Loan Think

The prospect of a lower corporate rate resulting from looming tax reform discussions may be a blessing for the industry, but it could be bittersweet for one particular group of bankers.

Regardless of whether Congress could act, proponents don’t seem to fully appreciate the potential unintended consequences of a future without Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Efforts to repeal a Dodd-Frank mandate for lenders to report data on small-business applicants — including race and ethnicity — overlook the benefits of the provision to both communities of color and banks.

The U.S. population is aging, and one of the well-established components of the American dream — buying and owning a home — appears poised to aid in the baby boomers' next phase of life.

Policymakers should differentiate between housing finance-related issues of real importance to the greater public interest, and those that concern only special interests.

From the small lender’s perspective, most of the various GSE reform proposals that have been offered are designed to advance the interests of the big banks.

From the largest banks to the smallest independents, policymakers want to hear the mortgage industry speak with one voice in the critical efforts to reform the government-sponsored enterprises.

A key question for the future of housing finance is whether large and small lenders will both be able to compete, or will a new system favor Wall Street giants?

The Financial Choice Act contains many positive reforms for community banks, but a provision affording benefits for holding loans on balance sheet poses risk for small lenders.

As long as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exist, they must have adequate capital so taxpayers will never again be compelled to help them meet their financial obligations.