On October 22, 2026, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Decreasing Housing Costs for the American People,” directing the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and other federal agencies to pursue a series of measures aimed at reducing the ongoing costs of homeownership and mortgage financing. The order states that it is the policy of the Administration to “reduce regulatory barriers to mortgage origination and costs impeding homeownership; embrace innovative risk and value assessment technologies…to drive down mortgage and homeownership costs; and promote competition and innovation throughout the housing and mortgage market.” In furtherance of those policy goals, the order focuses on four areas: proactive cancellation of mortgage insurance through a new GSE pilot program, standardization of manufactured housing permitting, expansion of alternatives to title insurance on refinance transactions, and reduction of interest rates on single-family home loans made directly by the USDA and VA.

Proactive Cancellation of Mortgage Insurance

Section 2 authorizes the FHFA director, “if he determines that it is in the best interests of” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or the FHFA, and the American public, to have the GSEs establish a pilot program for proactive mortgage insurance (MI) cancellation on single-family loans. Under the program, the GSEs would periodically review loans they own, guarantee, or securitize, using automated valuation models (AVMs) and other available data to assess current market value and identify borrowers who appear to satisfy equity and other requirements for MI cancellation. Notably, the pilot would apply only to mortgages originated after its establishment, not to existing loans.

This provision has the potential to change the operational dynamics of MI cancellation. Under existing practice, MI cancellation is typically borrower-initiated, and many borrowers who have reached the requisite equity level continue paying premiums because they are unaware of their eligibility or do not take the steps to request cancellation. Under the pilot, the GSEs would proactively identify eligible borrowers using their own AVMs and data, and servicers would be required to “notify borrowers promptly” when their MI qualifies for cancellation. Additionally, servicers would be required by the GSEs to “reduce or eliminate unnecessary documentation requests, appraisal costs, and other administrative barriers to cancellation” so that the process could move forward without undue friction. This shift to proactive GSE-driven MI cancellation would require servicers to build or adapt systems to receive and act on GSE notifications, adjust escrow and payment processing, and communicate the change to borrowers.

Because the order gives the FHFA director discretion over whether and when to act, the key compliance variable is timing. Servicers of newly originated GSE loans should watch for FHFA and GSE guidance and be prepared to stand up new notification and documentation workflows on relatively short notice.

Task Force on Manufactured Housing Innovation

Section 3 establishes a “Task Force on Manufactured Housing Innovation,” co-chaired by the secretary of HUD and the FHFA director, and includes the USDA, Commerce, and VA secretaries. Within 180 days, the Task Force must submit recommendations to the president, through the assistant to the president for economic policy, to “facilitate the use of modern manufacturing methods in the production of manufactured and other factory-built housing eligible for Federal housing programs.”

In particular, the Task Force is to recommend actions that would:

• promote consistent specifications, certifications, and approvals across federal housing and housing-finance programs;
• establish reciprocal recognition of licenses, certifications, and inspections among agencies where doing so would avoid unnecessary duplication;
• eliminate federal requirements and duplicative reviews that unnecessarily impede advanced manufacturing techniques or increase the time or cost of bringing homes to market;
• leverage federal financing, insurance, guarantee, and other program authorities to encourage innovation and increase production of affordable manufactured and factory-built homes; and
• promote competition among manufacturers while maintaining appropriate standards for safety, quality, and consumer protection.

The Task Force is also directed to “evaluate whether, and under what existing statutory authorities,” federal grant funding “may be conditioned on, or be used to incentivize, State and local adoption of standardized permitting and licensing for manufactured and other factory-built housing.” The Task Force must then prepare legislative recommendations to codify those policies, and agency heads serving on the Task Force must implement its recommendations within their respective authorities.

For lenders that finance manufactured or factory-built housing, the reciprocal-recognition and standardized-permitting provisions are the ones to watch. Inconsistent permitting and approval regimes across jurisdictions primarily affect builders and manufacturers, but the downstream impact on lenders is real: unpredictable local requirements make it harder to standardize lending processes and suppress the overall volume of manufactured housing eligible for financing.

Expanding Alternatives to Title Insurance on Refinances

In 2024, the FHFA launched a title acceptance pilot allowing certain refinance borrowers to close without a lender’s title insurance policy. Section 4 authorizes the FHFA director to direct the GSEs to expand the pilot into an ongoing, nationwide program under which Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac could accept an automated title review or other FHFA-approved title-risk assessment “in lieu of a lender’s title insurance policy on eligible refinance transactions.” As with Section 2, the expansion is conditioned on the FHFA director’s determination that it is in the “best interests” of the GSEs or the FHFA, and the American public, and further that it is “consistent with financial safety and soundness, the director’s authorities as regulator and conservator, and applicable law.”

In expanding the program, the FHFA director is to consider:

• extending eligibility to refinance transactions with loan-to-value ratios above the current 80 percent limit where title risk remains low;
• removing geographic limitations and certifying additional title-assessment providers to promote competition;
• waiving appraisals, income re-verification, and other documentation requirements for limited cash-out refinances that reduce the borrower’s monthly payment where the GSEs’ existing data support doing so; and
• reducing or eliminating loan-level price adjustments and other GSE fees on such refinances.

The order also requires that resulting cost savings “be passed through to borrowers and that lenders inform borrowers of those savings.”

For lenders, expanding the title acceptance pilot into an ongoing, nationwide program could meaningfully reduce closing costs and timelines on refinance transactions, which in turn could increase refinance volume. However, lenders would need to develop workflows to determine loan eligibility under the expanded program and comply with the order’s requirement that cost savings be passed through to and disclosed to borrowers. The scope and timing of any expansion remain subject to the FHFA director’s determination. Lenders should watch for FHFA and GSE guidance as it develops, particularly around the certification of title-assessment providers and the scope of documentation waivers.

It is also worth noting that the title insurance industry has opposed the title acceptance pilot since its inception, and the response to the executive order authorizing its expansion was immediate. On the same day the order was signed, the American Land Title Association (ALTA) published a statement emphasizing the risks of reducing title protections at a time when fraud threats are growing. ALTA cited recent research showing that 59% of surveyed title firms experienced seller impersonation fraud attempts in 2025, up from 28% in 2024, and that fraud and forgery account for more than 40% of title insurance losses and expenses associated with mortgage refinances.

USDA and VA Direct Loan Rate Reductions

Section 5 directs the USDA and VA secretaries, “consistent with applicable law and available appropriations,” to reduce the interest rates charged on single-family home loans made directly by their respective departments. This provision is narrower in scope than the others, as it applies only to direct loans originated by the USDA and the VA rather than to the broader mortgage market. Nonetheless, for institutions that participate in or service these programs, any rate adjustments could affect origination volume and competitive positioning.

Conditions and Constraints

The executive order’s scope is broad, but its operative provisions are conditioned in important ways. First, the MI cancellation pilot and the title acceptance pilot expansion both require the FHFA director to first determine that action is in the “best interests” of the GSEs or the FHFA, and the American public. Only after those determinations are made will the GSEs be called upon to act. Notably, the order preserves existing agency authority and requires that implementation be “consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.” The scope and timing of real-world change will be shaped as much by existing law and funding availability as by the order’s stated policy goals.

What This Means Going Forward

If the FHFA director makes the requisite determinations, the MI cancellation pilot and title acceptance pilot expansion could be carried out through FHFA directives and GSE guidance without a full rulemaking process, potentially on a shorter timeline than traditional regulatory reform.

The manufactured housing Task Force recommendations are due within 180 days (late April 2027), and agency heads serving on the Task Force must implement those recommendations within their respective authorities — meaning practical effects could begin to materialize shortly after submission, depending on the scope of the recommendations.

The USDA and VA rate reductions, by contrast, are expressly conditioned on available appropriations, so funding constraints could limit how far or how quickly either agency can act.

For lenders, servicers, and title insurers, the practical takeaway is to begin assessing how these changes would affect existing workflows, particularly around MI cancellation processes, refinance closing procedures, manufactured housing lending, and government direct loan programs. Otherwise, the industry can only monitor FHFA, GSE, and Task Force guidance as it develops.

We will also be monitoring these developments as they emerge and will provide updates on this blog.