This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
First, the implementation timeline is rather long, as key recommendations are significantly dependent upon Congress passing legislation – and it must be assumed that such passage will require, at a minimum, at least several years. I find these recommendations lacking for four main reasons. government.
This translates into considerable clout in Congress and state legislatures. 23 There has even been legislation proposed in Congress to legally require the tri-merge report, 24 overriding the FHFA’s proposed reform. The FHFA, from its founding in 2008 to 2021, was an independent regulator. labor force of 168 million.
In the years immediately following conservatorship (which began in September 2008), the FHFA increasingly took over setting the average G-fee. Not surprisingly, the two companies highly prioritized protecting those subsidies, which meant maintaining political support in Congress to ensure no legislation was passed to take them away.
The changes then became the subject of hearings and legislation in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to reverse the changes. One is the long-standing Affordable Housing Goals program (from 1992), and the other is the more recent Duty to Serve (DTS) program (from 2008). This claim is simply untrue.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 40,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content