding the proposed changes
to FHA requirements.
percentage of the current portfolio, to address
unexpected losses.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
At the close of the public comment
period on August 16, 2010, HUD
received 902 public comments in
response to the July 15, 2010, notice.
The majority of the public comments
focused on the reduction in seller
concessions and revised manual
underwriting requirements. In order to
provide itself with the necessary
additional time to consider the issues
raised by the commenters on these two
issues, HUD decided to separately
implement the proposals contained in
the July 15, 2010, notice. On September
10, 2010, HUD published a final rule, at
75 FR 54020, implementing a credit
score threshold and reducing the
maximum LTV for borrowers with lower
credit scores.
III. This Document—Implementation of
Revised Manual Underwriting
Requirements; Additional
Compensating Factors
This document implements the
revised manual underwriting
requirements, and takes into
consideration the public comments
received on this proposal. The new
manual underwriting requirements will
reduce the risk to the MMIF by reducing
the probability of default and protecting
consumers from predatory, irresponsible
lending practices.
Section III of this document discusses
the significant issues raised by the
public comments regarding the new
manual underwriting requirements, as
well as HUD’s responses to these issues.
Section IV of this document implements
the new manual underwriting
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
requirements. HUD will also issue
additional guidance through Mortgagee
Letter to assist in implementation of
these new requirements.
As discussed in the July 15, 2010,
notice, the purpose of mortgage
underwriting is to determine a
borrower’s ability and willingness to
repay the debt and to limit the
probability of default. An underwriter
must consider the borrower’s credit
history, evaluate their capacity to repay
the loan based on income, assets and
current debt, determine if cash to be
used for closing is sufficient and from
an acceptable source, determine if the
value of the collateral is adequate
security for the amount being borrowed
and reserves are adequate. In cases
where mortgage loans cannot be rated
by FHA’s TOTAL Mortgage Scorecard,
the loan is referred by TOTAL, or the
loan is manually downgraded the loan
must be manually underwritten. Where
FHA’s standard qualifying ratios for
total mortgage payment-to-income and
total fixed payment-to-income are
exceeded, lenders must cite at least one
compensating factor. Under FHA’s
current manual underwriting standards,
there is no limit on the maximum debt
to income ratios a lender may approve
nor does FHA define which or how
many compensating factors must be
cited to exceed FHA’s standard
qualifying ratio guidelines 4 FHA has
determined that factors concerning
housing and debt-to-income ratios,
along with cash reserves, are
particularly good predictive indicators
as to the sustainability of the mortgage.
Through this document, FHA is
implementing additional requirements
for consideration of these factors for
manually underwritten mortgage loans.
These additional requirements will
consider the borrower’s credit history,
LTV percentage, housing/debt ratios,
reserves, and compensating factors.
In response to comment, HUD has
made five changes to the proposed
manual underwriting requirements at
this stage. First, HUD has taken the
opportunity to address the issue of
borrowers who exceed the 31 percent
housing-to-income ratio, yet carry little
or no discretionary debt and, therefore,
do not exceed the maximum 43 percent
debt-to-income ratio. Second, HUD has
addressed the relationship between
compensating factors and ‘‘stretch
ratios’’ that permit borrowers to exceed
the housing payment and total debt-to4 The manual underwriting procedures are
detailed in HUD Handbook 4155.1 ‘‘Mortgage Credit
Analysis for Mortgage Insurance.’’ The handbook
may be downloaded at: https://www.hud.gov/offices/
adm/hudclips/handbooks/hsgh/4155.1/
41551HSGH.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
income ratios under certain FHA
mortgage insurance programs. Third,
this document establishes additional
compensating factors that can be used to
qualify borrowers who exceed FHA’s
standard housing payment and debt to
income ratios. Fourth, HUD has reduced
the credit score (from 620 to 580) below
which compensating factors may not be
cited and the standard ratio guidelines
may not be exceeded. Fifth, the manual
underwriting requirements are
applicable to all purchase loans and all
credit qualifying refinance loans,
including FHA-to-FHA rate and term
refinance transactions (no cash out) and
credit qualifying FHA streamline
refinance transactions.
IV. Discussion of the Public Comments
Regarding Proposed Revisions to
Manual Underwriting Requirements
Comment: Support for revised manual
underwriting requirements. The
majority of the commenters submitting
comments on the revised manual
underwriting requirements wrote to
express support for the new policy. The
commenters agreed that clarifying the
underwriting standards for manually
underwritten loans would reduce risks
to the FHA MMIF and help to stem the
tide of home foreclosures. Moreover,
these commenters wrote that the new
manual underwriting standards would
protect consumers from predatory and
irresponsible lending practices, thereby
assisting in stabilizing the housing
industry.
HUD Response. HUD appreciates the
support expressed by these commenters,
and agrees that the changes will reduce
the risk to the MMIF and help ensure
that homebuyers are offered FHAinsured mortgage loans that are
sustainable.
Comment: Opposition to revised
manual underwriting guidelines.
Several commenters opposed the
proposed manual underwriting
standards. Some of these commenters
questioned the need for the proposed
changes. These commenters wrote that
lenders have voluntarily implemented
stricter underwriting standards to help
ensure borrowers are financially capable
of meeting their loan obligations. Other
commenters focused on the potential
impacts of the new standards on lowand moderate-income homebuyers. The
commenters wrote that borrowers are
already facing limited access to credit as
a result of stricter underwriting
standards being adopted by lenders, and
that the standards proposed by FHA
would further restrict the ability of these
homebuyers to obtain financing for the
purchase of a home.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75241
HUD Response. HUD has considered
these comments and as a result, revised
its proposal to reduce the credit score
requirement for the use of compensating
factors from 620 to 580, thereby
expanding the pool of eligible borrowers
who may qualify for the use of such
factors. In addition to expanding access
to compensating factors, the new
threshold provides for the more precise
and historically accurate use of credit
scores. The formerly proposed
thresholds would have grouped
borrowers with non-traditional/
insufficient credit together all borrowers
with credit scores up to 619. Such a
grouping would have been overly broad.
The new threshold recognizes that the
loan performance of FHA borrowers
with non-traditional/insufficient credit
is comparable to that of borrowers with
credit scores of 579 or lower. Moreover,
the use of the credit score of 580 is
consistent with HUD’s recent guidance
on manual underwriting contained in
Mortgagee Letter 2013–05 (January 31,
2013).5
In response to these comments, HUD
is also providing more flexible front-end
and back-end ratios. The document also
establishes better defined compensating
factors, and provides that HUD may
establish additional compensating
factors through Mortgagee Letter,
thereby enabling HUD to more promptly
address changes in market conditions
and the population of borrowers being
served by the FHA programs. While
HUD does not presently anticipate the
need for issuing such a Mortgage Letter,
HUD emphasizes that the purpose of
any such issuance would be to add to,
but not subtract from, the list of
compensating factors established in this
document.
HUD believes that these changes
strike the appropriate balance between
fulfilling the Department’s historical
and social mission as well as its
statutory duty to preserve the financial
health of the MMIF. Moreover,
sustainable homeownership is essential
to a healthy and well-functioning
housing market. These changes will
promote that goal by helping to ensure
that homeowners are able to afford their
FHA-insured mortgage loans.
The preamble to the July 15, 2010,
notice specifically solicited public
comment on acceptable compensating
factors and, in particular, on how FHA
could serve borrowers with housing
ratios above the proposed threshold and
debt-to-income ratios below the
threshold (see 75 FR 41222). These
borrowers, while having established
5 https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/
huddoc?id=13-05ml.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
75242
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
credit lines, traditionally do not use
credit to finance purchases over a
period of several months or years or pay
them off within the billing cycle.
Therefore, they have a history of
carrying little to no discretionary debt.
While the housing debt assumed by
such a borrower may be higher than the
housing ratios established by this
document, their overall debt-to-income
ratios fall within acceptable
underwriting levels and reflect a record
of responsible credit. To address this
issue, HUD has established an
additional ‘‘compensating factor’’ that
would allow such borrowers to qualify
for FHA mortgage insurance.
Specifically, a borrower will be
permitted to exceed the housing and
debt-to-income ratios, if the borrower
has access to credit but carries no
discretionary debt. For example, the
borrower’s monthly housing expense is
the only open installment debt with an
outstanding balance and revolving debt
is paid off every month.
HUD also agrees that borrowers are
already facing limited access to credit as
a result of stricter underwriting
standards being adopted by mortgagees.
To provide additional consideration for
manually evaluating the borrower for
expanded ratios, HUD has included a
residual income compensating factor
that can be used to determine if the
borrower has sufficient income after
making their monthly mortgage
payment, including taxes and insurance,
to meet their needs for food, utilities,
clothing, transportation, work-related
expenses, and other essentials. HUD
will permit the use of a compensating
factor modeled on the Department of
Veteran’s Affairs (VA) residual income
requirements (codified in regulation at
38 CFR 36.4340). Under the VA
regulations, residual income is
calculated by determining the
borrower’s gross monthly income, then
deducting the borrower’s monthly
expenses from the total gross monthly
income. The balance remaining is
‘‘residual income’’ and the mortgagee
can determine if the mortgagor meets
the applicable residual income
requirements, which vary based on
family size, region, and loan amount as
described in tables codified in the VA
regulations. If the mortgagor meets the
residual income test, the mortgagee can
use residual income as a compensating
factor.6
Second, HUD has clarified the
relationship between the compensating
6 For more details on the VA residual income
requirements, please refer to Chapter 4 of VA
Pamphlet 26–7, ‘‘Lenders Handbook,’’ available at
https://www.benefits.va.gov/warms/pam26_7.asp.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
factors and the ‘‘stretch ratios’’ provided
for under certain FHA mortgage
insurance programs that authorize
borrowers to exceed qualifying housing
and debt-to-income ratios. For example,
as noted in the preamble to the July 15,
2010, notice, borrowers using FHA
energy efficient mortgage insurance may
have stretch ratios of 33/45 if the homes
are built or retrofitted to exceed the
applicable International Energy
Conservation Code (IECC) standard.
HUD has taken the opportunity afforded
by this document to clarify that,
although such borrowers may not be
subject to the 31/43 percent qualifying
ratios established by this document,
these borrowers may not exceed the 33/
45 percent upper limit for stretch ratios
established by the document unless they
qualify for higher ratios based on credit
score and additional compensating
factors.
Comment: Hold underwriters to a
higher standard. Several commenters
suggested that, in addition to the
proposed manual underwriting
requirements, HUD should hold
underwriters themselves to a higher
standard. The commenters
recommended that HUD require
underwriters to absorb a higher
percentage of the risk associated with
manual underwriting. For example, one
of the commenters recommended that
HUD suspend lenders with high default
rates on their manually underwritten
loans.
HUD Response. HUD has not revised
its proposal based on these comments.
The Department has already
implemented the types of action
recommended by the commenters.
Mortgagee Letter 2010–03, issued on
January 21, 2010, announced several
steps undertaken by HUD to enhance its
authority to address deficiencies in a
lender’s performance, focusing on all
underwriting decisions, not just those
that were manually underwritten.7
Specifically, Mortgagee Letter 2010–03
advised that every three months, HUD
reviews the rates of default and claims
on all FHA-insured single family loans.
This review analyzes the performance of
every participating lender based on its
area of operation. HUD may terminate
an underwriting lender’s approval to
underwrite FHA-insured loans in an
area where the lender’s default and
claim rate exceeds the established
Credit Watch Termination thresholds.
Comment: Clarify what are acceptable
compensating factors in underwriting
guidelines. Several commenters, while
7 Mortgagee Letter 2010–03 is available for
download at: https://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/
hudclips/letters/mortgagee/files/10-03ml.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
expressing support of the proposed
changes to the manual underwriting
requirements, also suggested that HUD
simplify the acceptable compensating
factors. For example, one commenter
recommended that FHA develop a list
or chart that more clearly identifies the
relationship between the compensating
factors and the acceptable housing and
debt to income ratios. Another
commenter suggested that FHA more
specifically define the compensating
factors.
HUD Response. As noted above, HUD
has, in response to these comments,
made changes to clarify the
compensating factors and their
relationship to the qualifying housing
and debt-to-income ratios. In addition,
HUD is providing a matrix outlining
credit score, front-end ratios, back-end
ratios, cash reserves, acceptable
compensating factors, and criteria for
stretch ratios.
V. Establishment of Revised Manual
Underwriting Requirements
Commencing on the effective date:
Manual Underwriting. On manually
underwritten mortgage loans, borrowers
are required to have minimum cash
reserves equal to one monthly mortgage
payment for one- and two-unit
properties, and 3 months for three- and
four-unit properties, which includes
principal, interest, taxes, and insurance.
For borrowers with credit scores of 500
to 579 or non-traditional credit the
maximum housing and debt-to-income
ratios for manually underwritten loans
are set at 31 percent and 43 percent,
respectively, unless the borrower
qualifies for 33/45 stretch ratios
available for manually underwritten
borrowers with homes built or
retrofitted to exceed the applicable IECC
standard including Energy Efficient
Mortgages. For borrowers with credit
scores of 580 or higher the maximum
housing and debt-to-income ratios for
manually underwritten loans are set at
31 percent and 43 percent, respectively,
unless the borrower (1) qualifies for 33/
45 stretch ratios available for manually
underwritten borrowers with homes
built or retrofitted to exceed the
applicable IECC standard including
Energy Efficient Mortgages or (2) meets
the compensating factors criteria in the
matrix below. To exceed 31/43 ratios or,
in the case of homes built or retrofitted
to exceed the applicable IECC standard
including Energy Efficient Mortgages,
the 33/45 stretch ratios, not to exceed
37/47 percent, borrowers must meet at
least one of the acceptable
compensating factors. To exceed the
qualifying ratios of 37/47 percent, not to
exceed 40/50 percent, borrowers must
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
meet at least two of the acceptable
compensating factors. These minimum
cash reserve and maximum qualifying
ratio requirements are applicable for
purchase transactions and all creditqualifying FHA refinance transactions,
where the loan received a REFER
Credit score
scoring recommendation from TOTAL,
where TOTAL cannot score the loan
(non-traditional credit) or where the
TOTAL Scorecard scoring
recommendation is Accept, but the
underwriter manually downgrades it to
Refer. These maximum front and back
Maximum front
and back
ratios
500–579 or Non-traditional/
Insufficient Credit.
580 and above ......................
580 and above ......................
31/43
31/43
37/47
580 and above ......................
40/40
580 and above ......................
40/50
75243
ratios requirements and reserve
requirements are not applicable for noncredit qualifying FHA streamline
refinance transactions and Home Equity
Conversion Mortgage transactions.
Acceptable compensating factors
(Note: HUD may establish additional compensating factors through Mortgagee Letter)
Not applicable. Borrowers with credit scores below 580 or with Non-traditional/insufficient credit
may not exceed 31/43 ratios.
No compensating factors required.
One of the following:
• Verified and documented liquid cash reserves equal to at least three total monthly mortgage
payments (1–2 units) or six total monthly mortgage payments (3–4 units).
• New total monthly mortgage payment is not more than $100 or 5% higher than previous total
monthly housing payment, whichever is less; and verified and documented twelve month
housing payment history (1X30 only).
• Sufficient Residual Income as calculated per VA requirements
Borrower with established credit and open credit lines carries no discretionary debt. Monthly
housing payment is only open installment account and revolving credit is paid off monthly.
Two of the following:
• Verified and documented liquid cash reserves equal to at least three total monthly mortgage
payments (1–2 units) or six total monthly mortgage payments (3–4 units).
• New total monthly mortgage payment is not more than $100 or 5% higher than previous total
monthly housing payment, whichever is less; and verified and documented twelve month
housing payment history (1X30 only).
• Sufficient Residual Income as calculated per VA requirements.
• Verified and documented additional income that is not considered effective income. Overtime
and bonus income can be cited as a compensating factor if the mortgagee verifies and documents that the borrower has received this income for at least one year but less than two
years, and it will likely continue. Part-time and seasonal income can be cited as a compensating factor if the mortgagee verifies and documents that the borrower has worked the parttime or seasonal job uninterrupted for at least one year but less than two years, and plans to
continue.
Note: Maximum ratios for manually underwritten borrowers with homes built or retrofitted to exceed the applicable IECC standard including Energy Efficient Mortgages are eligible for stretch ratios of 33/45 regardless of credit score or Nontraditional credit, but must meet the minimum required reserve requirement for manually underwritten loans (1 month for 1–2 units, 3 months for 3–4 units). These transactions may also be eligible for higher ratios if they meet additional criteria, i.e. minimum 580 FICO and one or more additional compensating factors.
VI. Findings and Certification
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Review—Executive Orders
12866 and 13563
Under Executive Order 12866
(Regulatory Planning and Review), a
determination must be made whether a
regulatory action is significant and
therefore, subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) in
accordance with the requirements of the
order. Executive Order 13563
(Improving Regulations and Regulatory
Review) directs executive agencies to
analyze regulations that are ‘‘outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively
burdensome, and to modify, streamline,
expand, or repeal them in accordance
with what has been learned. Executive
Order 13563 also directs that, where
relevant, feasible, and consistent with
regulatory objectives, and to the extent
permitted by law, agencies are to
identify and consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and
maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public. This document
was determined to be a ‘‘significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
regulatory action’’ as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order (although not an
economically significant regulatory
action, as provided under section 3(f)(1)
of the Executive Order).
As noted above, this document
implements one of the three initiatives
announced in HUD’s July 15, 2010,
notice to aid in the restoration of the
MMIF capital reserve account.
Specifically, this document provides
more definitive underwriting standards
for mortgage loan transactions that are
manually underwritten to overcome
lender uncertainty and resistance to
manually underwritten, credit-worthy
FHA borrowers in this time of tighter
mortgage credit. The benefit of the
document is to reduce underwriting
losses by strengthening manual
underwriting requirements and thereby
increase net revenue to the FHA.
Whether there are net transfers to FHA
depends on what proportion of the
current borrowers is excluded from
receiving a loan. As long as not more
than 13 percent are excluded, the net
transfer to FHA is positive. When 10
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
percent of applicants are excluded, the
gain (transfer) to FHA ranges from $35
million to $42 million. HUD has
prepared an economic analysis
assessing costs and benefits of the new
manual underwriting requirements.
HUD’s full analysis can be found at
www.regulations.gov. A summary of
HUD’s analysis follows:
A. Transfers/Revenue Effects. The
broader purpose of the policy change is
to reduce the risk to the MMIF so that
FHA can continue to provide mortgage
loans. Facilitating the provision of
credit during a liquidity crisis is a
welfare-enhancing activity, and FHA
provides such a public benefit.
A government agency’s increase in net
revenue is usually treated as a transfer
because governments traditionally raise
revenue through taxes and fees. In the
case of the manual underwriting
document, the increase in FHA revenue
occurs as the result of more rigorous
underwriting practices that reduce the
number of claims. FHA can control its
costs through risk management
practices. The lower costs are a gain to
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
75244
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
FHA. When 10 percent of applicants are
excluded, HUD’s estimate of the
expected net gain to the FHA (and
subsequent transfer to the U.S.
Treasury) ranges from $35 million to
$42 million depending upon the
discount rate. Any gain to the FHA is an
eventual transfer to others. Under
certain circumstances, reducing the
riskiest of loans will allow FHA to
return excess revenues to the U.S.
Treasury.
HUD expects a reduction in the
number of loans but also a reduction in
the number of claims. The target of the
document is low net-revenue loans,
which have higher claim rates and
higher loss rates. HUD expects the net
revenue per loan to increase by $2,300
(discounted at 3 percent) primarily
because the expected claim amount. At
a 7 percent discount rate, the increase
in net revenue per loan is $1,900.
B. Benefits/Costs. The new
underwriting guidelines will postpone
(perhaps indefinitely for some) the
purchase of a home or the refinancing
of a loan until the excluded households
can satisfy more specific requirements.
As noted by many of the public
commenters on the July 15, 2010,
notice, the policy changes being made
by FHA have already been adopted by
the private mortgage lending industry.
Accordingly, the borrowers excluded by
the document would not be able to
purchase mortgage insurance from a
private mortgage insurance company.
The only choice for a rejected applicant
would be to improve the strength of
their financial position. A few analytical
options exist for estimating the
magnitude of the cost of being excluded
from homeownership. The costs are: the
direct private costs of meeting the new
requirements, the private costs of
delaying the loan, and the public costs
of delay.
Many of the borrowers who would not
qualify under the underwriting
requirements may adjust their financial
situation in order to meet the
requirements. If the front-end ratio is
the disqualifying factor, then a borrower
could adjust by purchasing a less
expensive home. Longer term solutions
include saving to build reserves and
repaying non-housing debt to meet the
back-end ratio. A household could work
to repair their credit score which would
raise the allowable debt ratios. Most of
the negatives will be removed from a
credit report after 7 years, and it is
possible to increase credit scores
significantly after 3 years by better
managing consumer debt. Once the
borrower reaches a credit score of 580
or greater, compensating factors such as
3 months of reserves or the purchase of
an energy-efficient home will raise the
qualifying ratios even further. Thus, not
all of the 16,000–19,000 borrowers
affected by the document will be
excluded from an FHA loan. Some will
be able to adjust immediately and others
within a year or two.
Another consideration in measuring
the costs of the document is that by
excluding potential borrowers from the
benefits of an FHA loan guarantee, the
new manual underwriting requirements
may lead to a reduction in the social
benefits of homeownership. HUD
assumed two potential outcomes: that
homeownership has positive net public
benefits or that there are no public
benefits of homeownership. The first
scenario is motivated by economic
theory and the second by recent
empirical evidence. One study
estimated the public benefits of
homeownership to be $443 ($341
adjusted to the 2013 price level).
Assuming that homeowners leave their
current homes every seven years, the
annualized benefit per loan is $70 (at a
3 percent discount rate) or $80 (at a 7
percent discount rate). The exclusion of
homeowners may reduce these public
benefits of homeownership. However,
HUD also notes that some studies find
that a negative social effect of home
ownership is reduced mobility, which
leads to rigidity in the labor market and
thus lengthens economic downturns. In
addition, a full analysis of the expected
cost to society of excluding a household
from homeownership would account for
the expected social costs of foreclosure
for every homeowner created.
C. Aggregate costs and benefits. The
aggregate economic impact of the
document is found by examining the
aggregate changes to FHA’s net revenue,
the total impact on consumers (rejected
applicants and accepted borrowers), and
the public benefits of homeownership.
HUD quantifies the revenue impacts and
discusses qualitatively the impacts on
consumers and social benefits. The predocument number of loans is estimated
to be 18,000. HUD assumes that some
proportion of those loans will be
excluded as a direct result of the
document. The implications of raising
the number of loans that cannot make
the transition into higher quality loans
are that the gain to the FHA will decline
and the total cost to borrowers will rise
(since the loss due to exclusion is
assumed to be greater than the loss due
to compliance).
The aggregate revenue impacts of the
document for a variety of assumptions
concerning key parameters are
summarized in the table below.
ANNUAL AGGREGATE IMPACTS OF THE FINAL DOCUMENT
[In millions of dollars]
0% of loans excluded
Category
10% of loans excluded
20% of loans excluded
100% of loans excluded
discount rate of
discount rate of
discount rate of
discount rate
3%
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Transfers
FHA Gain ..................
7%
3%
7%
3%
7%
3%
7%
+42
+35
+20
+16
¥17
¥3
¥176
¥156
As long as not more than 13 percent
of applications are excluded, the net
transfers to FHA outweigh the burden of
the document regardless of the discount
rate.
The docket file is available for public
inspection in the Regulations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
451 7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500. Due to
security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, please schedule
an appointment to review the docket file
by calling the Regulations Division at
202–402–3055 (this is not a toll-free
number). Individuals with speech or
hearing impairments may access this
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
number via TTY by calling the Federal
Information Service at 800–877–8339.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), generally requires
an agency to conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any document
subject to notice and comment
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
rulemaking requirements unless the
agency certifies that the document will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The document does not
establish new and unfamiliar regulatory
requirements on FHA-approved
mortgage lenders. Rather, the document
builds on existing requirements and
procedures that are familiar to lenders.
Specifically, the document tightening
portions of FHA’s current underwriting
guidelines that present an excessive
level of risk to both homeowners and
FHA. The benefit of the set of actions to
regulated lending institutions will be to
reduce the risk to the MMIF so that FHA
can continue to insure mortgage loans
originated and serviced by these
lenders.
As noted in the economic analysis for
the document, relative to the total FHA
portfolio, few borrowers are served in
the categories that would be excluded
under the new policies, relative to the
total FHA portfolio. Further, as noted by
many of the public commenters on the
July 15, 2010, notice, the policy changes
being made by FHA have already been
adopted by the private mortgage lending
industry. The impact of the policy
changes will, therefore, largely be
limited to conforming FHA standards to
widespread industry practice.
Accordingly, to the extent this
document has any economic impact on
the minority of lenders that have not
already adopted such stricter
underwriting standards; they will be
minimal, encompassing a relatively
small proportion of their FHA business
activities.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) with respect to the
environment has been made in
accordance with HUD regulations at 24
CFR part 50, which implement section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)). The Finding of No
Significant Impact is available for public
inspection between the hours of 8 a.m.
and 5 p.m. weekdays in the Regulations
Division, Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room
10276, Washington, DC 20410. Due to
security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, please schedule
an appointment to review the FONSI by
calling the Regulations Division at 202–
708–3055 (this is not a toll-free
number). Individuals with speech or
hearing impairments may access this
number via TTY by calling the Federal
Information Relay Service at 800–877–
8339.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:26 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (entitled
‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from
publishing any document that has
federalism implications if the document
either imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on state and local
governments and is not required by
statute, or the document preempts state
law, unless the agency meets the
consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the Executive Order. This
document would not have federalism
implications and would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
state and local governments or preempt
state law within the meaning of the
Executive Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements
for federal agencies to assess the effects
of their regulatory actions on state,
local, and tribal governments, and on
the private sector. This document would
not impose any federal mandates on any
state, local, or tribal governments, or on
the private sector, within the meaning of
the UMRA.
Dated: December 3, 2013.
Carol J. Galante,
Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal
Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2013–29170 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 199
[Docket ID: DoD–2013–HA–0085]
RIN 0720–AB60
Civilian Health and Medical Program of
the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS)/
TRICARE: Pilot Program for Refills of
Maintenance Medications for TRICARE
for Life Beneficiaries Through the
TRICARE Mail Order Program
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
75245
military treatment facility pharmacies.
Covered maintenance medications are
those that involve recurring
prescriptions for chronic conditions, but
do not include medications to treat
acute conditions. Beneficiaries may opt
out of the pilot program after one year
of participation. This rule includes
procedures to assist beneficiaries in
transferring covered prescriptions to the
mail order pharmacy program. This
regulation is being issued as an interim
final rule in order to comply with the
express statutory intent that the program
begin early in calendar year 2013.
Public comments, however, are invited
and will be considered for possible
revisions to this rule for the second year
of the program.
DATES: This rule is effective February
14, 2014. Written comments received at
the address indicated below by February
10, 2014 will be considered and
addressed in the final rule.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or RIN
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive,
Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rear
Admiral Thomas McGinnis, Chief,
Pharmacy Operations Directorate,
TRICARE Management Activity,
telephone 703–681–2890.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
A. Executive Summary
This interim final rule
implements Section 716 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2013 which establishes a five year
pilot program that would generally
require TRICARE for Life beneficiaries
to obtain all refill prescriptions for
covered maintenance medications from
the TRICARE mail order program or
1. Purpose
This interim final rule implements
section 716 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013,
which establishes a five year pilot
program requiring TRICARE for Life
beneficiaries to obtain all prescription
refills for select maintenance
medications from the TRICARE mail
order program or military treatment
facilities.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75238-75245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29170]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Chapter II
[Docket No. FR-5595-N-01]
RIN 2502-AJ07
Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Risk Management Initiatives:
New Manual Underwriting Requirements
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final notice of new manual underwriting requirements.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 15, 2010, HUD issued a document seeking comment on
three initiatives that HUD proposed would contribute to the restoration
of the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund capital reserve account. This
document implements one of these proposals. Specifically, through this
document, FHA is providing more definitive underwriting standards for
mortgage loan transactions that are manually underwritten.
DATES: Effective date: This document will be effective for FHA case
numbers assigned on or after a date to be established by Mortgagee
Letter following publication of this document. The effective date shall
be no earlier March 11, 2014. HUD will publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing the effective date. Comment due date:
February 10, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding
the revised credit score threshold for use of compensating factors to
the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410-0500. Communications must refer to the above
docket number and title. There are two methods for submitting public
comments. All submissions must refer to the above docket number and
title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410-0500.
2. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit
comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make them immediately available to
the public. Comments submitted electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public. Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public comments, comments must
be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. Again,
all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the
rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile (FAX) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the
above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters
building, an appointment to review the public comments must be
scheduled in advance by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-
3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or
hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the
Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. Copies of all comments submitted
are available for inspection and downloading at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karin Hill, Director, Office of Single
Family Program Development, Office of Housing, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 9278, Washington, DC
20410; telephone number 202-708-2121 (this is not a toll-free number).
Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Legal Authority
Under the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), which
authorizes Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance, HUD
has a responsibility to ensure that the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund
(MMIF) remains financially sound. During times of economic volatility,
FHA has maintained its countercyclical influence, supporting the
private sector when access to housing finance capital is otherwise
constrained. FHA played this role in the recent housing crisis, and the
volume of FHA insurance increased rapidly as private sources of
mortgage finance retreated from the market. However, the growth in the
MMIF portfolio over such a short period of time contributed
significantly to the projected losses to, and financial soundness of,
the Fund.\1\ Consistent with the Secretary's responsibility under the
National Housing Act to ensure that the MMIF remains financially sound,
FHA has taken steps to improve the health of the Fund. Therefore, HUD
published a July 15, 2010, notice, and sought public comment on three
proposals designed to address features of FHA mortgage insurance that
have resulted in high mortgage insurance claim rates and risk of loss
to FHA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Annual
Report to Congress Regarding the Financial Status of the FHA Mutual
Mortgage Insurance Fund, Fiscal Year 2012. See https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=F12MMIFundRepCong111612.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the close of the public comment period on August 16, 2010, HUD
received 902 public comments in response to the July 15, 2010, notice.
The majority of the public comments focused on the proposal to reduce
allowable seller concessions. In order to provide itself with the
necessary additional time to consider the issues
[[Page 75239]]
raised by the commenters, HUD decided to separately implement the
proposals contained in the July 15, 2010, notice.
B. Summary of Major Changes
This final document implements the revised manual underwriting
requirements, and takes into consideration the public comments received
on this proposal. Through this final document, FHA is providing more
definitive underwriting standards for mortgage loan transactions that
are manually underwritten. In response to comment, HUD has made five
changes to the proposed manual underwriting requirements at this stage.
First, HUD has taken the opportunity to address the issue of borrowers
who exceed the 31 percent housing-to-income ratio, yet carry little or
no discretionary debt and, therefore, do not exceed the maximum 43
percent debt-to-income ratio. Second, HUD has addressed the
relationship between compensating factors and ``stretch ratios'' that
permit borrowers to exceed the housing payment and total debt-to-income
ratios under certain FHA mortgage insurance programs. Third, this
document establishes additional compensating factors that can be used
to qualify borrowers who exceed FHA's standard housing payment and debt
to income ratios. Fourth, HUD has reduced the credit score (from 620 to
580) below which compensating factors may not be cited and the standard
ratio guidelines may not be exceeded. Fifth, HUD has extended the
applicability of these underwriting policies to FHA-to-FHA rate and
term refinance transactions (no cash-out) and credit-qualifying FHA
streamline refinance transactions.
Manually underwritten loans are required to have reserves equal to
at least one full monthly mortgage payment (1-2 unit properties) or
three full monthly mortgage payments (3-4 unit properties). FHA
currently has standard guidelines for the debt-to-income ratios. The
mortgage payment-to-income ratio (the front-end ratio) may not exceed
31 percent, and the total fixed payment-to-income ratio (the back-end
ratio) may not exceed 43 percent. Either or both of these ratios may be
exceeded provided that there are compensating factors. This document
establishes for manually underwritten loans a maximum front ratio and a
maximum back ratio that may not be exceeded based on the borrower's
credit score. Borrowers with no credit score \2\ or with credit scores
below 580 may not exceed the standard 31/43 ratios. Borrowers with
credit scores of 580 or higher may be approved for ratios as high as
37/47 with one compensating factor, and 40/50 with two compensating
factors. In addition, the final document restricts the use of
compensating factors to borrowers with credit scores of 580 or higher.
Borrowers not meeting this standard are limited to maximum ratios of
31/43 unless they meet the Energy Efficient Mortgage requirements which
provide maximum stretch ratios of 33/45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For manually underwritten loans with insufficient credit
references and with greater than 31/43 ratios, HUD currently does
not to allow for compensating factors. Under this document, HUD will
continue not to allow for compensating factors for these borrowers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The manual underwriting requirements are applicable for purchase
transactions and all credit qualifying FHA refinance transactions
C. Requests for Comments on Credit Score Threshold for Use of
Compensating Factors
As noted above, and discussed in more detail in the response to
comments that follows, HUD has reduced the credit score (from 620 to
580) below which compensating factors may not be cited and the standard
ratio guidelines may not be exceeded. This change will expand the pool
of eligible borrowers who may qualify for the use of such compensating
factors. Although this document is being issued for effect, HUD
nonetheless invites public comment on this one change. HUD is not
soliciting comments on other aspects of the document. Comments on the
revised credit score threshold for use of compensating factors are due
on or before February 10, 2014, and submitted in accordance with the
procedures described in the ADDRESSES section of this document. HUD
will publish a follow-up document addressing the comments received on
the revised credit score threshold.
D. Benefits and Costs
The effect of the document is to reduce underwriting losses by
strengthening manual underwriting guidelines and thereby increase
revenue per loan for FHA as a result of more rigorous underwriting
practices that reduce the number of claims. FHA can control costs
through risk management practices. The lower costs are a gain to FHA.
The target of the document is low net-revenue loans, which have higher
claim rates and higher loss rates. HUD expects the net revenue per loan
to increase by $2,300 (discounted at 3 percent) primarily because the
expected claim amount falls. At a 7 percent discount rate, the increase
in net revenue per loan is $1,900. Any gain to the FHA is a transfer.
Whether there are net transfers to FHA depends on the impact of the
rule on volume and thus the proportion of the current borrowers
excluded from receiving a loan. When 10 percent of applicants are
excluded, the gain (transfer) to FHA ranges from $35 to $42 million.
Under certain circumstances, reducing the riskiest of loans will allow
FHA to return additional revenues to the U.S. Treasury.
The new underwriting guidelines will postpone (perhaps indefinitely
for some) the purchase of a home or the refinancing of a loan until the
excluded households can satisfy more specific requirements. As noted by
many of the public commenters on the July 15, 2010, notice, the policy
changes being made by FHA have already been adopted by the private
mortgage lending industry. Accordingly, the borrowers excluded by the
document would not be able to purchase mortgage insurance from a
private mortgage insurance company.
Many of the borrowers who would not qualify under the underwriting
requirements may adjust their financial situation in order to meet the
requirements. If the front-end ratio is the disqualifying factor, then
a borrower could adjust by purchasing a less expensive home. Longer
term solutions include saving to build reserves and repaying non-
housing debt to meet the back-end ratio. A household could work to
repair their credit score which would raise the allowable debt ratios.
Once the borrower reaches a credit score of 580 or greater,
compensating factors such as 3 months of reserves or the purchase of an
energy-efficient home will raise the qualifying ratios even further.
Thus, not all of the 16,000-19,000 borrowers affected by the document
will be excluded from an FHA loan. Some will be able to adjust
immediately and others within a year or two.
Another consideration in measuring the costs of the document is
that by excluding potential borrowers from the benefits of an FHA loan
guarantee, the new manual underwriting requirements may lead to a
reduction in the social benefits of homeownership. HUD assumed two
potential outcomes: that homeownership has positive net public benefits
or that there are no public benefits of homeownership. The first
scenario is motivated by economic theory and the second by recent
empirical evidence. One study estimated the public benefits of
homeownership to be $443 ($341 adjusted to the 2013 price level).
Assuming that homeowners leave their current homes every seven years,
the annualized benefit per loan is $70 (at a 3 percent discount rate)
or $80 (at a 7 percent discount rate). The exclusion of
[[Page 75240]]
homeowners may reduce these public benefits of homeownership. However,
HUD also notes that some studies find that a negative social effect of
home ownership is reduced mobility, which leads to rigidity in the
labor market and thus lengthens economic downturns. In addition, a full
analysis of the expected cost to society of excluding a household from
homeownership would account for the expected social costs of
foreclosure for every homeowner created.
The aggregate economic impact of the document is found by examining
the aggregate changes to FHA's net revenue, the total impact on
consumers (rejected applicants and accepted borrowers), and the public
benefits of homeownership. HUD quantifies the revenue impacts and
discusses qualitatively the impacts on consumers and social benefits.
The pre-document number of loans is estimated to be 18,000. HUD assumes
that some proportion of those loans will be excluded as a direct result
of the document. The implications of raising the number of loans that
cannot make the transition into higher quality loans are that the gain
to the FHA will decline and the total cost to borrowers will rise
(since the loss due to exclusion is assumed to be greater than the loss
due to compliance). As long as not more than 13 percent of applications
are excluded, the net transfers to FHA outweigh the burdens of the
document regardless of the discount rate.
The aggregate revenue impacts of the document for a variety of
assumptions concerning key parameters are summarized in the table
below.
Annual Aggregate Impacts of the Final Document
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% of loans excluded 10% of loans excluded 20% of loans excluded 100% of loans excluded
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category discount rate of discount rate of discount rate of discount rate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% 7% 3% 7% 3% 7% 3% 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers
FHA Gain............................ +42 +35 +20 +16 -17 -3 -176 -156
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
On July 15, 2010, at 75 FR 41217, HUD submitted for public comment
three policy changes that HUD proposed would contribute to the
restoration of the MMIF capital reserve account. The volume of FHA
insurance has increased rapidly as private sources of mortgage finance
retreated from the market. FHA's share of the single-family mortgage
market was estimated at 17 percent (33 percent for home purchase
mortgages) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, up from 3.4 percent in FY 2007,
and the dollar volume of insurance written has jumped from the $77
billion issued in FY 2007 to $319 billion in FY 2010. The growth in the
MMIF portfolio over such a short period of time coincided with
worsening economic conditions that have seen high levels of defaults
and foreclosures, and consequently FHA has had to balance its social
mission, which includes meeting the needs of homebuyers with low down
payments and first time homebuyers, with the risk of incurring
unexpected losses that could deplete capital reserves in the MMIF.\3\
The National Housing Act, which authorizes FHA mortgage insurance,
envisions that FHA will adjust program standards and practices, as
necessary, to operate the MMIF, on a financially sound basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ While the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 requires that
FHA (and all other government credit agencies) estimate and budget
for the anticipated cost of mortgage loan guarantees, the National
Housing Act imposes a special requirement that the MMIF hold an
additional amount of funds in reserve to cover unexpected losses.
FHA maintains the MMIF capital reserve in a special reserve account,
which the National Housing Act mandates maintain a 2 percent ratio
of reserve relative to the amount of outstanding insurance in force.
The capital ratio generally reflects the reserves available (net of
expected claims and expenses) as a percentage of the current
portfolio, to address unexpected losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with HUD's responsibility under the National Housing Act
to ensure that the MMIF remains financially sound, HUD published the
July 15, 2010, notice and sought public comment on three proposals
designed to address features of FHA mortgage insurance that have
resulted in high mortgage insurance claim rates and risk of loss to
FHA. Specifically, HUD proposed to reduce the amount of closing costs a
seller may pay on behalf of a homebuyer purchasing a home with FHA-
insured mortgage financing for the purposes of calculating the maximum
mortgage amount; to introduce a credit score threshold as well as
reduce the maximum loan-to-value (LTV) for borrowers with lower credit
scores who represent a higher risk of default and mortgage insurance
claim; and to provide more definitive underwriting standards for
mortgage loan transactions that are manually underwritten.
The proposed changes were developed to preserve both the historical
role of the FHA in providing a home financing vehicle during periods of
economic volatility and HUD's social mission of helping underserved
borrowers. Interested readers are referred to the July 15, 2010, notice
for details regarding the proposed changes to FHA requirements.
At the close of the public comment period on August 16, 2010, HUD
received 902 public comments in response to the July 15, 2010, notice.
The majority of the public comments focused on the reduction in seller
concessions and revised manual underwriting requirements. In order to
provide itself with the necessary additional time to consider the
issues raised by the commenters on these two issues, HUD decided to
separately implement the proposals contained in the July 15, 2010,
notice. On September 10, 2010, HUD published a final rule, at 75 FR
54020, implementing a credit score threshold and reducing the maximum
LTV for borrowers with lower credit scores.
III. This Document--Implementation of Revised Manual Underwriting
Requirements; Additional Compensating Factors
This document implements the revised manual underwriting
requirements, and takes into consideration the public comments received
on this proposal. The new manual underwriting requirements will reduce
the risk to the MMIF by reducing the probability of default and
protecting consumers from predatory, irresponsible lending practices.
Section III of this document discusses the significant issues
raised by the public comments regarding the new manual underwriting
requirements, as well as HUD's responses to these issues. Section IV of
this document implements the new manual underwriting
[[Page 75241]]
requirements. HUD will also issue additional guidance through Mortgagee
Letter to assist in implementation of these new requirements.
As discussed in the July 15, 2010, notice, the purpose of mortgage
underwriting is to determine a borrower's ability and willingness to
repay the debt and to limit the probability of default. An underwriter
must consider the borrower's credit history, evaluate their capacity to
repay the loan based on income, assets and current debt, determine if
cash to be used for closing is sufficient and from an acceptable
source, determine if the value of the collateral is adequate security
for the amount being borrowed and reserves are adequate. In cases where
mortgage loans cannot be rated by FHA's TOTAL Mortgage Scorecard, the
loan is referred by TOTAL, or the loan is manually downgraded the loan
must be manually underwritten. Where FHA's standard qualifying ratios
for total mortgage payment-to-income and total fixed payment-to-income
are exceeded, lenders must cite at least one compensating factor. Under
FHA's current manual underwriting standards, there is no limit on the
maximum debt to income ratios a lender may approve nor does FHA define
which or how many compensating factors must be cited to exceed FHA's
standard qualifying ratio guidelines \4\ FHA has determined that
factors concerning housing and debt-to-income ratios, along with cash
reserves, are particularly good predictive indicators as to the
sustainability of the mortgage. Through this document, FHA is
implementing additional requirements for consideration of these factors
for manually underwritten mortgage loans. These additional requirements
will consider the borrower's credit history, LTV percentage, housing/
debt ratios, reserves, and compensating factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The manual underwriting procedures are detailed in HUD
Handbook 4155.1 ``Mortgage Credit Analysis for Mortgage Insurance.''
The handbook may be downloaded at: https://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/handbooks/hsgh/4155.1/41551HSGH.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to comment, HUD has made five changes to the proposed
manual underwriting requirements at this stage. First, HUD has taken
the opportunity to address the issue of borrowers who exceed the 31
percent housing-to-income ratio, yet carry little or no discretionary
debt and, therefore, do not exceed the maximum 43 percent debt-to-
income ratio. Second, HUD has addressed the relationship between
compensating factors and ``stretch ratios'' that permit borrowers to
exceed the housing payment and total debt-to-income ratios under
certain FHA mortgage insurance programs. Third, this document
establishes additional compensating factors that can be used to qualify
borrowers who exceed FHA's standard housing payment and debt to income
ratios. Fourth, HUD has reduced the credit score (from 620 to 580)
below which compensating factors may not be cited and the standard
ratio guidelines may not be exceeded. Fifth, the manual underwriting
requirements are applicable to all purchase loans and all credit
qualifying refinance loans, including FHA-to-FHA rate and term
refinance transactions (no cash out) and credit qualifying FHA
streamline refinance transactions.
IV. Discussion of the Public Comments Regarding Proposed Revisions to
Manual Underwriting Requirements
Comment: Support for revised manual underwriting requirements. The
majority of the commenters submitting comments on the revised manual
underwriting requirements wrote to express support for the new policy.
The commenters agreed that clarifying the underwriting standards for
manually underwritten loans would reduce risks to the FHA MMIF and help
to stem the tide of home foreclosures. Moreover, these commenters wrote
that the new manual underwriting standards would protect consumers from
predatory and irresponsible lending practices, thereby assisting in
stabilizing the housing industry.
HUD Response. HUD appreciates the support expressed by these
commenters, and agrees that the changes will reduce the risk to the
MMIF and help ensure that homebuyers are offered FHA-insured mortgage
loans that are sustainable.
Comment: Opposition to revised manual underwriting guidelines.
Several commenters opposed the proposed manual underwriting standards.
Some of these commenters questioned the need for the proposed changes.
These commenters wrote that lenders have voluntarily implemented
stricter underwriting standards to help ensure borrowers are
financially capable of meeting their loan obligations. Other commenters
focused on the potential impacts of the new standards on low- and
moderate-income homebuyers. The commenters wrote that borrowers are
already facing limited access to credit as a result of stricter
underwriting standards being adopted by lenders, and that the standards
proposed by FHA would further restrict the ability of these homebuyers
to obtain financing for the purchase of a home.
HUD Response. HUD has considered these comments and as a result,
revised its proposal to reduce the credit score requirement for the use
of compensating factors from 620 to 580, thereby expanding the pool of
eligible borrowers who may qualify for the use of such factors. In
addition to expanding access to compensating factors, the new threshold
provides for the more precise and historically accurate use of credit
scores. The formerly proposed thresholds would have grouped borrowers
with non-traditional/insufficient credit together all borrowers with
credit scores up to 619. Such a grouping would have been overly broad.
The new threshold recognizes that the loan performance of FHA borrowers
with non-traditional/insufficient credit is comparable to that of
borrowers with credit scores of 579 or lower. Moreover, the use of the
credit score of 580 is consistent with HUD's recent guidance on manual
underwriting contained in Mortgagee Letter 2013-05 (January 31,
2013).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=13-05ml.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to these comments, HUD is also providing more flexible
front-end and back-end ratios. The document also establishes better
defined compensating factors, and provides that HUD may establish
additional compensating factors through Mortgagee Letter, thereby
enabling HUD to more promptly address changes in market conditions and
the population of borrowers being served by the FHA programs. While HUD
does not presently anticipate the need for issuing such a Mortgage
Letter, HUD emphasizes that the purpose of any such issuance would be
to add to, but not subtract from, the list of compensating factors
established in this document.
HUD believes that these changes strike the appropriate balance
between fulfilling the Department's historical and social mission as
well as its statutory duty to preserve the financial health of the
MMIF. Moreover, sustainable homeownership is essential to a healthy and
well-functioning housing market. These changes will promote that goal
by helping to ensure that homeowners are able to afford their FHA-
insured mortgage loans.
The preamble to the July 15, 2010, notice specifically solicited
public comment on acceptable compensating factors and, in particular,
on how FHA could serve borrowers with housing ratios above the proposed
threshold and debt-to-income ratios below the threshold (see 75 FR
41222). These borrowers, while having established
[[Page 75242]]
credit lines, traditionally do not use credit to finance purchases over
a period of several months or years or pay them off within the billing
cycle. Therefore, they have a history of carrying little to no
discretionary debt. While the housing debt assumed by such a borrower
may be higher than the housing ratios established by this document,
their overall debt-to-income ratios fall within acceptable underwriting
levels and reflect a record of responsible credit. To address this
issue, HUD has established an additional ``compensating factor'' that
would allow such borrowers to qualify for FHA mortgage insurance.
Specifically, a borrower will be permitted to exceed the housing and
debt-to-income ratios, if the borrower has access to credit but carries
no discretionary debt. For example, the borrower's monthly housing
expense is the only open installment debt with an outstanding balance
and revolving debt is paid off every month.
HUD also agrees that borrowers are already facing limited access to
credit as a result of stricter underwriting standards being adopted by
mortgagees. To provide additional consideration for manually evaluating
the borrower for expanded ratios, HUD has included a residual income
compensating factor that can be used to determine if the borrower has
sufficient income after making their monthly mortgage payment,
including taxes and insurance, to meet their needs for food, utilities,
clothing, transportation, work-related expenses, and other essentials.
HUD will permit the use of a compensating factor modeled on the
Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) residual income requirements
(codified in regulation at 38 CFR 36.4340). Under the VA regulations,
residual income is calculated by determining the borrower's gross
monthly income, then deducting the borrower's monthly expenses from the
total gross monthly income. The balance remaining is ``residual
income'' and the mortgagee can determine if the mortgagor meets the
applicable residual income requirements, which vary based on family
size, region, and loan amount as described in tables codified in the VA
regulations. If the mortgagor meets the residual income test, the
mortgagee can use residual income as a compensating factor.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For more details on the VA residual income requirements,
please refer to Chapter 4 of VA Pamphlet 26-7, ``Lenders Handbook,''
available at https://www.benefits.va.gov/warms/pam26_7.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, HUD has clarified the relationship between the compensating
factors and the ``stretch ratios'' provided for under certain FHA
mortgage insurance programs that authorize borrowers to exceed
qualifying housing and debt-to-income ratios. For example, as noted in
the preamble to the July 15, 2010, notice, borrowers using FHA energy
efficient mortgage insurance may have stretch ratios of 33/45 if the
homes are built or retrofitted to exceed the applicable International
Energy Conservation Code (IECC) standard. HUD has taken the opportunity
afforded by this document to clarify that, although such borrowers may
not be subject to the 31/43 percent qualifying ratios established by
this document, these borrowers may not exceed the 33/45 percent upper
limit for stretch ratios established by the document unless they
qualify for higher ratios based on credit score and additional
compensating factors.
Comment: Hold underwriters to a higher standard. Several commenters
suggested that, in addition to the proposed manual underwriting
requirements, HUD should hold underwriters themselves to a higher
standard. The commenters recommended that HUD require underwriters to
absorb a higher percentage of the risk associated with manual
underwriting. For example, one of the commenters recommended that HUD
suspend lenders with high default rates on their manually underwritten
loans.
HUD Response. HUD has not revised its proposal based on these
comments. The Department has already implemented the types of action
recommended by the commenters. Mortgagee Letter 2010-03, issued on
January 21, 2010, announced several steps undertaken by HUD to enhance
its authority to address deficiencies in a lender's performance,
focusing on all underwriting decisions, not just those that were
manually underwritten.\7\ Specifically, Mortgagee Letter 2010-03
advised that every three months, HUD reviews the rates of default and
claims on all FHA-insured single family loans. This review analyzes the
performance of every participating lender based on its area of
operation. HUD may terminate an underwriting lender's approval to
underwrite FHA-insured loans in an area where the lender's default and
claim rate exceeds the established Credit Watch Termination thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Mortgagee Letter 2010-03 is available for download at:
https://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/letters/mortgagee/files/10-03ml.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Clarify what are acceptable compensating factors in
underwriting guidelines. Several commenters, while expressing support
of the proposed changes to the manual underwriting requirements, also
suggested that HUD simplify the acceptable compensating factors. For
example, one commenter recommended that FHA develop a list or chart
that more clearly identifies the relationship between the compensating
factors and the acceptable housing and debt to income ratios. Another
commenter suggested that FHA more specifically define the compensating
factors.
HUD Response. As noted above, HUD has, in response to these
comments, made changes to clarify the compensating factors and their
relationship to the qualifying housing and debt-to-income ratios. In
addition, HUD is providing a matrix outlining credit score, front-end
ratios, back-end ratios, cash reserves, acceptable compensating
factors, and criteria for stretch ratios.
V. Establishment of Revised Manual Underwriting Requirements
Commencing on the effective date:
Manual Underwriting. On manually underwritten mortgage loans,
borrowers are required to have minimum cash reserves equal to one
monthly mortgage payment for one- and two-unit properties, and 3 months
for three- and four-unit properties, which includes principal,
interest, taxes, and insurance. For borrowers with credit scores of 500
to 579 or non-traditional credit the maximum housing and debt-to-income
ratios for manually underwritten loans are set at 31 percent and 43
percent, respectively, unless the borrower qualifies for 33/45 stretch
ratios available for manually underwritten borrowers with homes built
or retrofitted to exceed the applicable IECC standard including Energy
Efficient Mortgages. For borrowers with credit scores of 580 or higher
the maximum housing and debt-to-income ratios for manually underwritten
loans are set at 31 percent and 43 percent, respectively, unless the
borrower (1) qualifies for 33/45 stretch ratios available for manually
underwritten borrowers with homes built or retrofitted to exceed the
applicable IECC standard including Energy Efficient Mortgages or (2)
meets the compensating factors criteria in the matrix below. To exceed
31/43 ratios or, in the case of homes built or retrofitted to exceed
the applicable IECC standard including Energy Efficient Mortgages, the
33/45 stretch ratios, not to exceed 37/47 percent, borrowers must meet
at least one of the acceptable compensating factors. To exceed the
qualifying ratios of 37/47 percent, not to exceed 40/50 percent,
borrowers must
[[Page 75243]]
meet at least two of the acceptable compensating factors. These minimum
cash reserve and maximum qualifying ratio requirements are applicable
for purchase transactions and all credit-qualifying FHA refinance
transactions, where the loan received a REFER scoring recommendation
from TOTAL, where TOTAL cannot score the loan (non-traditional credit)
or where the TOTAL Scorecard scoring recommendation is Accept, but the
underwriter manually downgrades it to Refer. These maximum front and
back ratios requirements and reserve requirements are not applicable
for non-credit qualifying FHA streamline refinance transactions and
Home Equity Conversion Mortgage transactions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum front Acceptable compensating factors (Note: HUD may
Credit score and back establish additional compensating factors through
ratios Mortgagee Letter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500-579 or Non-traditional/Insufficient 31/43 Not applicable. Borrowers with credit scores below
Credit. 580 or with Non-traditional/insufficient credit may
not exceed 31/43 ratios.
580 and above............................ 31/43 No compensating factors required.
580 and above............................ 37/47 One of the following:
Verified and documented liquid cash reserves
equal to at least three total monthly mortgage
payments (1-2 units) or six total monthly mortgage
payments (3-4 units).
New total monthly mortgage payment is not
more than $100 or 5% higher than previous total
monthly housing payment, whichever is less; and
verified and documented twelve month housing payment
history (1X30 only).
Sufficient Residual Income as calculated per
VA requirements
580 and above............................ 40/40 Borrower with established credit and open credit
lines carries no discretionary debt. Monthly housing
payment is only open installment account and
revolving credit is paid off monthly.
580 and above............................ 40/50 Two of the following:
Verified and documented liquid cash reserves
equal to at least three total monthly mortgage
payments (1-2 units) or six total monthly mortgage
payments (3-4 units).
New total monthly mortgage payment is not
more than $100 or 5% higher than previous total
monthly housing payment, whichever is less; and
verified and documented twelve month housing payment
history (1X30 only).
Sufficient Residual Income as calculated per
VA requirements.
Verified and documented additional income
that is not considered effective income. Overtime
and bonus income can be cited as a compensating
factor if the mortgagee verifies and documents that
the borrower has received this income for at least
one year but less than two years, and it will likely
continue. Part-time and seasonal income can be cited
as a compensating factor if the mortgagee verifies
and documents that the borrower has worked the part-
time or seasonal job uninterrupted for at least one
year but less than two years, and plans to continue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Maximum ratios for manually underwritten borrowers with homes built or retrofitted to exceed the
applicable IECC standard including Energy Efficient Mortgages are eligible for stretch ratios of 33/45
regardless of credit score or Nontraditional credit, but must meet the minimum required reserve requirement
for manually underwritten loans (1 month for 1-2 units, 3 months for 3-4 units). These transactions may also
be eligible for higher ratios if they meet additional criteria, i.e. minimum 580 FICO and one or more
additional compensating factors.
VI. Findings and Certification
Regulatory Review--Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), a
determination must be made whether a regulatory action is significant
and therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the order. Executive Order
13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review) directs executive
agencies to analyze regulations that are ``outmoded, ineffective,
insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, streamline,
expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been learned.
Executive Order 13563 also directs that, where relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives, and to the extent permitted by
law, agencies are to identify and consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the
public. This document was determined to be a ``significant regulatory
action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order (although not an
economically significant regulatory action, as provided under section
3(f)(1) of the Executive Order).
As noted above, this document implements one of the three
initiatives announced in HUD's July 15, 2010, notice to aid in the
restoration of the MMIF capital reserve account. Specifically, this
document provides more definitive underwriting standards for mortgage
loan transactions that are manually underwritten to overcome lender
uncertainty and resistance to manually underwritten, credit-worthy FHA
borrowers in this time of tighter mortgage credit. The benefit of the
document is to reduce underwriting losses by strengthening manual
underwriting requirements and thereby increase net revenue to the FHA.
Whether there are net transfers to FHA depends on what proportion of
the current borrowers is excluded from receiving a loan. As long as not
more than 13 percent are excluded, the net transfer to FHA is positive.
When 10 percent of applicants are excluded, the gain (transfer) to FHA
ranges from $35 million to $42 million. HUD has prepared an economic
analysis assessing costs and benefits of the new manual underwriting
requirements. HUD's full analysis can be found at www.regulations.gov.
A summary of HUD's analysis follows:
A. Transfers/Revenue Effects. The broader purpose of the policy
change is to reduce the risk to the MMIF so that FHA can continue to
provide mortgage loans. Facilitating the provision of credit during a
liquidity crisis is a welfare-enhancing activity, and FHA provides such
a public benefit.
A government agency's increase in net revenue is usually treated as
a transfer because governments traditionally raise revenue through
taxes and fees. In the case of the manual underwriting document, the
increase in FHA revenue occurs as the result of more rigorous
underwriting practices that reduce the number of claims. FHA can
control its costs through risk management practices. The lower costs
are a gain to
[[Page 75244]]
FHA. When 10 percent of applicants are excluded, HUD's estimate of the
expected net gain to the FHA (and subsequent transfer to the U.S.
Treasury) ranges from $35 million to $42 million depending upon the
discount rate. Any gain to the FHA is an eventual transfer to others.
Under certain circumstances, reducing the riskiest of loans will allow
FHA to return excess revenues to the U.S. Treasury.
HUD expects a reduction in the number of loans but also a reduction
in the number of claims. The target of the document is low net-revenue
loans, which have higher claim rates and higher loss rates. HUD expects
the net revenue per loan to increase by $2,300 (discounted at 3
percent) primarily because the expected claim amount. At a 7 percent
discount rate, the increase in net revenue per loan is $1,900.
B. Benefits/Costs. The new underwriting guidelines will postpone
(perhaps indefinitely for some) the purchase of a home or the
refinancing of a loan until the excluded households can satisfy more
specific requirements. As noted by many of the public commenters on the
July 15, 2010, notice, the policy changes being made by FHA have
already been adopted by the private mortgage lending industry.
Accordingly, the borrowers excluded by the document would not be able
to purchase mortgage insurance from a private mortgage insurance
company. The only choice for a rejected applicant would be to improve
the strength of their financial position. A few analytical options
exist for estimating the magnitude of the cost of being excluded from
homeownership. The costs are: the direct private costs of meeting the
new requirements, the private costs of delaying the loan, and the
public costs of delay.
Many of the borrowers who would not qualify under the underwriting
requirements may adjust their financial situation in order to meet the
requirements. If the front-end ratio is the disqualifying factor, then
a borrower could adjust by purchasing a less expensive home. Longer
term solutions include saving to build reserves and repaying non-
housing debt to meet the back-end ratio. A household could work to
repair their credit score which would raise the allowable debt ratios.
Most of the negatives will be removed from a credit report after 7
years, and it is possible to increase credit scores significantly after
3 years by better managing consumer debt. Once the borrower reaches a
credit score of 580 or greater, compensating factors such as 3 months
of reserves or the purchase of an energy-efficient home will raise the
qualifying ratios even further. Thus, not all of the 16,000-19,000
borrowers affected by the document will be excluded from an FHA loan.
Some will be able to adjust immediately and others within a year or
two.
Another consideration in measuring the costs of the document is
that by excluding potential borrowers from the benefits of an FHA loan
guarantee, the new manual underwriting requirements may lead to a
reduction in the social benefits of homeownership. HUD assumed two
potential outcomes: that homeownership has positive net public benefits
or that there are no public benefits of homeownership. The first
scenario is motivated by economic theory and the second by recent
empirical evidence. One study estimated the public benefits of
homeownership to be $443 ($341 adjusted to the 2013 price level).
Assuming that homeowners leave their current homes every seven years,
the annualized benefit per loan is $70 (at a 3 percent discount rate)
or $80 (at a 7 percent discount rate). The exclusion of homeowners may
reduce these public benefits of homeownership. However, HUD also notes
that some studies find that a negative social effect of home ownership
is reduced mobility, which leads to rigidity in the labor market and
thus lengthens economic downturns. In addition, a full analysis of the
expected cost to society of excluding a household from homeownership
would account for the expected social costs of foreclosure for every
homeowner created.
C. Aggregate costs and benefits. The aggregate economic impact of
the document is found by examining the aggregate changes to FHA's net
revenue, the total impact on consumers (rejected applicants and
accepted borrowers), and the public benefits of homeownership. HUD
quantifies the revenue impacts and discusses qualitatively the impacts
on consumers and social benefits. The pre-document number of loans is
estimated to be 18,000. HUD assumes that some proportion of those loans
will be excluded as a direct result of the document. The implications
of raising the number of loans that cannot make the transition into
higher quality loans are that the gain to the FHA will decline and the
total cost to borrowers will rise (since the loss due to exclusion is
assumed to be greater than the loss due to compliance).
The aggregate revenue impacts of the document for a variety of
assumptions concerning key parameters are summarized in the table
below.
Annual Aggregate Impacts of the Final Document
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% of loans excluded 10% of loans excluded 20% of loans excluded 100% of loans excluded
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category discount rate of discount rate of discount rate of discount rate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% 7% 3% 7% 3% 7% 3% 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers
FHA Gain............................ +42 +35 +20 +16 -17 -3 -176 -156
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As long as not more than 13 percent of applications are excluded,
the net transfers to FHA outweigh the burden of the document regardless
of the discount rate.
The docket file is available for public inspection in the
Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC
20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building,
please schedule an appointment to review the docket file by calling the
Regulations Division at 202-402-3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number
via TTY by calling the Federal Information Service at 800-877-8339.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any document subject to notice and comment
[[Page 75245]]
rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the document
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The document does not establish new and unfamiliar
regulatory requirements on FHA-approved mortgage lenders. Rather, the
document builds on existing requirements and procedures that are
familiar to lenders. Specifically, the document tightening portions of
FHA's current underwriting guidelines that present an excessive level
of risk to both homeowners and FHA. The benefit of the set of actions
to regulated lending institutions will be to reduce the risk to the
MMIF so that FHA can continue to insure mortgage loans originated and
serviced by these lenders.
As noted in the economic analysis for the document, relative to the
total FHA portfolio, few borrowers are served in the categories that
would be excluded under the new policies, relative to the total FHA
portfolio. Further, as noted by many of the public commenters on the
July 15, 2010, notice, the policy changes being made by FHA have
already been adopted by the private mortgage lending industry. The
impact of the policy changes will, therefore, largely be limited to
conforming FHA standards to widespread industry practice. Accordingly,
to the extent this document has any economic impact on the minority of
lenders that have not already adopted such stricter underwriting
standards; they will be minimal, encompassing a relatively small
proportion of their FHA business activities.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the
environment has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR
part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The Finding of
No Significant Impact is available for public inspection between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays in the Regulations Division, Office
of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410. Due to security
measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an
appointment to review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at
202-708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech
or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the
Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency
from publishing any document that has federalism implications if the
document either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state
and local governments and is not required by statute, or the document
preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and
funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order. This document
would not have federalism implications and would not impose substantial
direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state
law within the meaning of the Executive Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and
tribal governments, and on the private sector. This document would not
impose any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or on the private sector, within the meaning of the UMRA.
Dated: December 3, 2013.
Carol J. Galante,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2013-29170 Filed 12-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P