So I guess the former CEO of Mortgage Banker Association, and FHA Commissioner under Obama, undoubtedly an expert on the subject matter, is just bullshitting: The result, according to industry pros: pricier monthly mortgage payments for most homebuyers — an ugly surprise for those who worked for years to build their credit, only to face higher costs than they expected as part of a housing affordability push by the US Federal Housing Finance Agency. “It’s going to be a challenge trying to explain to somebody that says, ‘I worked my whole life for high credit and I’ve put a lot of money down and you’re telling me that’s a negative now?’ That’s a hard conversation to have,” one worried Arizona-based mortgage loan originator told The Post. “It’s unprecedented,” added David Stevens, who served as Federal Housing Administration commissioner during the Obama administration. “My email is full from mortgage companies and CEOs [telling] me how unbelievably shocked they are by this move.” “This was a blatant and significant cut of fees for their highest-risk borrowers and a clear increase in much better credit quality buyers – which just clarified to the world that this move was a pretty significant cross-subsidy pricing change,” added Stevens, who is also the former CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association. P. S. Source: https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/how-the-us-is-subsidizing-high-risk-homebuyers-at-the-cost-of-those-with-good-credit/
So I guess the former CEO of Mortgage Banker Association, and FHA Commissioner under Obama, undoubtedly an expert on the subject matter, is just bullshitting: The result, according to industry pros: pricier monthly mortgage payments for most homebuyers — an ugly surprise for those who worked for years to build their credit, only to face higher costs than they expected as part of a housing affordability push by the US Federal Housing Finance Agency. “It’s going to be a challenge trying to explain to somebody that says, ‘I worked my whole life for high credit and I’ve put a lot of money down and you’re telling me that’s a negative now?’ That’s a hard conversation to have,” one worried Arizona-based mortgage loan originator told The Post. “It’s unprecedented,” added David Stevens, who served as Federal Housing Administration commissioner during the Obama administration. “My email is full from mortgage companies and CEOs [telling] me how unbelievably shocked they are by this move.” “This was a blatant and significant cut of fees for their highest-risk borrowers and a clear increase in much better credit quality buyers – which just clarified to the world that this move was a pretty significant cross-subsidy pricing change,” added Stevens, who is also the former CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association. P. S. Source: https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/how-the-us-is-subsidizing-high-risk-homebuyers-at-the-cost-of-those-with-good-credit/
最近关于rmbs的media讨论很多，我们大组刚请了mortgage组的人来讲座，谈到了这个LLPA，根本不是隔壁lz说的。official link:https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/media/9391/display.
大家看到信用分数越高，llpa越低，LTV越小downpay就越高，明明是downpay越多，分数越低。ltv大于80以上，一般会要求再买private insurance，最后算下来，并没有优惠。这上面的数字不是直接加在prevailing mortgage rate上的，而是（llpa-1%）/4，也就是说这上面少于1%的llpa，得出的是比prevailing mortgage rate要低
这个llpa只对conventional mortgage才有影响，按2023的标准对72万一下的loan才有影响。
隔壁标题危言耸听了。但是biden推行这个趋势很不好。银行是要挣钱的，根据信用收入downpay算出来每种应该收多少利率。biden这样搞，就是用行政干预市场，让信用好的补贴差的。 FHA只是市场一部分，但是开了这个头，其他loan也会慢慢搞起来的。 这怎么是不让穷人买房了？穷人也可以提高信用得到好利率。没钱，信用差，政府还强制银行降低该有的利率，这部分钱哪里来的？为什么中产和好信用的就那么倒霉
就是啊，能用人话解释一下吗？
贷款利率相同
不会
这个是 08金融危机以后，两房开始加入的一个指标
你的贷款的每个月的还款， 那个是 amortization + 你每个月的 escrow 里要扣得钱
固定利率贷款，每个月的 amortization 部分的钱是固定值，
讨论这些问题之前，
把基本的房贷 搞清楚 最好
用fannie和freddie两房来担保兜底美国房市就是妥妥的行政干预市场啊，只是人家仅仅干预residential housing，不干预office，hotel，warehouse这些房地产。 什么叫开这个头？难道真的不希望穷人有房子住了？
你的问题的 正确 问法是：
相同信用背景的人， 同样的贷款额和 downplay 额度，
5/1 前和后，能拿到的利率是否会有区别。
哈
不可思议
那个女的就是个造谣狂传谣狂，资深阴谋论和极端川粉，当年投票机作弊等等，造谣传谣的可厉害了。 都不是一般的那种粉了，她嘴里没一句真话， 属于有精神疾病的。别和她一般见识就好。
看来大家都知道。
并不是大家都知道啊。我睡一觉醒来，好多个微信群里都传疯了。
有些人是狗改不了吃屎，有些人是专门爱吃屎，抱团取暖，各取所需。粉的意义就在此
造谣传谣是黄右的本性 你看看是不是都是黄右在转发
错了，不是她的帖子一夜之间传遍全网，而是川粉们的行动都是有组织的，有的负责在华人造谣，有的负责在文学城造谣，有的负责在各种微信群造谣
我只想知道： 相同downpayment情况下，一个信用780和一个信用580的人拿到利率的差距，5月1日后是不是缩小了？ 如果是的话，本质还是奖恶罚善么．．．
造谣也得有人信啊！
国人这种焦虑体制，真是没辙，
教育程度不低，
经济状况也可以，
如果关心这个话题说明买过房或者要买房，
贷款的一些最基本的常识，也搞不清楚，
真是无语
我的理解是缩小了 但说奖恶罚善也算不上，有些人就有这个毛病 觉得自己占不到便宜就是吃了大亏
那个帖子信的人还少吗
这里没有
恶 和 善
学会改变你的思维
是不少
所以 不可思议
这种国内 教育 出来的
焦虑体质，终身携带，
真的无解
造谣低成本是一个，另外一个是这些造谣的瘾真大， 每天不造谣传谣浑身难受，政治邪念一上头，真是可悲。
在有的人眼里人家信用分数不好就是恶人呗 穷就是原罪 反正自己不穷 自己就是善的化身
差距是有缩小的。但是没到奖恶罚善的地步，信用好的还是比信用差的有利。而且信用分780以上的人没受到什么影响。
奖懒罚勤？相对的．．．也就是大锅饭么．．． 和占不占便宜没关系，从土共改革前生产队大锅饭的经验教训看，这总机制对社会有危害
这就是所谓的上纲上线
有的人眼里没赚到便宜就是吃了大亏 当然可以理解为被惩罚了
那个贴可以说是右党的高潮贴了 可算是又一次抓住了民主党的小辫子
问题是如果base利率一样的基础上，利率不会相同啊，费用打进利率了
有些政策是出于好的intention 但是对被target帮助的群体没有益处甚至造成damage. 这样的例子有很多。经济政策的微调都应该谨慎。 楼里某些人只想攻击，无法好好讨论。我不再发言了
信用分不好不能等同于穷吧，我挺穷的，信用分也有800以上，年收入5，60万的也有信用分不到700的啊 大部分信用分不好的应该是无法合理根据收入水平来安排生活水准的吧
我理解你说的。也同意你说的。 我单纯是想指出隔壁帖子的说法是不正确的。我们要讨论政策，得基于事实，不能胡编乱造。
还有，什么右啊左的。吵政治架的人真的很烦。
mm你错了，有些人就是为了自己心爱的候选人、政客、政党，可以无所不用其极的造谣传谣、污染信息、欺骗别人，作贱自己，都在所不惜
有些人真的是这样，真是精神疾病了，好些还是在美国读过博士和有正经工作的， 有时候群里看到这么几个群魔乱舞， 只要稍微用点脑子都知道是假的，她们传起来信誓旦旦的，真觉得可怕。
任何一个群，只要有几个极端疯狂的川粉上窜下跳，基本上就废掉了，没法看了。
我也好奇这有什么可转的
不是
The result, according to industry pros: pricier monthly mortgage payments for most homebuyers — an ugly surprise for those who worked for years to build their credit, only to face higher costs than they expected as part of a housing affordability push by the US Federal Housing Finance Agency.
“It’s going to be a challenge trying to explain to somebody that says, ‘I worked my whole life for high credit and I’ve put a lot of money down and you’re telling me that’s a negative now?’ That’s a hard conversation to have,” one worried Arizona-based mortgage loan originator told The Post.
“It’s unprecedented,” added David Stevens, who served as Federal Housing Administration commissioner during the Obama administration. “My email is full from mortgage companies and CEOs [telling] me how unbelievably shocked they are by this move.”
“This was a blatant and significant cut of fees for their highest-risk borrowers and a clear increase in much better credit quality buyers – which just clarified to the world that this move was a pretty significant cross-subsidy pricing change,” added Stevens, who is also the former CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association.
P. S. Source: https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/how-the-us-is-subsidizing-high-risk-homebuyers-at-the-cost-of-those-with-good-credit/
不是穷人的人为什么要关心穷人买不买得起房子，穷人都睡大街也和他无关
只要不是睡他家旁边的大街
政客不见得懂业务。这个fee是按揭的cost不是利息的高低。信用差得如果不够资格拿到房贷，新政策下一样拿不到。所以不是放宽放贷资格，而是拿到房贷以后得一部分费用计算改了
是