Revised HMDA Rule Published

Important Changes Made to HMDA

-- Download Revised HMDA Rule Published as PDF --

The CFPB published revisions to HMDA yesterday, August 24th, 2017.

Open End Threshold Increase is Official

The revisions include the temporary increase in the open end volume threshold (from 100 in each of the two prior years to 500).  The temporary increase in the open end volume threshold (from 100 in each of the two prior years to 500) is now official for two years while the Bureau studies the issue to arrive at the best threshold. You must meet the threshold in each of the two years prior to the reporting year in order to be required to report – so that will be 2016 and 2017 to measure volume for 2018 reporting. If you miss the threshold in one of the two prior years, you are not required to report. Voluntary reporting is allowed and will be helpfult to institutions that hover around the threshold and could otherwise stop and start reporting.

Multifamily – Multiple 1 to 4 Family Properties Will NOT Be Treated as Multifamily!

Yahoo is all I can say.  The CFPB has done a turnaround, thank goodness, and decided that 5 or more 1 to 4 family homes taken as collateral will NOT be treated as a loan secured by a multifamily property.  This is a relief as it presented a number of problems, particularly CRA reporting, let alone training. Their comment in the analysis section states:

“After careful consideration of all the comments received, the Bureau now believes that it is not appropriate to add language to comment 2(f)–2 providing that a loan secured by five or more separate dwellings in more than one location is a loan secured by a multifamily dwelling. To ensure clarity and facilitate compliance, the Bureau is now changing the language proposed in the April 2017 HMDA Proposal to provide explicitly that such a loan is not secured by a multifamily dwelling. The Bureau is also altering the example provided to clarify that the multilocation loan described in the example should not be reported as secured by a multifamily dwelling.”

Revisions to Appendix B on Reporting Demographic Data

Applicants can select whatever they want; the financial institution is limited to reporting 5 ethnicities and 5 races per applicant. An applicant can select both Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino.  A person can certainly have mixed ethnicity and will be able to report that if they wish.

There is updated information on how to report when an applicant selects a subcategory but no aggregate race or ethnicity, or writes in a race or ethnicity but does not select “Other”.

This chart will walk you through the demographic changes.

Voluntary Reporting of Geocoding

The rule now says that an institution can voluntarily report geocoding outside of MSAs where they have an office and regardless of county population.  This is a good clarification; the current rule allows this and many institutions have geocoding automated and picking out applications not to report is extra work (and open up the data for more errors).  Additionally, for penetration analysis, you need to know where applications and loans are located, so you need the geocoding data.

We will be issuing more detail on the revisions (there are other changes) and offering training and other resources as we enter this final run up to January 1, 2018.

You can find the revised rule, and an Executive Summary of the changes, at this link.

The 2018 FIG has also been revised and is available here.


Try the HMDA Academy – 6 Months for $450

HMDA Delay Proposed by Treasury

-- Download HMDA Delay Proposed by Treasury as PDF --

You may have heard that the Treasury Department released a report to the President entitled:

“A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities

Banks and Credit Unions”


You can access the full report at this link:  Treasury Report.

On page 100, it states the following regarding HMDA:

“Delay Implementation of HMDA Reporting Requirements Fundamental concerns remain about the efficiency of the HMDA regime, borrower privacy, and competitive harm to lenders through disclosure of proprietary information. The CFPB should delay the 2018 implementation of the new HMDA requirements until borrower privacy is adequately addressed and the industry is better positioned to implement the new requirements. The new requirements should be examined for utility and cost burden, particularly on smaller lending institutions. Consideration should be given to moving responsibility for HMDA back to bank regulators, discontinuing public use, and revising regulatory applications.”

This, of course, leaves things up in the air at the moment, pending a proposal for changes to the rule and the proposed clarification ppublished in April.  Note it does not call for a repeal of HMDA, it calls for a delay and revision.

Hopefully, we will see action from the CFPB quickly because we have the 2017 submissions to deal with at year end that are part of that rule.  Also, there are changes in the rule that are beneficial such as the agricultural finance exclusion and clearer instructions on existing fields; I would hate to see those changed.  Bear in mind, that a delay in HMDA must be done a calendar year at a time, it cannot be a delay of a few months.

This potential delay could clearly be beneficial for many but it creates potential problems for vendors and for some larger institutions that have programmed in-house for the new rule.  A delay will give more time for testing, at least for the revised rule, but not for the 2017 submission. Year end is coming up fast so lets hope for minimal chaos around changing that new submission process!

The statement about ending public use of the data concerns me – not because I love the data being publicly available, but because I am concerned that regulators would have the data for peer comparisons and the financial institutions would not, causing them to enter exams without all necessary knowledge.  Let’s hope that would not happen and that any proposal will contain clarity on that subject. If it creates a disadvantage for financial institutions in the exam process, be sure to comment.

The proposal also recommends returning HMDA back to bank regulators – it is not clear what that means.  HMDA was traditionally the responsibility of the Federal Reserve and the other regulators, the prudential regulators, handled examinations for their banks, etc. The difference now is that the CFPB “owns” the regulation and examines larger institutions. That has not changed, other than the very large institutions examined by the CFPB.



Earlier HMDA Public Data Release & Fair Lending Analysis

Be Prepared

-- Download Earlier HMDA Public Data Release & Fair Lending Analysis as PDF --

Calculator, pen and business document

HMDA data is a key focus of fair lending analysis.

While many institutions analyze HMDA for fair lending performance throughout the year, there are others who wait until year end or even until after submission of annual data by March 1st. The delay in analysis until after March 1 worked to some extent because data was not released publicly until September of each year. Of course, any ability to address shortcomings mid-year is lost by waiting until year end.

This will all change with the new fully automated HMDA submission process beginning with the 2017 submission in early 2018.  The current plan is for the CFPB to publish the public HMDA data quickly, possibly as early as 30 days after submission. This will be possible because all edits will be managed online and there is only one submission method, a fully automated paperless process.

HMDA data will be in the hands not only of institutions and examiners within 30 days of submission, but also will be available to community groups and software vendors who download that data into programs that provide instant fair lending analysis.

What does this mean to HMDA reporting institutions? It means that it is more important than ever to be always on top of your HMDA data and the fair lending story it tells.  If you analyze data at year end, give serious consideration to analyzing throughout the year, uncovering any shortcomings and making needed changes to improve results or at least understand reasons for performance.

Don’t wait and undertake a last minute mad scramble to review the data submitted to prepare explanations of potential disparities such as different outcomes of similar applicants, pricing differences, and geographic penetration shortcomings. All data, other than any held back from the public files, will be published for the world to see in early second quarter.

This new publication schedule will likely begin with the 2017 data submitted in early 2018, the first year under the new automated process.  We do not know at this point if there will be any grace period for 2017 data, given it will be the first year with the new process.

The 2018 data submitted in early 2019 will, of course, contain greatly expanded HMDA data, making early analysis even more important.

Contact us if you have any questions on this or other HMDA issues.

Have you checked out The HMDA Academy?  The resources go far beyond webinars and conferences. Learn about it and find out how we can help!

Multiple Dwellings to be Treated as Multifamily Collateral

Proposed Clarifications to Revised HMDA

-- Download Multiple Dwellings to be Treated as Multifamily Collateral as PDF --

The CFPB issued proposed clarifications what will cause multiple dwellings securing a loan to be treated as multifamily dwellings for HMDA reporting as well as a number of other sections of the revised HMDA rule and Commentary on April 13, 2017.  The Bureau will be soliciting comments on the proposal once it has been published in the Federal Register. There are a number of large and small changes proposed.  One major change is the treatment of 5 or more individual dwellings of fewer than 5 units as multifamily collateral.

The Bureau believes that such a loan should be reported as secured by a multifamily dwelling. As with loans that are secured by multifamily dwellings in one location, the information that would be excluded from reporting under revised § 1003.4(a), such as the debt-to-income ratio discussed above, might also not be easily available, relevant, or useful for loans secured by five or more separate non-multifamily dwellings in more than one location. Consequently, to facilitate implementation and ensure the relevance and usefulness of the data collected, the Bureau proposes to add language to comment 2(f)-2 making clear that a loan secured by five or more separate dwellings in more than one location is a loan secured by a multifamily dwelling and providing an example. The Bureau solicits comment on this added language.

To implement this clarification, the revision to the Commentary on the definition of Dwelling is proposed to state:

“In addition, a loan secured by five or more separate dwellings in more than one location is a loan secured by a multifamily dwelling. For example, assume a landlord uses a covered loan to improve five or more rental property dwellings located in different parts of a town, and the loan is secured by those properties.  The loan should be reported as secured by a multifamily dwelling.”

A loan secured by or proposed to be secured by such a group of dwelling would follow multifamily rules when completing the HMDA LAR. These multiple dwellings will not necessarily be treated as multifamily for Community Reinvestment Act purposes, which will present challenges for financial institutions subject to CRA.

The complete proposed clarification can be found at this link.

We will review other proposed changes in future articles over the new few weeks. Two of the additional major changes are adjustments to reporting of race and ethnicity and the welcome exemption for builder construction financing.

Watch for the proposal in the Federal Register and submit your comments on the suggested changes.

Action Date for HMDA Transition

Here are the citations

-- Download Action Date for HMDA Transition as PDF --

Is It Application Date or Action Date for HMDA in 2018?

Recently, a number of questions have been asked about whether the revised HMDA rules going into effect 1/1/2018 apply only to applications taken in 2018.

Following normal HMDA reporting practices, and the instructions in the preamble to the final HMDA rule published in the Federal Register of October 28, 2015, the revised rule applies to all applications with an action taken date of January 1, 2018 and onward. Refer to Page 22657 of the Federal Register:

“This final rule applies to covered loans and applications with respect to which final action is taken beginning on January 1, 2018. Data on these covered loans and applications are submitted to the appropriate Federal agency pursuant to § 1003.5(a) beginning on January 1, 2019. For example, if a financial institution described in 2(g) of this part receives an application on January 1, 2018 and takes final action on that application on March 1, 2018, data about that application will be collected and recorded pursuant to § 1003.4, and submitted to the appropriate Federal agency by March 1, 2019 pursuant to § 1003.5(a). Similarly, if a financial institution described in 2(g) of this part receives an application on December 1, 2017 and does not take final action on that application until January 1, 2018, data about that application would be collected and recorded pursuant to § 1003.4 and submitted to the appropriate Federal agency by March 1, 2019 pursuant to § 1003.5(a).441 The final rule also applies to purchases that occur on or after January 1, 2018. For example, a financial institution described in 2(g) of this part that purchases a HMDA reportable loan on February 1, 2018 would collect and record data about that purchase pursuant to § 1003.4, and submit the data to the appropriate Federal agency by March 1, 2019 pursuant to § 1003.5(a).

441The Bureau understands that final action taken on an application may not occur until a few months after the application date. A financial institution may receive an application at the end of a calendar year but may not determine the final disposition of the application until the following calendar year.

Why Isn’t the Revised Rule Implemented Only for Applications Taken in 2018?

HMDA reporting involves an aggregation of data for applications with final action taken in a single calendar year. Applying the new rule only to applications taken in 2018 would leave applications taken in 2017 (or previously) and final action in 2018 unreported. There would have to be a special filing for those transactions, and what if some were not originated until 2019? That would be yet another separate submission. What would that do to fair lending analysis?

It truly makes more sense to apply the rule based upon action date.

Some have asked why HMDA reporting is not based on application date.  If HMDA data was gathered by application date, you would be including applications that have not yet reached a final processing stage and therefore would not yet have all required data available (including an action taken type or action taken date).  Until final action is taken, many aspects of the transaction can change including applicant names, loan amount, collateral address, interest rate, etc. Additionally, reported transactions must be geocoded using the same annual year census data in order to allow for meaningful comparisons and analysis.

TRID implementation could be done by application date because the TRID rules are applied on an application by application basis, and not aggregated together systemically in the manner of HMDA data.

Historical Reporting

HMDA has always been reported by action date.  The current HMDA Getting It Right Guide states (Page 7):

“A LAR for a given calendar year must contain all reportable applications that reached final action (e.g., origination of a loan, denial of an application) in that year, regardless in which year the application was submitted. The LAR should exclude applications that have not yet reached a final action; those applications should appear on the LAR for the calendar year in which they reach final action.”

Planning for the Transition

Transitioning to the new HMDA rule will take planning and pipeline management.  Be prepared to capture the new fields on applications taken prior to 2018 and already in the pipeline.  As year end 2017 approaches, it might be possible to finalize open applications prior to year end provided regulatory and safety and soundness considerations are observed (don’t deny all open applications on December 31, 2017!) Some applications simply will not be ready for final action.  For those, be prepared to have all data available to report for the revised HMDA LAR.

There are nine months left in 2017 – start planning for the transition.

Ethnicity, Race and Sex Transition Rule

There is a special transition rule for using and reporting the expanded ethnicity and race information on applicants. The CFPB has issued a chart that explains the process well. The aggregate ethnicity data means “Hispanic or Latino” or “Not Hispanic or Latino”.  Aggregate race refers to the major categories now in use (American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; and White).

Disaggregated data refers to the subcategories that can be selected by applicants for 2018 reporting, such as Mexican, Puerto Rican or Cuban, for ethnicity.

For 2017, only aggregate data will be reported even if the financial institution voluntarily collected the disaggregated data.  The disaggregated data is not “official” until 2018.

Race Ethnicity Use Chart


HMDA Academy banner

Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) for HMDA

Time to Order

-- Download Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) for HMDA as PDF --

Who Needs an LEI

LEI questions are being asked frequently!

All HMDA reporters will have to obtain a Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) in order to use the new HMDA platform as of 1/1/2018. All HMDA reporters will use the new HMDA platform, even if your institution uses vendor software to initially prepare your data.

Therefore, every institution that will be a HMDA reporter in 2018 must obtain an LEI. You should get it on your agenda now to avoid an end of year rush.

The institution that is submitting a HMDA file needs an LEI, a parent company’s LEI cannot be utilized. The LEI must be specific to the HMDA reporter submitting data.

Why Do We Need an LEI

The CFPB chose to use an existing legal entity numbering system to replace the various IDs currently in use as Respondent IDs for HMDA reporting.  The LEI process was not developed just for HMDA.

The Global Markets Entity Identifier (GMEI) utility is DTCC’s (Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation) legal entity identifier (LEI) solution. The solution was designed to create and apply a single, universal standard identifier to any organization or firm involved in a financial transaction globally and was developed in response to the financial crisis of 2008- 2009 after governments and regulators called for new financial market regulation.

The CFPB did not “cook this up” solely for HMDA!

Ordering an LEI

Use the following website to order the LEI:

GMEI Utility

Is Your Legal Entity Already Registered?

Check first to see if your firm is already registered.  Many are, for various reasons.

You can search your firm’s name by clicking on the search symbol at the top right and entering key words. The search box will appear when you click on the magnifying glass.

picture of legal entity identifier search


Make use of the Help section and manual and FAQs.  Those can be accessed at the top left under Help and Documents.

LEI Help section


Cost to Register for an LEI

The total cost to initially register for an LEI is $219, the $200 fee and a $19 surcharge.  Annual renewals are $100 plus the $19 surcharge.

Payment is made on the site; payments come through as an international transaction because the GMEI is in Europe.

Completion of the Transaction

The User Manual, in the Help section, will walk you through the process.

Get it done now and have one less thing to remember in this very busy year!


Just Getting Started with the Revised HMDA Rules?

Advice on First Steps

-- Download Just Getting Started with the Revised HMDA Rules? as PDF --

We are now in the last 11 and 1/4 months before the revised HMDA rules go into effect on January 1, 2018.

If you are just beginning to look at the new rules, you have a big task ahead of you. There are several tasks that need to be done before diving into the requirements for reporting individual fields:

• If the financial institution is a smaller reporter, determine if it is a mandatory reporter for 2017, and again for 2018. There are new loan volume thresholds that can exempt some smaller reporters (depository institutions only in 2017 and all lenders in 2018). You can review a lesson on the new volume thresholds here.

• Review the Small Entity Compliance Guide, no matter the size of your financial institution. It provides a good overview of the changes but is not a substitute for learning the regulation and the Commentary.

• Work with the lending divisions and product areas at your financial institution to become familiar with the application and underwriting process and develop data on where specific data is stored (e.g., credit scores, loan to value, property value, automated underwriting system results, etc.), and how it will be transferred to the HMDA LAR. You can opt in to this blog for regulatory and training updates and receive a project plan plus some additional HMDA charts. The link is on this page on the right.

• Lastly, fully understand what properties are reportable for HMDA beginning in 2018. The rules have changed; there are new exclusions from the definition of dwelling and new rules for treatment of agricultural loans and agricultural properties with dwellings, and revised rules for mixed use properties that affect what is considered a dwelling.

Once it has been determined that the financial institution is a HMDA reporter, and there is an understanding of what properties are dwellings for HMDA, then begin to go through the revised rule and Commentary and lastly the Filing Instruction Guide (FIG). The FIG contains additional information, including a few instructions that are not in the regulation or Commentary at this time.

The Commentary is mandatory reading; if you only review the regulation itself, you will not understand the actual reporting requirements or definitions. The detailed requirements (what, when and how) are primarily contained in the Commentary. The Commentary is available at the CFPB’s eregulation site, where it is linked to the regulation, and also at BankersOnline. Make sure you read the rule for the proper reporting year.

If you want help with all of this work, consider enrolling in The HMDA Academy.

CFPB Posts 2017 HMDA LAR Tool

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has published an HMDA formatting tool for 2017 HMDA. The tool is available at this link.

The tool allows for data entry directly into Excel, including transmittal sheet data. When the time comes to upload to the data to the HMDA platform, simply click the Create LAR File button in the top left cell! A macro will then create the properly formatted text file for upload.

The formatting tool has the added benefit of pop-ups with the possible codes for each field. I think those who relied upon the FFIEC software will find this Excel tool very user friendly and helpful. It is ready to use as soon as you download it.

HMDA and Fields Tied to Regulation Z

This article should help to unravel any confusion

-- Download HMDA and Fields Tied to Regulation Z as PDF --

confusion illustration

There is a section of the revised HMDA LAR, effective 1/1/2018, that requires reporting of certain charges for consumer purpose closed end loans. The Small Entity Guide refers to these fields as “Data points for certain loans subject to Regulation Z”. On the HMDA LAR for 2018 they are fields 73 through 77.

This article and accompanying chart are my year end gift to you! On first reading, these requirements can make your head spin. The chart below illustrates what and when to report.

Four of the fields pull data from the TRID closing disclosure – Loan Costs, Borrower Paid Origination Charges, Discount Points paid to reduce the interest rate, and Lender Credits. The Points and Fees field requires reporting of points and fees calculated according to 1026.32 for consumer purpose HMDA reportable closed end loans not subject to TRID but subject to Ability to Repay.

The reportable transactions must of course be HMDA reportable.  TRID applies only to consumer purpose, closed end transactions with land as collateral. Ability to Repay applies to consumer purpose closed end loans secured by 1 to 4 family dwellings. The chart in this article reflects how the requirements are applied for HMDA reporting.

The Loan Costs and Point and Fees fields are related and apply only to closed end consumer purpose loans secured by 1 to 4 family dwellings because of the tie to Ability to Repay (1026.43(c). The Loan Cost field is tied to TRID, so will apply to those loans with land as collateral. The Points and Fees field is not related to TRID, so will apply only to those loans without land. If you report Loan Costs because there is land as collateral, you will report NA for Points and Fees.  Conversely, if you have no land as collateral, such as for a manufactured home without land, you will report NA for loan costs because the loan is not subject to TRID and instead report under points and fees.

The last three fields (Origination Charges, Discount Points, and Lender Credits) have no tie to Ability to Repay; they relate only to HMDA and TRID.

It is important to understand that 0, NA and a blank field are not equivalent on the HMDA LAR.

For loan costs, points and fees, and origination charges, report 0 if the transaction is subject to the field but there are no charges to report and report NA if the transaction is not subject to the field. Do not leave these three fields blank.

For discount points and lender credits, if the transaction is subject to reporting for the field and there is no data to report, leave the field blank – do not report 0 or NA. If the transaction is not subject to the field, report NA.

Applications that do not result in originated loans will always be reported as NA for these fields.

Purchased loans that were not originated under TRID rules (applications received prior to 10/3/2015) will always be reported as NA. Purchased loans originated under TRID rules are covered.

The following chart gives a basic overview of how this section of the HMDA LAR will work according to the Commentary and the Filing Instructions Guide (FIG).


If you have not yet subscribed to this blog to stay up to date on regulatory articles and training opportunities, you can sign up at the top right.  Also consider the HMDA Academy if you want more in depth training and consulting for the HMDA revisions.