Disbursing Multifamily Mortgage Proceeds: Permitting Mortgagees To Disburse Mortgage Proceeds With Mortgagor-Provided Funds, 63847-63850 [2024-17033]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 6, 2024 / Proposed Rules
a. Each berth installed in the suite
must incorporate a safety belt that meets
§ 25.785(f).
b. Each berth must be placarded to
indicate the appropriate orientation of
the occupant’s head direction.
c. Each berth cushion must meet
§ 25.853(c).
6. If waste-disposal receptacles are
fitted in the suite, the suite must be
equipped with an automatic fireextinguishing system that meets the
performance requirements of
§ 25.854(b).
7. The design of each suite must:
a. Maintain minimum main aisle(s),
cross aisle(s), and passageway(s)
required by 14 CFR part 25
requirements when subjected to the
ultimate inertia forces listed in
§ 25.561(d).
b. Prevent structural failure or
deformation of components that could
block access to the available evacuation
routes (e.g., seats, doors, contents of
stowage compartments, etc.).
8. In addition to the requirements of
§ 25.562 for seat systems, which are
occupiable during taxi, takeoff, and
landing, the suite structure must be
designed for the additional loads
imposed by the seats as a result of the
conditions specified in § 25.562(b).
Issued in in Kansas City, Missouri, on July
30, 2024.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Technical Policy Branch, Policy and
Standards Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–17157 Filed 8–5–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 200
[Docket No. FR–6423–P–01]
RIN 2502–AJ72
Disbursing Multifamily Mortgage
Proceeds: Permitting Mortgagees To
Disburse Mortgage Proceeds With
Mortgagor-Provided Funds
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
Commissioner, Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
AGENCY:
When funds provided by a
mortgagor to a mortgagee are not fully
disbursed with the initial advance of the
insured mortgage proceeds, the
proposed rule would permit mortgagees
to disburse up to 1 percent of the
mortgage amount initially endorsed for
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Aug 05, 2024
Jkt 262001
insurance before requiring that the
funds provided by the mortgagor be
disbursed in full. This proposed change
would allow mortgagees to pool
mortgages into mortgage-backed
securities guaranteed by the
Government National Mortgage
Association prior to the funds provided
by the mortgagor being disbursed in full.
DATES: Comments due October 7, 2024.
ADDRESSES: To receive consideration as
public comments, comments must be
submitted through one of the two
methods specified in the text that
follows. All submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of this
proposed rule.
1. 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 comments immediately available
to the public. Commenters should
follow the instructions provided on
www.regulations.gov to submit
comments electronically.
2. 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.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications
submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying at
www.regulations.gov or between 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. weekdays at the
above address. HUD strongly encourages
the public to view the docket file at
www.regulations.gov. Due to security
measures at the HUD Headquarters
building, an advance appointment to
review the public comments must be
scheduled by calling the Regulations
Division at 202–402–3055 (this is not a
toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is
prepared to receive calls from
individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing, as well as individuals with
speech or communication disabilities.
To learn more about how to make an
accessible telephone call, please visit
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/
telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4),
a summary of this proposed rule may be
found at www.regulations.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
63847
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Willie Fobbs III, Director, Office of
Multifamily Production, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW, Room 6134, Washington,
DC 20410, telephone 202–402–3242
(this is not a toll-free number). HUD
welcomes and is prepared to receive
calls from individuals who are deaf or
hard of hearing, as well as individuals
with speech or communication
disabilities. To learn more about how to
make an accessible telephone call,
please visit https://www.fcc.gov/
consumers/guides/telecommunicationsrelay-service-trs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
24 CFR 200.54 and Ginnie Mae
Guaranteed Mortgage-Backed Securities
Mortgagees seeking to originate a
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)insured mortgage regulated pursuant to
24 CFR part 200, subpart A, must
comply with the project completion
funding requirements in 24 CFR 200.54.
These require that a mortgagor deposit
funds with its mortgagee that are
sufficient, when added to the proceeds
from the FHA-insured mortgage, to
assure completion of planned
multifamily or healthcare facility project
work and to pay the initial service
charge, carrying charges, and legal and
organization expenses incident to the
construction of the project. Typically,
24 CFR 200.54(b) requires that the funds
deposited by the mortgagor with the
mortgagee (mortgagor-provided funds)
must be disbursed in full for project
work, material, and incidental charges
and expenses (collectively, ‘‘projectrelated expenses’’) before the mortgagee
may disburse any mortgage proceeds.
HUD requires that mortgagees disburse
the mortgagor-provided funds in full
before disbursing any mortgage
proceeds as a basic risk measure.1
For most mortgages regulated
pursuant to 24 CFR part 200, subpart A,
the mortgagor-provided funds are
disbursed in full to pay for projectrelated expenses with the initial
advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds at the time the insured
mortgage is endorsed. For certain
mortgages, however, the amount of
mortgagor-provided funds exceeds the
amount of project-related expenses due
at the time the insured mortgage is
1 HUD’s current regulations at 24 CFR 200.54(c)
allow an exception to the requirement in 24 CFR
200.54(b) for certain projects involving low-income
housing tax credit syndication proceeds, historic
tax-credit syndication proceeds, New Markets Tax
Credits proceeds, and funds provided by a grant or
loan from a Federal, State, or local government.
E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM
06AUP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
63848
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 6, 2024 / Proposed Rules
endorsed. Where the mortgagorprovided funds are not fully disbursed
at the time the insured mortgage is
endorsed, the mortgagor-provided funds
are fully disbursed through subsequent
disbursements by the mortgagee, usually
with the mortgagor-provided funds
being disbursed within two months after
the insured mortgage is endorsed.
Given that 24 CFR 200.54(b) does not
permit insured mortgage proceeds to be
disbursed until the mortgagee disburses
all mortgagor-provided funds, if the
mortgagor-provided funds are not fully
disbursed at the time the insured
mortgage is endorsed, the mortgage
cannot be pooled into a mortgagebacked security (MBS) guaranteed by
the Government National Mortgage
Association (Ginnie Mae) without
conflicting with 24 CFR 200.54(b).2 As
such, for an insured mortgage to be
pooled into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed
MBS, the insured mortgage proceeds
must be permitted to be disbursed.
This conflict with 24 CFR 200.54(b)
typically only exists for a short period
of usually no longer than two months
after the endorsement of the FHAinsured mortgage, by which time the
mortgagor-provided funds are usually
fully disbursed. During the short period
where this conflict exists, the mortgagee
must either implement unusual and
burdensome mortgage servicing
practices to maintain compliance with
24 CFR 200.54(b) or else the mortgagee
will not be able to pool the insured
mortgage into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed
MBS at the time of endorsement. If a
mortgagee is unable to pool an insured
mortgage into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed
MBS at endorsement, the mortgagee
might never be able to securitize the
insured mortgage and might fail to meet
contractually required delivery dates
between the mortgagee and investor.
This could potentially lead to costly
investor compensation fees. The
mortgagee may also experience issues
relating to its financial liquidity cycle.
When many insured mortgages are
unable to be pooled into Ginnie Mae
guaranteed MBSs at the time the insured
mortgages are endorsed, cascading
issues for the broader mortgage market
can occur. These can include reducing
the overall liquidity of the mortgage
market and increasing the cost on
mortgagors to borrow funds, which
reduces the availability of housing and
ultimately harms HUD’s mission to
create strong, sustainable, inclusive
2 For additional information about Ginnie Mae
and Ginnie Mae’s guarantee of MBSs, see Ginnie
Mae’s About Us web page, available at https://
www.ginniemae.gov/about_us/who_we_are/Pages/
funding_government_lending.aspx.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Aug 05, 2024
Jkt 262001
communities and affordable homes for
all.
Partial Regulatory Waiver of 24 CFR
200.54(b)
HUD has recently addressed the
described conflict with the requirements
in 24 CFR 200.54(b) for mortgages
insured under National Housing Act
sections 213 and 221(d)(4) by issuing a
partial regulatory waiver of the
requirements of 24 CFR 200.54(b)
(Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b)).3
The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b)
partially waived the requirement in 24
CFR 200.54(b) that mortgagor-provided
funds ‘‘must be disbursed in full’’ for
project-related expenses before any
disbursement of funds from the insured
mortgage. Instead, the Partial Waiver of
24 CFR 200.54(b) permitted, to the
extent necessary, a mortgagee to
disburse funds from the insured
mortgage in an amount up to one-half
percent (0.5%) of the initially endorsed
mortgage amount. The Partial Waiver of
24 CFR 200.54(b) allows mortgagees to
pool insured mortgages into Ginnie Mae
guaranteed MBSs when mortgagorprovided funds are not fully disbursed
at the time the insured mortgage is
endorsed because it allows mortgagees
to meet the Ginnie Mae requirement that
the insured mortgage proceeds be
disbursable.
II. This Proposed Rule
The Proposed Exception to 24 CFR
200.54(b)
Through this proposed rule, HUD
proposes to add an exception to the
requirement in 24 CFR 200.54(b) that
the funds provided by the mortgagor
must be disbursed in full before the
disbursement of any proceeds from the
insured mortgage. This proposed rule
would also make non-substantive
terminology and organizational edits to
24 CFR 200.54 that would not affect any
other requirements within the section.
The exception proposed to be added
to 24 CFR 200.54(b) would permit
mortgagees, where the funds provided
by the mortgagor are not fully disbursed
with the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds, to disburse up to 1
percent of the mortgage amount initially
endorsed for insurance before requiring
that the funds provided by the
mortgagor be disbursed in full. This
proposed exception would permit that a
mortgagee could disburse mortgage
proceeds at the time the mortgage is
3 The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) was
initially granted in July 2021. See 87 FR 14563
(Mar. 15, 2022). The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR
200.54(b) has subsequently been extended and
remains in effect until July 4, 2025.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
initially endorsed for insurance up to a
maximum of 1 percent of the initially
endorsed mortgage amount.
Alternatively, a mortgagee could choose
to disburse mortgage proceeds in any
amount on a monthly basis, whether
consecutive or not, up to a combined
maximum of 1 percent of the initially
endorsed insured mortgage amount
until the mortgagor-provided funds are
fully disbursed.
As described in the Background
section of this proposed rule, the Partial
Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) permits a
mortgagee to disburse funds from the
insured mortgage in an amount up to
one-half percent (0.5%) of the initially
endorsed mortgage amount. HUD is
proposing to set the amount of the
proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b)
at 1 percent of the initially endorsed
mortgage amount because in an
environment where mortgage interest
rates increase, additional mortgagorprovided funds are required to be
deposited with the mortgagee. Where
additional mortgagor-provided funds are
deposited with a mortgagee, there is an
increased chance that the mortgagorprovided funds will not be fully
disbursed when the insured mortgage is
initially endorsed. Permitting a 1% of
the initially endorsed mortgage amount
exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) will
allow additional mortgages to be
securitized at the time of endorsement
with no incremental risk to HUD
compared to the one-half percent (0.5%)
prescribed in the Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b).
The proposed exception to 24 CFR
200.54(b) would allow mortgagees to
disburse mortgagor-provided funds for
project-related expenses in conjunction
with the proceeds from the insured
mortgage at the time the mortgage is
initially endorsed even where the
mortgagor-provided funds are not fully
disbursed with the initial advance of the
insured mortgage proceeds. This would
allow mortgagees to pool a mortgage
into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBS even
when the mortgagor-provided funds
were not fully disbursed with the initial
advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds.
This proposed exception would help
keep FHA-insured mortgage products
competitive in economic environments
with rising interest rates and/or multiyear high interest rates, especially for
new construction projects, where a
higher proportion of mortgage proceeds
are constrained by FHA’s debt service
coverage ratio requirements. In an
economic environment with rising and
high interest rates, mortgagors must
deposit additional funds with their
mortgagee, making it more likely that
E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM
06AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 6, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the mortgagor-provided funds will not
be fully disbursed during the initial
advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds. HUD believes that the
proposed exception would help ensure
that interest rates for FHA-insured
mortgages remain competitive and
ensure the liquidity of FHA-insured
mortgages on the secondary mortgage
market.
Alternative Solution Considered
In determining whether to propose
the exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b), HUD
considered whether an alternative
solution to the proposed exception to 24
CFR 200.54(b) existed that would better
address the issue outlined throughout
this proposed rule. One alternative
solution considered by HUD was to
encourage the mortgage industry to
contract for the future delivery of MBSs
once all mortgagor-provided funds had
been disbursed from the insured
mortgages that were to be pooled. While
this solution could, in theory, correct
the same issue that the proposed
exception addresses, HUD ultimately
determined that this would likely cause
higher borrowing costs for mortgagors
because interest rates would need to be
hedged through some mechanism.
Further, mortgagees would potentially
experience unfavorable accounting
classifications, having to book recently
closed mortgages as ‘‘mortgages held for
sale,’’ rather than booking closed
mortgages as the more favorable
‘‘mortgage serving rights.’’ Mortgagees
could also face unfavorable changes to
their counterparty credit profile because
of the need to hold whole mortgages on
their balance sheet for a number of
months, likely precluding smaller
mortgagees from warehouse credit and
potentially creating funding constraints.
For these reasons, HUD believes that the
proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b)
would be a better solution for
mortgagors, mortgagees, FHA, and the
secondary mortgage markets.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Evaluation of the Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b)
HUD has evaluated the results of
granting the Partial Waiver of 24 CFR
200.54(b). At the time that HUD granted
the Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b),
HUD determined that permitting up to
one-half percent (.5%) of the initially
endorsed mortgage amount to be
disbursed represented only a negligible
increase of risk to FHA. As expected,
since granting the Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b) in July 2021, HUD has
received positive feedback from
mortgagees regarding the use of the
partial waiver and FHA has experienced
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Aug 05, 2024
Jkt 262001
no negative impacts due to mortgagees’
reliance on the partial waiver.
In reviewing the knowledge gained
from the implementation of the Partial
Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b), HUD
designed this proposed rule to be
similar to the partial waiver, with a
notable exception being that this
proposed rule permits mortgagees to
disburse mortgage proceeds in an
amount up to 1 percent, rather than onehalf percent, of the initially endorsed
mortgage amount before requiring that
the mortgagor-provided funds be
disbursed in full. HUD determined that
the proposed 1 percent of the initially
endorsed mortgage amount produces no
meaningful increase of risk to FHA,
while better helping to ensure that
mortgagees are more easily able to pool
mortgages into Ginnie Mae guaranteed
MBSs.
In summary, HUD believes that the
proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b)
is the best solution to the potential
conflict with the requirements in 24
CFR 200.54(b) where the mortgagorprovided funds are not fully disbursed
with the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds for mortgages
intended to be pooled into Ginnie Mae
guaranteed MBSs. The proposed
exception would assist FHA in keeping
its mortgage products competitive and
would further HUD’s mission to create
strong, sustainable, inclusive
communities and affordable homes for
all.
III. Findings and Certifications
Regulatory Review—Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 14094
Pursuant to 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
Executive Order. Executive Order 13563
(Improving Regulations and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. The order also
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 further 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
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
63849
choice for the public. Executive Order
14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review)
amends section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, among other things.
As discussed in this preamble, the
only substantive regulatory change
proposed in this rule would permit
mortgagees, where the funds provided
by the mortgagor are not fully disbursed
with the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds, to disburse up to 1
percent of the mortgage amount initially
endorsed for insurance before requiring
that the funds provided by the
mortgagor be disbursed in full. This rule
was determined not to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 as
amended by Executive Order 14094 and
is not an economically significant
regulatory action and therefore was not
subject to OMB review.
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 rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking
requirements, unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The changes
proposed in this rule are limited to
permitting mortgagees, where the funds
provided by the mortgagor are not fully
disbursed with the initial advance of the
insured mortgage proceeds, to disburse
up to 1 percent of the mortgage amount
initially endorsed for insurance before
requiring that the funds provided by the
mortgagor be disbursed in full. These
proposed changes would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, the undersigned certifies
that the proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Notwithstanding HUD’s
determination that this rule will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
HUD specifically invites comments
regarding any less burdensome
alternatives to this rule that will meet
HUD’s objectives as described in the
preamble to this rule.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
prohibits an agency from publishing any
rule that has federalism implications if
the rule either imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on State and
local governments and is not required
by statute or preempts State law, unless
the agency meets the consultation and
funding requirements of section 6 of the
E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM
06AUP1
63850
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 6, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Executive Order. This proposed rule
does not have federalism implications
and does not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on State and local
governments or preempt State law
within the meaning of the Executive
Order.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact
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 on
www.regulations.gov and between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays in
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Room 10276,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
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 proposed rule
would not impose any Federal mandates
on any State, local, or Tribal
governments, or on the private sector,
within the meaning of the UMRA.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 200
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
PART 200—INTRODUCTION TO FHA
PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for part 200
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1702–1715z–21; 42
U.S.C. 3535(d).
2. In § 200.54:
■ a. Revise paragraph (a) by removing
the citation to ‘‘paragraph (d)’’ and
adding, in its place, a citation to
‘‘paragraph (c)’’;
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Aug 05, 2024
Jkt 262001
§ 200.54
Project completion funding.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) If the funds provided by the
mortgagor are not fully disbursed with
the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds, the mortgagee may
disburse up to 1 percent of the mortgage
amount initially endorsed for insurance
before requiring that the funds provided
by the mortgagor be disbursed in full.
The 1 percent of the initially endorsed
mortgage amount may be disbursed in
full at the time of initial endorsement or
may be disbursed in any amount on a
monthly basis, whether consecutive or
nonconsecutive, until the funds
provided by the mortgagor are fully
disbursed.
*
*
*
*
*
Julia R. Gordon,
Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal
Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2024–17033 Filed 8–5–24; 8:45 am]
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Equal employment
opportunity, Fair housing, Housing
standards, Lead poisoning, Loan
programs—housing and community
development, Mortgage insurance,
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Social Security,
Unemployment compensation, Wages.
For the reasons stated above, HUD
proposes to amend 24 CFR part 200 as
follows:
b. Revise paragraph (b) by removing
the word ‘‘mortgage’’ and adding, in its
place, ‘‘insured mortgage’’;
■ c. Redesignate paragraph (c) as
paragraph (b)(1);
■ d. Amend newly redesignated
paragraph (b)(1) by removing the word
‘‘mortgage’’ and adding, in its place,
‘‘insured mortgage’’ and by adding the
word ‘‘or’’ at the end of the paragraph;
■ e. Add paragraph (b)(2); and
■ f. Redesignate paragraph (d) as
paragraph (c).
The addition reads as follows:
■
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
Address Correction Notices IMpb
Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Postal Service is
proposing to amend Mailing Standards
of the United States Postal Service,
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®) in
various sections to remove the hardcopy
address correction notice option for all
packages bearing an Intelligent Mail®
package barcode (IMpb®).
DATES: Submit comments on or before
September 5, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver written
comments to the manager, Product
Classification, U.S. Postal Service, 475
L’Enfant Plaza SW, Room 4446,
Washington, DC 20260–5015. If sending
comments by email, include the name
and address of the commenter and send
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to PCFederalRegister@usps.gov, with a
subject line of ‘‘Address Correction
Notices IMpb’’. Faxed comments are not
accepted.
You may inspect and photocopy all
written comments, by appointment
only, at USPS® Headquarters Library,
475 L’Enfant Plaza SW, 11th Floor
North, Washington, DC 20260. These
records are available for review on
Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.–4 p.m.,
by calling 202–268–2906.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Evans at (901) 681–4474 or
Garry Rodriguez at (202) 268–7281.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All
submitted comments and attachments
are part of the public record and subject
to disclosure. Do not enclose any
material in your comments that you
consider to be confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
Background
Ancillary service endorsements
provide an option for mailers to instruct
the Postal Service on how to treat their
mail if it is determined to be
undeliverable-as-addressed and to
request address correction services.
Address corrections are currently
available in four available formats: a
returned mailpiece with the new
address or reason for nondelivery
attached; PS Form 3547, Notice to
Mailer of Correction in Address, that is
mailed to the return address on a
mailpiece; PS Form 3579, Notice of
Undeliverable Periodical, mailed to the
publisher address indicated in the
publication ID Statement; or via ACSTM
(Address Change Service) which is an
electronic address correction notice
made available to the sender via
download from a secure USPS website
that requires a login and password to
access the files. Address correction fees
are charged based on the method in
which they are provided, with return
mail costs and manual address
correction fees that reflect the USPS
costs to handle those notices.
The IMpb applied to packages allows
shippers to obtain postage discounts
and the ability to track their packages
through the Postal network. The Postal
Service can effectively provide address
correction notices to our IMpb mailers
electronically via ACS faster and more
efficiently.
Proposal
The Postal Service is proposing to
remove the option to request PS Forms
3547, Notice to Mailer of Correction in
Address, and PS Form 3579, Notice of
Undeliverable Periodical, for packages
with an IMpb.
E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM
06AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 6, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63847-63850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17033]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 200
[Docket No. FR-6423-P-01]
RIN 2502-AJ72
Disbursing Multifamily Mortgage Proceeds: Permitting Mortgagees
To Disburse Mortgage Proceeds With Mortgagor-Provided Funds
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: When funds provided by a mortgagor to a mortgagee are not
fully disbursed with the initial advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds, the proposed rule would permit mortgagees to disburse up to 1
percent of the mortgage amount initially endorsed for insurance before
requiring that the funds provided by the mortgagor be disbursed in
full. This proposed change would allow mortgagees to pool mortgages
into mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by the Government National
Mortgage Association prior to the funds provided by the mortgagor being
disbursed in full.
DATES: Comments due October 7, 2024.
ADDRESSES: To receive consideration as public comments, comments must
be submitted through one of the two methods specified in the text that
follows. All submissions must refer to the docket number and title of
this proposed rule.
1. 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 comments immediately available
to the public. Commenters should follow the instructions provided on
www.regulations.gov to submit comments electronically.
2. 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.
Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying at www.regulations.gov or between 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. weekdays at the above address. HUD strongly
encourages the public to view the docket file at www.regulations.gov.
Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance
appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by calling
the Regulations Division at 202-402-3055 (this is not a toll-free
number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals with speech or
communication disabilities. To learn more about how to make an
accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this proposed
rule may be found at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Willie Fobbs III, Director, Office of
Multifamily Production, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW, Room 6134, Washington, DC 20410, telephone 202-402-
3242 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to
receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well
as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more
about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
24 CFR 200.54 and Ginnie Mae Guaranteed Mortgage-Backed Securities
Mortgagees seeking to originate a Federal Housing Administration
(FHA)-insured mortgage regulated pursuant to 24 CFR part 200, subpart
A, must comply with the project completion funding requirements in 24
CFR 200.54. These require that a mortgagor deposit funds with its
mortgagee that are sufficient, when added to the proceeds from the FHA-
insured mortgage, to assure completion of planned multifamily or
healthcare facility project work and to pay the initial service charge,
carrying charges, and legal and organization expenses incident to the
construction of the project. Typically, 24 CFR 200.54(b) requires that
the funds deposited by the mortgagor with the mortgagee (mortgagor-
provided funds) must be disbursed in full for project work, material,
and incidental charges and expenses (collectively, ``project-related
expenses'') before the mortgagee may disburse any mortgage proceeds.
HUD requires that mortgagees disburse the mortgagor-provided funds in
full before disbursing any mortgage proceeds as a basic risk
measure.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ HUD's current regulations at 24 CFR 200.54(c) allow an
exception to the requirement in 24 CFR 200.54(b) for certain
projects involving low-income housing tax credit syndication
proceeds, historic tax-credit syndication proceeds, New Markets Tax
Credits proceeds, and funds provided by a grant or loan from a
Federal, State, or local government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For most mortgages regulated pursuant to 24 CFR part 200, subpart
A, the mortgagor-provided funds are disbursed in full to pay for
project-related expenses with the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds at the time the insured mortgage is endorsed. For
certain mortgages, however, the amount of mortgagor-provided funds
exceeds the amount of project-related expenses due at the time the
insured mortgage is
[[Page 63848]]
endorsed. Where the mortgagor-provided funds are not fully disbursed at
the time the insured mortgage is endorsed, the mortgagor-provided funds
are fully disbursed through subsequent disbursements by the mortgagee,
usually with the mortgagor-provided funds being disbursed within two
months after the insured mortgage is endorsed.
Given that 24 CFR 200.54(b) does not permit insured mortgage
proceeds to be disbursed until the mortgagee disburses all mortgagor-
provided funds, if the mortgagor-provided funds are not fully disbursed
at the time the insured mortgage is endorsed, the mortgage cannot be
pooled into a mortgage-backed security (MBS) guaranteed by the
Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) without
conflicting with 24 CFR 200.54(b).\2\ As such, for an insured mortgage
to be pooled into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBS, the insured mortgage
proceeds must be permitted to be disbursed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For additional information about Ginnie Mae and Ginnie Mae's
guarantee of MBSs, see Ginnie Mae's About Us web page, available at
https://www.ginniemae.gov/about_us/who_we_are/Pages/funding_government_lending.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This conflict with 24 CFR 200.54(b) typically only exists for a
short period of usually no longer than two months after the endorsement
of the FHA-insured mortgage, by which time the mortgagor-provided funds
are usually fully disbursed. During the short period where this
conflict exists, the mortgagee must either implement unusual and
burdensome mortgage servicing practices to maintain compliance with 24
CFR 200.54(b) or else the mortgagee will not be able to pool the
insured mortgage into a Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBS at the time of
endorsement. If a mortgagee is unable to pool an insured mortgage into
a Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBS at endorsement, the mortgagee might never
be able to securitize the insured mortgage and might fail to meet
contractually required delivery dates between the mortgagee and
investor. This could potentially lead to costly investor compensation
fees. The mortgagee may also experience issues relating to its
financial liquidity cycle. When many insured mortgages are unable to be
pooled into Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBSs at the time the insured
mortgages are endorsed, cascading issues for the broader mortgage
market can occur. These can include reducing the overall liquidity of
the mortgage market and increasing the cost on mortgagors to borrow
funds, which reduces the availability of housing and ultimately harms
HUD's mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and
affordable homes for all.
Partial Regulatory Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b)
HUD has recently addressed the described conflict with the
requirements in 24 CFR 200.54(b) for mortgages insured under National
Housing Act sections 213 and 221(d)(4) by issuing a partial regulatory
waiver of the requirements of 24 CFR 200.54(b) (Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b)).\3\ The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) partially
waived the requirement in 24 CFR 200.54(b) that mortgagor-provided
funds ``must be disbursed in full'' for project-related expenses before
any disbursement of funds from the insured mortgage. Instead, the
Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) permitted, to the extent necessary,
a mortgagee to disburse funds from the insured mortgage in an amount up
to one-half percent (0.5%) of the initially endorsed mortgage amount.
The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) allows mortgagees to pool
insured mortgages into Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBSs when mortgagor-
provided funds are not fully disbursed at the time the insured mortgage
is endorsed because it allows mortgagees to meet the Ginnie Mae
requirement that the insured mortgage proceeds be disbursable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) was initially granted
in July 2021. See 87 FR 14563 (Mar. 15, 2022). The Partial Waiver of
24 CFR 200.54(b) has subsequently been extended and remains in
effect until July 4, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. This Proposed Rule
The Proposed Exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b)
Through this proposed rule, HUD proposes to add an exception to the
requirement in 24 CFR 200.54(b) that the funds provided by the
mortgagor must be disbursed in full before the disbursement of any
proceeds from the insured mortgage. This proposed rule would also make
non-substantive terminology and organizational edits to 24 CFR 200.54
that would not affect any other requirements within the section.
The exception proposed to be added to 24 CFR 200.54(b) would permit
mortgagees, where the funds provided by the mortgagor are not fully
disbursed with the initial advance of the insured mortgage proceeds, to
disburse up to 1 percent of the mortgage amount initially endorsed for
insurance before requiring that the funds provided by the mortgagor be
disbursed in full. This proposed exception would permit that a
mortgagee could disburse mortgage proceeds at the time the mortgage is
initially endorsed for insurance up to a maximum of 1 percent of the
initially endorsed mortgage amount. Alternatively, a mortgagee could
choose to disburse mortgage proceeds in any amount on a monthly basis,
whether consecutive or not, up to a combined maximum of 1 percent of
the initially endorsed insured mortgage amount until the mortgagor-
provided funds are fully disbursed.
As described in the Background section of this proposed rule, the
Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) permits a mortgagee to disburse
funds from the insured mortgage in an amount up to one-half percent
(0.5%) of the initially endorsed mortgage amount. HUD is proposing to
set the amount of the proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) at 1
percent of the initially endorsed mortgage amount because in an
environment where mortgage interest rates increase, additional
mortgagor-provided funds are required to be deposited with the
mortgagee. Where additional mortgagor-provided funds are deposited with
a mortgagee, there is an increased chance that the mortgagor-provided
funds will not be fully disbursed when the insured mortgage is
initially endorsed. Permitting a 1% of the initially endorsed mortgage
amount exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) will allow additional mortgages to
be securitized at the time of endorsement with no incremental risk to
HUD compared to the one-half percent (0.5%) prescribed in the Partial
Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b).
The proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) would allow mortgagees
to disburse mortgagor-provided funds for project-related expenses in
conjunction with the proceeds from the insured mortgage at the time the
mortgage is initially endorsed even where the mortgagor-provided funds
are not fully disbursed with the initial advance of the insured
mortgage proceeds. This would allow mortgagees to pool a mortgage into
a Ginnie Mae guaranteed MBS even when the mortgagor-provided funds were
not fully disbursed with the initial advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds.
This proposed exception would help keep FHA-insured mortgage
products competitive in economic environments with rising interest
rates and/or multi-year high interest rates, especially for new
construction projects, where a higher proportion of mortgage proceeds
are constrained by FHA's debt service coverage ratio requirements. In
an economic environment with rising and high interest rates, mortgagors
must deposit additional funds with their mortgagee, making it more
likely that
[[Page 63849]]
the mortgagor-provided funds will not be fully disbursed during the
initial advance of the insured mortgage proceeds. HUD believes that the
proposed exception would help ensure that interest rates for FHA-
insured mortgages remain competitive and ensure the liquidity of FHA-
insured mortgages on the secondary mortgage market.
Alternative Solution Considered
In determining whether to propose the exception to 24 CFR
200.54(b), HUD considered whether an alternative solution to the
proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) existed that would better
address the issue outlined throughout this proposed rule. One
alternative solution considered by HUD was to encourage the mortgage
industry to contract for the future delivery of MBSs once all
mortgagor-provided funds had been disbursed from the insured mortgages
that were to be pooled. While this solution could, in theory, correct
the same issue that the proposed exception addresses, HUD ultimately
determined that this would likely cause higher borrowing costs for
mortgagors because interest rates would need to be hedged through some
mechanism. Further, mortgagees would potentially experience unfavorable
accounting classifications, having to book recently closed mortgages as
``mortgages held for sale,'' rather than booking closed mortgages as
the more favorable ``mortgage serving rights.'' Mortgagees could also
face unfavorable changes to their counterparty credit profile because
of the need to hold whole mortgages on their balance sheet for a number
of months, likely precluding smaller mortgagees from warehouse credit
and potentially creating funding constraints. For these reasons, HUD
believes that the proposed exception to 24 CFR 200.54(b) would be a
better solution for mortgagors, mortgagees, FHA, and the secondary
mortgage markets.
Evaluation of the Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b)
HUD has evaluated the results of granting the Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b). At the time that HUD granted the Partial Waiver of 24
CFR 200.54(b), HUD determined that permitting up to one-half percent
(.5%) of the initially endorsed mortgage amount to be disbursed
represented only a negligible increase of risk to FHA. As expected,
since granting the Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b) in July 2021, HUD
has received positive feedback from mortgagees regarding the use of the
partial waiver and FHA has experienced no negative impacts due to
mortgagees' reliance on the partial waiver.
In reviewing the knowledge gained from the implementation of the
Partial Waiver of 24 CFR 200.54(b), HUD designed this proposed rule to
be similar to the partial waiver, with a notable exception being that
this proposed rule permits mortgagees to disburse mortgage proceeds in
an amount up to 1 percent, rather than one-half percent, of the
initially endorsed mortgage amount before requiring that the mortgagor-
provided funds be disbursed in full. HUD determined that the proposed 1
percent of the initially endorsed mortgage amount produces no
meaningful increase of risk to FHA, while better helping to ensure that
mortgagees are more easily able to pool mortgages into Ginnie Mae
guaranteed MBSs.
In summary, HUD believes that the proposed exception to 24 CFR
200.54(b) is the best solution to the potential conflict with the
requirements in 24 CFR 200.54(b) where the mortgagor-provided funds are
not fully disbursed with the initial advance of the insured mortgage
proceeds for mortgages intended to be pooled into Ginnie Mae guaranteed
MBSs. The proposed exception would assist FHA in keeping its mortgage
products competitive and would further HUD's mission to create strong,
sustainable, inclusive communities and affordable homes for all.
III. Findings and Certifications
Regulatory Review--Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
Pursuant to 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 Executive Order.
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. The order
also 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 further 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. Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review) amends section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, among
other things.
As discussed in this preamble, the only substantive regulatory
change proposed in this rule would permit mortgagees, where the funds
provided by the mortgagor are not fully disbursed with the initial
advance of the insured mortgage proceeds, to disburse up to 1 percent
of the mortgage amount initially endorsed for insurance before
requiring that the funds provided by the mortgagor be disbursed in
full. This rule was determined not to be a ``significant regulatory
action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 as amended
by Executive Order 14094 and is not an economically significant
regulatory action and therefore was not subject to OMB review.
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 rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The changes proposed in this rule are limited to permitting mortgagees,
where the funds provided by the mortgagor are not fully disbursed with
the initial advance of the insured mortgage proceeds, to disburse up to
1 percent of the mortgage amount initially endorsed for insurance
before requiring that the funds provided by the mortgagor be disbursed
in full. These proposed changes would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, the
undersigned certifies that the proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Notwithstanding HUD's determination that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, HUD
specifically invites comments regarding any less burdensome
alternatives to this rule that will meet HUD's objectives as described
in the preamble to this rule.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) prohibits an agency from
publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either
imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local
governments and is not required by statute or preempts State law,
unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of
section 6 of the
[[Page 63850]]
Executive Order. This proposed rule does not have federalism
implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on
State and local governments or preempt State law within the meaning of
the Executive Order.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact 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 on www.regulations.gov and
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays in the Regulations
Division, Office of General Counsel, Room 10276, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410-0500.
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 proposed rule would
not impose any Federal mandates on any State, local, or Tribal
governments, or on the private sector, within the meaning of the UMRA.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 200
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Equal employment
opportunity, Fair housing, Housing standards, Lead poisoning, Loan
programs--housing and community development, Mortgage insurance,
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Penalties, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Social Security, Unemployment
compensation, Wages.
For the reasons stated above, HUD proposes to amend 24 CFR part 200
as follows:
PART 200--INTRODUCTION TO FHA PROGRAMS
0
1. The authority citation for part 200 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1702-1715z-21; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
0
2. In Sec. 200.54:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a) by removing the citation to ``paragraph (d)''
and adding, in its place, a citation to ``paragraph (c)'';
0
b. Revise paragraph (b) by removing the word ``mortgage'' and adding,
in its place, ``insured mortgage'';
0
c. Redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph (b)(1);
0
d. Amend newly redesignated paragraph (b)(1) by removing the word
``mortgage'' and adding, in its place, ``insured mortgage'' and by
adding the word ``or'' at the end of the paragraph;
0
e. Add paragraph (b)(2); and
0
f. Redesignate paragraph (d) as paragraph (c).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 200.54 Project completion funding.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) If the funds provided by the mortgagor are not fully disbursed
with the initial advance of the insured mortgage proceeds, the
mortgagee may disburse up to 1 percent of the mortgage amount initially
endorsed for insurance before requiring that the funds provided by the
mortgagor be disbursed in full. The 1 percent of the initially endorsed
mortgage amount may be disbursed in full at the time of initial
endorsement or may be disbursed in any amount on a monthly basis,
whether consecutive or nonconsecutive, until the funds provided by the
mortgagor are fully disbursed.
* * * * *
Julia R. Gordon,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2024-17033 Filed 8-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P