Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program rule (2024)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program rule is a significant rule issued by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) effective June 18, 2024, that amended the regulations governing the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program to clarify its rules, minimize risk for stakeholders, and increase participation from financial institutions. HUD issued the rule pursuant to its authority under Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program
  • Code of Federal Regulations: 24 CFR 58 and 1005
  • Action: Final rule
  • Type of significant rule:Other significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    Background

    Since its creation in 1994, the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program has provided access to private housing financing to Native American families, Tribes, and tribally Designated Housing Entities (TDHEs), who faced challenges in obtaining mortgage lending due to "remote [home] locations, the specialized situation of observing Tribal courts and laws, and the unique Trust Land status of much of the land in Tribal areas," according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Section 184 Program has seen a steady increase in participation since 1994 and was advised in a 2015 audit of the program by the HUD Office of Inspector General to develop new regulations to strengthen its administration. Accordingly, HUD issued the Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program rule to minimize risk and increase participation for financial institutions.[1]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “ This final rule amends the regulations governing the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program ('Section 184 Program') to strengthen the program by clarifying rules for stakeholders. As the program has experienced an increase in demand, it is necessary that HUD update the Section 184 Program implementing regulations to minimize potential risk and increase program participation by financial institutions.[2] ”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “ This final rule adds participation and eligibility requirements for Lender Applicants, Direct Guarantee Lenders, Non-Direct Guarantee Lenders, Holders and Servicers and other financial institutions. This final rule clarifies the rules governing Tribal participation in the program, establishes underwriting requirements, specifies rules on the closing and endorsement process, establishes stronger and clearer servicing requirements, establishes program rules governing claims submitted by Servicers and paid by HUD, and adds standards governing monitoring, reporting, sanctions, and appeals. This final rule adds new definitions and makes statutory conforming amendments, including the categorical exclusion of the Section 184 Program in HUD's environmental review regulations. Ultimately, the changes made by this final rule promote program sustainability, increase Borrower protections, and provide clarity for new and existing Lenders who participate in the program.[2] ”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

    Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. Executive Order 14094, issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023, made changes to Executive Order 12866, including referring to economically significant rules as section 3(f)(1) significant rules and raising the monetary threshold for economic significance to $200 million or more.[1]


    The text of the Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program rule states that OMB deemed this rule significant, but not economically significant:

    “ This final rule was determined to be a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review), and therefore was reviewed by OMB. However, this final rule was not deemed to be significant under Section 3(f)(1).[2] ”

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 Federal Register, "Strengthening the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program," March 26, 2024
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Strengthening_the_Section_184_Indian_Housing_Loan_Guarantee_Program_rule_(2024)&oldid=10691987"