The housing and mortgage industries have seen a surge in demand for rural homes since the COVID pandemic, according to Fannie Mae research. The main factor helping increase rural housing demand was the opportunity many were given to work remotely. Demand for space and low mortgage rates also contributed, though those trends bolstered home buying in all areas in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic.
A Fannie Mae survey of mortgage executives shows wide support for standardizing and simplifying the language around closing costs and fees. The survey of senior mortgage executives, conducted in July, found that 60 percent of respondents said closing costs are easy to estimate, and 50 percent said they are easy to explain.
More data released so far this month has reinforced the trend that mortgage processors and underwriters have been keeping busy lately with home refinance loans. Optimal Blue, a mortgage analytics provider, reported a surge in refinance volume in its September Mortgage Data Report.
A group of Democrat U.S. senators expressed a lack of patience with the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) in implementing updated energy standards for new homes backed by the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). The seven senators sent a letter to FHFA Director Sandra Thompson last week urging the agency to set minimum standards, a move that has been debated for much of the past year.
While escalating home values have made buying more challenging for many consumers, they have had one major benefit: home equity. And, according to the latest CoreLogic Homeowner Equity Insights report, the average U.S. mortgagee increased their home equity by $25,000 in the last year. CoreLogic analysis shows U.S. homeowners with mortgages (roughly 62 percent of all properties) have seen their equity increase by a total of $1.3 trillion since the second quarter of 2023.
Last week I received a file to underwrite where the borrower’s tax return indicated that he earned more than 1.6 million in income. The Mortgage Loan Officer and the mortgage loan processor calculated the ratios based on the same income. The ratios were 2% over 4% and it was a slam dunk deal.as far as they were concerned.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
My previous article explained how HUD (FHA) wanted underwriters to review and to come up with an income trend using the borrower’s personal tax returns. There are many borrowers that self-employed and these borrowers use other forms to demonstrate their income trend.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Underwriters from time to time have difficulty in determining the income to use when they receive a complicated or very involved tax return.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
The way we can handle both business and personal tax returns is pretty much same. The key to the right analysis is to opt for right direction. We can divide the analysis procedure in 3 steps.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Written By: Bonnie Wildt
I have said it before and I will say it again and that is, do not believe everything you hear or read for that matter. In this particular instance I am referring to AUS Findings. I have had countless conversations with processors and loan officer who want to know why I am asking for documentation that the AUS findings have clearly stated wasn’t needed or worse, they can’t believe I am turning a loan down that has an Approve/Eligible. So here it is again and pay particular attention to the details because just because you have an Approve/Eligible or Accept doesn’t necessarily mean you have a done deal.