EO-14393
Promoting Access to Mortgage Credit
- Signed
- Mar 13, 2026
- Published
- Mar 18, 2026
Federal Register: 2026-05384
Source: Federal Register.
Reduces mortgage lending regulations, especially for smaller banks
Impact7/10
What it does
This order directs multiple federal financial regulators — including the CFPB, Federal Reserve, FDIC, OCC, NCUA, FHFA, HUD, VA, and USDA — to consider reducing or modifying mortgage lending rules that were largely put in place after the 2008 financial crisis. It would loosen requirements around ability-to-repay standards, home appraisals, data reporting, capital rules, and enforcement penalties, with a particular focus on banks with under $100 billion in assets. The order also directs agencies to modernize the mortgage process by expanding digital signatures, electronic closings, and AI-based property valuation tools.
Who benefits
Community banks and smaller regional banks (under $100 billion in assets) that would face lower compliance costs. Rural households and low-to-moderate income borrowers who may gain access to mortgage credit from community lenders. First-time homebuyers who could benefit from faster, cheaper closings. Small residential homebuilders who could access more construction lending. Mortgage loan officers at smaller banks who may face fewer licensing requirements. Borrowers in underserved markets where large banks have pulled back.
Who is affected
Borrowers who currently rely on consumer protection rules — such as ability-to-repay requirements and mandatory disclosures — to guard against unsuitable loans. Homeowners in foreclosure who could face simplified loss-mitigation processes with fewer protections. Traditional licensed appraisers whose work could be displaced by AI valuation tools and relaxed qualification standards. Fair-lending advocates and researchers who use Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, which could be reduced in scope. Taxpayers who could bear risk if reduced capital requirements contribute to future bank instability. Non-bank mortgage servicers who may face a less level competitive playing field if bank-specific exemptions expand.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that post-2008 mortgage regulations, while well-intentioned, imposed compliance costs so high that community banks — which historically served rural and lower-income borrowers — have largely exited the mortgage market, concentrating lending in large non-bank institutions that carry their own systemic risks. They contend that tailoring rules to the actual risk profile of smaller portfolio lenders, rather than applying one-size-fits-all standards, would restore competition, lower rates, and extend credit to creditworthy borrowers who are currently underserved — all within the president's Article II authority to direct executive agencies.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the consumer protection rules targeted by this order — including ability-to-repay standards, mandatory disclosures, and enforcement penalties — were enacted by Congress specifically to prevent the predatory lending practices that triggered the 2008 financial crisis and harmed millions of borrowers. They contend that reducing HMDA data collection would weaken the government's ability to detect discriminatory lending patterns, potentially in tension with the Fair Housing Act's disparate-impact standard recognized in Texas Department of Housing v. Inclusive Communities (2015), and that loosening capital requirements for smaller banks could shift financial risk onto the broader system and ultimately onto taxpayers.
Constitutional basis
Executive orders rest on constitutional authority or statutory delegation. This summary describes the legal grounding cited or implied by the order.
The order rests on the president's Article II, Section 3 Take Care Clause authority to direct executive branch agencies in implementing federal statutes. It also draws on statutory delegations embedded in the Dodd-Frank Act (Public Law 111-203), the Truth in Lending Act (TILA, Public Law 90-321), the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA, Public Law 93-533), and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act — all of which grant rulemaking discretion to the relevant agencies. Because the order directs independent agencies (CFPB, Federal Reserve, FDIC, NCUA, OCC) to "consider" rule changes rather than mandating them, it operates at the boundary of presidential supervisory authority over independent regulators.