<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Real Estate Institute&#039;s Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.instituteonline.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com</link>
	<description>Timely and Useful Information For Professional Licensees</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:26:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Instructions for Completing Your Illinois Real Estate License Transition Application by Real Estate Institute</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/10/11/instructions-for-completing-your-illinois-real-estate-license-transition-application/#comment-238</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Real Estate Institute]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=459#comment-238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[William - congratulations on your successful license transition! To earn your managing broker license, you should start by registering for our Complete Managing Broker Pre-License Program.  Click &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.instituteonline.com/Illinois-Real-Estate-PreLicense-Managing-Broker.asp?pageview=learn&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; for detailed course information. Please call 800-995-1700 to speak with us if you have any questions after reviewing the information at our website.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>William &#8211; congratulations on your successful license transition! To earn your managing broker license, you should start by registering for our Complete Managing Broker Pre-License Program.  Click <a href="http://www.instituteonline.com/Illinois-Real-Estate-PreLicense-Managing-Broker.asp?pageview=learn" rel="nofollow">here</a> for detailed course information. Please call 800-995-1700 to speak with us if you have any questions after reviewing the information at our website.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Instructions for Completing Your Illinois Real Estate License Transition Application by William Duckworth</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/10/11/instructions-for-completing-your-illinois-real-estate-license-transition-application/#comment-234</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[William Duckworth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 12:49:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=459#comment-234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I passed test and have Broker Lic. and would like to continue education to become managing Broker in the next year what is the step&#039;s i need to take?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I passed test and have Broker Lic. and would like to continue education to become managing Broker in the next year what is the step&#8217;s i need to take?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on EXTENSION OF PAYROLL TAX CUT CONTAINS A HIKE IN MORTGAGE FEES by Peter Citera - Real Estate Institute</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/12/23/extension-of-payroll-tax-cut-contains-a-hike-in-mortgage-fees/#comment-218</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Citera - Real Estate Institute]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:26:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=520#comment-218</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s a good question, Ron.  In this case, the idea had strong bi-partisan support.  The original sponsor of the legislation in the Senate was Robert Casey (D-PA), but the bill did not pass in its original form.  The language that was put in the final Senate version was taken from Casey&#039;s bill, but was altered slightly by the leadership (likely Senator Reid&#039;s office).  On the House side, the idea first found its way into legislation from Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), but the final compromise to get the languagage to agree was likely hashed out in Speaker Boehner&#039;s office.  At the end of the day, the legislation passed the Senate and the House with support from members of both parties over the objection of the Mortgage Bankers&#039; Association, the National Association of Realtors and the National Association of Homebuilders.

You can trace the concept of hiking mortgage fees to pay for Government expenses back to the bi-partisan Debt Relief Committee that failed spectacularly in accomplishing anything back in November.  One of the key points of agreement in that committee was that Fannie and Freddie guarantee fees could be increased to pay down the debt.  Most industry groups strongly oppose Fannie/Freddie fees being used for anything OTHER than paying for expenses and risk related to those entities.  Representative Camp seems to believe that increasing the fees will incent the private sector to step into the mortgage market again by making GSE loans more expensive.  I&#039;m of the opinion that he&#039;s incorrect - that private enterprises will have no interest in large-scale MBS securitizations unless and until we&#039;ve found a bottom in home values (which won&#039;t happen until we can work through the foreclosure backlog) and the industry knows what all of the implementing regulations for Dodd-Frank will look like.  For example, rumor has it that the risk-retention requirement is dead, at least in the form it took with the proposed QRM rule that was issued earlier this year, but we have no official word on that.  If it&#039;s dead, what&#039;s next?  The statute is pretty clear on risk-retention, even if it did give the Federal banking agencies a lot of latitude to implement it.  Right now, the only certainty is uncertainty, and that&#039;s not an environment that business likes.

Either way, using Fannie and Freddie fees to pay for non-housing related expenses is terrible policy (again, in my opinion) because Congress will be tempted to go back to the trough each time they need to pay for some new policy or other.  In other words, it addicts Congress to the GSEs at the same time that the stated goal is to UNWIND those agencies.  Ironically enough, even the FHFA was opposed to this idea for that reason.  Once Congress finds a new revenue source, it is loathe to let go of it, so the lingering question will continue to be what happens to the GSEs in the future?  That remains to be seen.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a good question, Ron.  In this case, the idea had strong bi-partisan support.  The original sponsor of the legislation in the Senate was Robert Casey (D-PA), but the bill did not pass in its original form.  The language that was put in the final Senate version was taken from Casey&#8217;s bill, but was altered slightly by the leadership (likely Senator Reid&#8217;s office).  On the House side, the idea first found its way into legislation from Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), but the final compromise to get the languagage to agree was likely hashed out in Speaker Boehner&#8217;s office.  At the end of the day, the legislation passed the Senate and the House with support from members of both parties over the objection of the Mortgage Bankers&#8217; Association, the National Association of Realtors and the National Association of Homebuilders.</p>
<p>You can trace the concept of hiking mortgage fees to pay for Government expenses back to the bi-partisan Debt Relief Committee that failed spectacularly in accomplishing anything back in November.  One of the key points of agreement in that committee was that Fannie and Freddie guarantee fees could be increased to pay down the debt.  Most industry groups strongly oppose Fannie/Freddie fees being used for anything OTHER than paying for expenses and risk related to those entities.  Representative Camp seems to believe that increasing the fees will incent the private sector to step into the mortgage market again by making GSE loans more expensive.  I&#8217;m of the opinion that he&#8217;s incorrect &#8211; that private enterprises will have no interest in large-scale MBS securitizations unless and until we&#8217;ve found a bottom in home values (which won&#8217;t happen until we can work through the foreclosure backlog) and the industry knows what all of the implementing regulations for Dodd-Frank will look like.  For example, rumor has it that the risk-retention requirement is dead, at least in the form it took with the proposed QRM rule that was issued earlier this year, but we have no official word on that.  If it&#8217;s dead, what&#8217;s next?  The statute is pretty clear on risk-retention, even if it did give the Federal banking agencies a lot of latitude to implement it.  Right now, the only certainty is uncertainty, and that&#8217;s not an environment that business likes.</p>
<p>Either way, using Fannie and Freddie fees to pay for non-housing related expenses is terrible policy (again, in my opinion) because Congress will be tempted to go back to the trough each time they need to pay for some new policy or other.  In other words, it addicts Congress to the GSEs at the same time that the stated goal is to UNWIND those agencies.  Ironically enough, even the FHFA was opposed to this idea for that reason.  Once Congress finds a new revenue source, it is loathe to let go of it, so the lingering question will continue to be what happens to the GSEs in the future?  That remains to be seen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on EXTENSION OF PAYROLL TAX CUT CONTAINS A HIKE IN MORTGAGE FEES by ronharriman</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/12/23/extension-of-payroll-tax-cut-contains-a-hike-in-mortgage-fees/#comment-214</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ronharriman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 15:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=520#comment-214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Which party inserted the real estate fee and who was it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which party inserted the real estate fee and who was it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on HVCC is dead, long live HVCC!  Fannie and Freddie announce new Appraiser Independence Requirements. by Erik the Red</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2010/10/20/hvcc-is-dead-long-live-hvcc-fannie-and-freddie-announce-new-appraiser-independence-requirements/#comment-208</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Erik the Red]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=104#comment-208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So here I enter, over a year after you posted this most informative piece. I am trying to approach FHA-approved lenders for direct FHA appraisal work. Most of them understand that they could give me direct work if they so desired but, even though HVCC has changed greatly, choose to just continue their course and use AMCs. I called the FHA hotline today and they told me that FHA loans were never directly affected by HVCC anyway, yet many lenders would rather just use a &quot;one-stop shopping&quot; model and get their appraisals and title searches done in one shot. Since the conflict of interest concerns mostly involved the mortgate brokers, is there anything you could recommend that I could use to my advantage by getting across to these lenders that using my services could be beneficial? Or is it simply a fact that they can get the same results regardless of which path they use to employ an appraser, except that the appraiser earns half the fee?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So here I enter, over a year after you posted this most informative piece. I am trying to approach FHA-approved lenders for direct FHA appraisal work. Most of them understand that they could give me direct work if they so desired but, even though HVCC has changed greatly, choose to just continue their course and use AMCs. I called the FHA hotline today and they told me that FHA loans were never directly affected by HVCC anyway, yet many lenders would rather just use a &#8220;one-stop shopping&#8221; model and get their appraisals and title searches done in one shot. Since the conflict of interest concerns mostly involved the mortgate brokers, is there anything you could recommend that I could use to my advantage by getting across to these lenders that using my services could be beneficial? Or is it simply a fact that they can get the same results regardless of which path they use to employ an appraser, except that the appraiser earns half the fee?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on REAL ESTATE AGENTS – Freddie Mac is Offering You a Holiday Gift by Realty Agent Reviews</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/12/07/real-estate-agents-freddie-mac-is-offering-you-a-holiday-gift/#comment-207</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Realty Agent Reviews]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=508#comment-207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, Great article... I run a real estate agent site and often read articles like these, Keep the articles coming.. I&#039;ve referenced this post in my newsletter.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Great article&#8230; I run a real estate agent site and often read articles like these, Keep the articles coming.. I&#8217;ve referenced this post in my newsletter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Will HARP 2.0 Really Stabilize the Housing Market? by Anderson</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/11/18/will-harp-2-0-really-stabilize-the-housing-market/#comment-198</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anderson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=500#comment-198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I hope for the best when it comes to HARP 2.0 helping home owners. But unless the banks get on board and honestly &amp; sincerely try to do their part, it will not work very well.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope for the best when it comes to HARP 2.0 helping home owners. But unless the banks get on board and honestly &amp; sincerely try to do their part, it will not work very well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Latest SAFE Test Pass Rates &amp; FHFA goals for 2010-2011 by Joshua</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2010/09/17/latest-safe-test-pass-rates-fhfa-goals-for-2010-2011/#comment-197</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joshua]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Nov 2011 02:53:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=83#comment-197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey,

Awesome post! I like this info.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey,</p>
<p>Awesome post! I like this info.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Legislation – What’s Next For Loan Originators? (Part 2) by Gmac Home Loans</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2010/07/26/whats-next-for-loan-originators-part-2/#comment-153</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gmac Home Loans]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 06:16:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=22#comment-153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The new mortgage reforms will definitely have a significant impact on the housing market because many prospective homeowners will not be able to meet the stringent income to mortgage payment ratio of 28% and heftier down payments. As a result we will see more renters.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new mortgage reforms will definitely have a significant impact on the housing market because many prospective homeowners will not be able to meet the stringent income to mortgage payment ratio of 28% and heftier down payments. As a result we will see more renters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Let’s Interact! by Let’s Interact! (via Real Estate Institute&#039;s Blog) &#171; Brittaj17&#039;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.instituteonline.com/2011/04/21/let%e2%80%99s-interact/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Let’s Interact! (via Real Estate Institute&#039;s Blog) &#171; Brittaj17&#039;s Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:23:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.instituteonline.com/?p=316#comment-96</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] IMPORTANT UPDATE TO ILLINOIS BROKER TESTING!   Starting May 1, 2011, the state of Illinois will issue a “Broker” license for entry-level real estate agents. New Broker licensees are allowed to help others buy, sell, manage and lease all types of real estate.  In order to obtain the “Broker” license, applicants must complete a 15-hour “interactive class.”   Real Estate Institute will begin offering this live class in May! “It’s really exciting to be a pioneer in the creation and development of &#8230; Read More [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] IMPORTANT UPDATE TO ILLINOIS BROKER TESTING!   Starting May 1, 2011, the state of Illinois will issue a “Broker” license for entry-level real estate agents. New Broker licensees are allowed to help others buy, sell, manage and lease all types of real estate.  In order to obtain the “Broker” license, applicants must complete a 15-hour “interactive class.”   Real Estate Institute will begin offering this live class in May! “It’s really exciting to be a pioneer in the creation and development of &#8230; Read More [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

