Uncategorized

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not likely to be released in the next four years, a former executive at one of the government-sponsored enterprises said. While it is still too early to truly know how events will unfold, former Freddie CEO Don Layton, thinks the Trump administration "will take a lot of steps to move the ball down the court, but that's as far as they'll get in the next four years." Getting their ducks in a row by mending their preferred stock purchase agreements (PSPAs) and figuring out the amount of capital needed to go private could take up to six years, Layton said speaking at Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. "The new administration made no commitment that it would be quick," he noted. "In fact, they said the opposite. That's because no one wants to screw up the mortgage system where all of a sudden mortgage [interest rates] rise to 9%."This runs counter to mainstream predictions from stakeholders that the two entities would be re-privatized within the next to three years, through a number of potential mechanisms.Hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman, an active Trump supporter, has vocally expressed his belief that the exit would take place in the near-term.What privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could look likeAckman has posited that if the government agrees to retire Fannie and Freddie's senior preferred stock and the capital ratio of the enterprises is reduced to 2.5%, the housing entities would need about $30 billion in combined capital to stage an initial public offering in 2026.Even if the government-sponsored enterprises are released from conservatorship, the Federal Housing Finance Agency will continue to maintain strict oversight, former Freddie Mac President Don Layton said. That oversight is necessary, he added, because privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would likely give the entities more flexibility to loosen credit standards."The concern might be they would get too frisky and be too loose [with credit requirements] and that's why you have a regulator," he said. "I would expect the FHFA to be able to do its job and make sure the GSEs don't get too frisky on credit." Looser credit standards could push privatized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the non-QM market, some have predicted.Whatever the outcome could be, Layton thinks that there is a high chance that borrowers will to some degree feel the brunt of Fannie and Freddie being released into the wild. "Will mortgage rates be higher or lower? That depends on where inflation and Federal Reserve policy is," he said. "How can GSEs impact mortgage rates? If their release is messed up, rates could go up 10,15, 20 basis points." 

Moody's Corp., a company that grades bonds and analyzes corporations' financial performance, said it expects to earn less this year than it had previously forecast, as tariff wars create tumult in markets, cutting into debt sales and acquisitions. The ratings and analytics company said it now expects to earn between $13.25 and $14 a share this year, excluding the impact of items like restructuring. In mid-February, its forecast for adjusted earnings per share was between $14 and $14.50. READ MORE: How Trump's wild tariff ride has changed mortgagesThe results underscore how trade wars that US President Donald Trump has escalated, including a series of higher tariffs he announced on April 2, are filtering through to markets and the economy. Moody's said it now expects global economic growth this year to be about a percentage point slower than its previous forecast. "We do believe many businesses are being impacted by the uncertainty of impending trade tensions and this uncertainty in turn leads to customers delaying financing and investment," Rob Fauber, Moody's chief executive officer, said on a call with analysts Tuesday.Shares of the company rose as much as 3.9% Tuesday, after the lowered guidance was better than some feared.The bond grader now expects total sales for bonds that it grades to decline this year, compared with prior expectations for slight gains. That includes a drop in junk bond sales and roughly no growth in investment-grade corporate notes. Bond markets have experienced more zero-deal-days than usual, making it harder for companies to time their bond sales."Last year, it was basically blue sky days the entire year," Fauber said. "We're in much more of a headline-driven environment at the moment."Moody's now forecasts corporate acquisitions this year, which are often funded by debt and drive overall bond sales, to grow by 15%, compared with the 50% it had previously anticipated. The firm also cut its free cash flow outlook, forecasting as much as $2.5 billion, down from prior outlook for up to $2.6 billion.For the first quarter, Moody's posted record revenue that topped estimates, with an 8% bump over the year-prior period. Earnings of $3.83 per share also beat the average of 24 analysts' estimates for $3.52.Trump's tariffs have weighed on debt markets, but US high-grade bond sales have remained resilient even as equities sold off. Investment-grade debt issuance totaled around $530 billion in the first quarter, only about 1% below the same period last year, Bloomberg compiled-data show.That relative steadiness benefited Moody's as its corporate finance revenue topped estimates and rose 6.6% year over year. Revenue from structured finance, helped by refinancing activity in collateralized loan obligations and commercial mortgage-backed securities, rose 21% from the first quarter of last year.Private credit has also emerged as a "meaningful contributor" to growth, Fauber said. The evolution of capital markets, including private credit, and the automation of financial services businesses are among the factors that Moody's expects to drive demand for its products longer-term. The analytics division said on Monday it will expand its private credit data offerings with a partnership with indexing giant MSCI Inc. that will provide investors with risk assessments on private credit loans. 

Adobe Stock MidFlorida Credit Union announced Tuesday it has struck a deal to buy Prime Meridian Bank, marking the credit union's third bank acquisition in five years.The purchase of Tallahassee-based Prime Meridian and its holding company, slated to close in 2026, will expand MidFlorida's footprint in the state's panhandle. The deal requires regulatory and shareholder approval, and it faces the ongoing bank industry pushback against such marriages.MidFlorida CEO Steve Mosely said the move is designed to expand the Lakeland, Florida-based company's consumer and business banking services in the panhandle region."As Florida's community credit union we are already serving the panhandle in a lending capacity with mortgage, auto and commercial business loans," Moseley said in a prepared statement. The addition of Prime Meridian will create a $9.5 billion-asset institution with more than 1,500 employees and 66 branches, the companies said. Financial terms of the deal weren't announced.Sammie Dixon, Prime Meridian's president and CEO, said in a prepared statement Tuesday that all of the $975 million-asset company's employees will be retained by MidFlorida, and "the expanded resources available to our clients are huge.""We recognized the strength in being able to adapt to change," Dixon said. "It is fitting we now find ourselves in a position to bring physical locations to MidFlorida's operations."Chris David, chief operations officer at MidFlorida, said that the two companies believe that branches, "coupled with" digital operations, are still an important part of banking. The merger agreement was unanimously approved by each of the companies' board of directors. Prime Meridian shareholders will receive $58.50 for each share owned once the deal closes.Despite a record announcement of 22 bank-credit union deals in 2024, getting such transactions over the finish line has proven somewhat complicated. Many transactions have faced extended regulatory reviews and scrutiny from banking groups, which argue that credit unions' tax-exempt status is an unfair advantage.On Tuesday, in the face of the MidFlorida-Prime Meridian deal, the Independent Community Bankers of America again called for policymaker action to curb the purchase of banks by credit unions. The ICBA specifically pointed to the federal tax exemption for credit unions with more than $1 billion in assets as an area ripe for reform."These institutions have outstripped their public mission and tax-exempt purpose and are now leveraging their tax exemption to purchase tax-paying community banks," said ICBA CEO Rebeca Romero Rainey in a letter to Congress earlier this year. "The pace of these acquisitions in recent years is driving the consolidation of financial services across all markets, to the harm of consumers and small businesses."The Florida institutions' combination marks the fifth credit-union-bank deal announcement this year, according to American Banker's tally.Earlier this month, Marion and Polk Schools Credit Union in Oregon announced plans to buy Lewis & Clark Bank. In March, NuMark Credit Union in Illinois said it would buy Lemont National Bank, near Chicago, in an all-cash deal, and Legacy Federal Credit Union in Alabama said it had agreed to purchase First National Bank of Cullman. Back in January, Frontwave Credit Union in suburban San Diego agreed to buy Community Valley Bank.

Nearly 75% of Americans say homeownership is now out of reach for the average person but when it comes to who's responsible, opinions are deeply divided along generational lines.According to a new survey by Clever Real Estate, millennials were most often blamed for the housing crisis (31%), followed closely by baby boomers (27%). Those two generational buckets put the blame on each other; 35% of millennials selected boomers as the cause, with just 21% picking their own generation.At the same time 33% of baby boomers cited millennials, with 25% picking their own demographic."Altogether, it's discouraging evidence that different generations can't even agree on how we got into the current housing trouble, much less the proper solutions," the report blog from Nick Pisano, a data writer at Clever, said.Which generation is to blame for the housing crisis?When it comes to the actual causes for the lack of affordable houses, more than 85% of boomers, Gen Xers and millennials cited three reasons: inflation, high interest rates and high property taxes.But 83% of boomers said supply and demand factors are responsible, compared with 74% of Gen X and 68% of millennials.State governments got the largest share of blame from millennials, at 70%, versus 57% of baby boomers.Surprisingly, 30% of all respondents pointed to millennials as the main culprits behind the housing inventory shortage, compared to just 24% who blamed baby boomers.This runs counter to the common narrative that baby boomers aging in place are a major factor limiting available housing. Still, the generational finger-pointing continues, with each group largely holding the other responsible.The survey respondents largely felt Gen Z is the most entitled demographic when it comes to their homeownership expectations, at 31%, with baby boomers next at 28%."This goes hand in hand with the 57% of respondents who say Gen Z is the most unrealistic about what they deserve in a home," the report said.The survey asked participants to rank life milestones by importance from most to least, and owning a home topped the list, ahead of a job they like, a comfortable retirement and at No. 4, being married or having a life partner.Are couples asking for down payment help instead of wedding gifts?Homeownership's importance as milestone plays into the results of a separate survey from LendingTree of homeowners who were married in the past two years.Nearly half of the respondents, 48%, requested wedding invitees gift them money to help for a down payment rather than a physical item. Among those newlywed homeowners, 71% said they received help from their parents for the down payment and/or wedding expenses."Wedding gifts used to be dinnerware, silverware, candlesticks and other things that would sit in a box or cabinet and maybe get used once a year," said Matt Shulz, LendingTree chief consumer finance analyst, in the report. "Now, there's less stigma in asking for money toward a down payment or a honeymoon."This is good for both the newlyweds and for those giving the gift because as they know their gifts won't become dust collectors, he added.Does getting married delay buying a home?The wedding delayed the home purchase plans of 35% of respondents to the LendingTree survey, while the cost meant putting less money down than planned for 36% of those surveyed.Thirty-eight percent of millennials said getting married delayed their home buying activity, while it was true for 37% of Gen Z and 32% of Gen X.On the other hand, 52% of all respondents said they downsized their wedding so they could buy a bigger home. For just under six-in-10, they put more money down than they spent on their wedding.When it came to what caused the most stress on their relationship, the results were rather even: 36% said it was buying a home, 33% cited wedding planning and 31% stated both were equally nerve-wracking.How many home buyers can afford a down payment right now?In the Clever report, 71% of respondents admitted they could not put down any money right now on a potential home purchase."Ironically, it seems the best way to come up with a significant down payment is to already be a homeowner," Clever said. "Although 25% of all respondents could put down $75,000 or more for a purchase, this includes just 7% of boomer renters, 6% of Gen X renters, and essentially no millennials renters at all (0%). "What down payment assistance programs are available in 2025?For those looking for down payment help, the number of homebuyer assistance programs increased by 43 during the first quarter and by 55 over March 31, 2024.The total number of programs now available is 2,509, the Down Payment Resource Q1 2025 Homeownership Program Index reported.A recipient does not have to be a first-time buyer in 952 of the programs, while 240 do not have income restrictions."Rates are still high and prices keep climbing, but we're seeing expanded program offerings, new providers and greater flexibility in how funds are used — not just for down payments but also to cover closing costs, lower the rate or meet other buyer needs," said Rob Chrane, CEO of Down Payment Resource, in a press release. "More programs now include manufactured and multi-family homes, opening new paths to affordability and steady income."Do millennials feel discriminated against by lenders?Almost six-in-10 millennial respondents to the Clever survey said mortgage lenders have more respect for older generations. Just 43% of baby boomers and 42% of Gen X agreed with that statement.When asked if older generations get better rates and/or service from their mortgage originator, 47% of millennials agreed, versus 36% of Gen Xers and 31% of boomers.The gap also exists on the sales side, with 42% of millennials believing the real estate agent prioritizes older clients, compared with 30% of Gen X and 24% of baby boomers.When it comes to feeling discriminated against, 30% of millennials said it was true, versus 20% of Gen X and 10% of boomers.

The Supreme Court has declined to certify a petition for a writ of certiorari from a Florida resident that could have had implications for a landmark decision involving consumer rights in a Minnesota tax-debt foreclosure.Robert Turner's petition asking for a review of an 11th Circuit Court decision in his case could have had implications for interpretations of the earlier Minnesota lawsuit, Tyler v. Hennepin County, according to Bloomberg Law, which was the first to report on the development.Geraldine Tyler had successfully argued Minnesota violated the U.S. Constitution by engaging in "home equity theft" and not returning surplus funds when the state foreclosed on her property. Turner's petition asked the court to review what he alleged was the "impermissibly low" sale of his homestead property on constitutional grounds, according to court documents on Justia.Why tax foreclosure procedures are an issue to watchWhile the Supreme Court rarely responds to requests for review, if it had done so the move could have had implications for how mortgage servicers and states respond to tax foreclosures at a time when the average homeowner's assessment is rising. States have had varying rules when it comes to what happens to surplus funds in property tax foreclosures, and some have engaged in legislative adjustments in response to Tyler v. Hennepin County. While Turner's petition for a writ of certiorari was denied, there still is potential for the Supreme Court to review its Tyler v. Hennepin County decision in other contexts, said John Rao, senior attorney at the National Consumer Law Center"There are some state tax foreclosure procedures that raise constitutional concerns even if they appear to comply with Tyler by allowing for the recovery of surplus proceeds," Rao said in an email. A case to watch in that context is Beeman v. Muskegon County, according to Rao."The Beeman case challenges Michigan's incredibly burdensome process for claiming surplus proceeds that was enacted after Tyler," he said. "The Court asked the county to respond to the petition for cert, which suggests there might be some interest in the case at least for some of the justices."

President Donald Trump's threats to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell have had a significant impact on financial markets, Goldman Sachs Chief Economist Jan Hatzius said."We have seen significant tightening in financial conditions, with increases in bond yields and declines in equity prices, and also weakness in the dollar," Hatzius said Tuesday on Bloomberg TV. "But net-net, it has tightened our financial conditions index whenever that has come up, and so I think that gives you sort of a foretaste of what would happen if we really did go down this road."US stocks fell Monday and yields on longer-term Treasury securities rose after Trump took to social media to criticize Powell, calling the Fed chair a "major loser" and warning the economy would slow unless the central bank starts cutting interest rates.The president's attacks have kept investors on edge in recent days amid reports that the White House is studying the legality of removing Powell from his post before his term expires in 2026.Hatzius said although Trump can shape the central bank's Board of Governors through appointments, the delegation of rate-setting authority to a broader committee, which includes members not appointed by the president, offers some insulation against political pressure."It is an institution that has quite a lot of institutional stability, even in an environment where the president gets to appoint a new chair and new governors," Hatzius said. "So I think there are some significant safeguards built into the system."

The International Monetary Fund said that policy uncertainty related to President Donald Trump's tariff regime has spurred the group to project lower growth in the U.S. and higher inflation expectations.Bloomberg News Tariff uncertainty is continuing to weigh on economic growth expectations and raises the likelihood of financial destabilization, according to the International Monetary Fund's latest global forecasts.In a report released Tuesday, the IMF revised its expectations for U.S. gross domestic product growth down from 2.7% to 1.8% for 2025. It also urged the Federal Reserve and other central banks to stand ready to take emergency steps to support lending in the case of a potential downturn."High uncertainty about the economic outlook and financial market volatility puts a premium on robust prudential policies to safeguard financial stability," the organization's latest World Economic Outlook report notes. "Jurisdictions experiencing financial market stress should release available macroprudential buffers to support the provision of credit to the economy and avoid a broad tightening of financial conditions and cascades of business failures and bankruptcies."The multinational organization also revised its inflation expectations for the U.S. from roughly 3% in 2025 to 4%, exceeding its forecasted uptick of 0.4% for the broader pool of "advanced economies."The IMF report, released ahead of its annual spring meeting in Washington, D.C. this week, focused heavily on the impact of the budding global trade war sparked by the tariff policies implemented by President Donald Trump this month. It focused heavily on the interplay between this new policy environment, persistently high inflation around the world and monetary policymaking. Specifically, it noted that central banks that have already lowered interest rates in response to economic slowdowns in the months leading up to the tariff announcement could have less flexibility to respond to a fresh bout of inflation brought on by tariffs and trade breakdowns. "In economies already operating at or close to potential and facing potential inflationary pressures, including those from new trade policies and exchange rate movements, there is less leeway for central banks to 'look through' new negative supply shocks," the report states.The report acknowledges that the outlook, both for the U.S. and the rest of the world, could change dramatically depending on what new trade agreements are reached during the Trump administration's 90-day pause on so-called reciprocal tariffs. But, in the meantime, the report urges central banks to maintain policy flexibility. Specifically, it recommends that "future cuts to the policy rate should remain contingent on evidence that inflation is heading decisively back toward target." It also suggests that central banks engage in "gradual" interest rate reductions if labor markets soften or economic growth weaken as inflation cools. The guidance comes in stark contrast to the preferences expressed by the White House. In a social media post yesterday, Trump called on the Fed to implement "preemptive cuts" to interest rates, arguing that costs have been trending down to such an extent that there "can almost be no inflation." Fed officials have favored a wait-and-see approach in recent weeks, noting that the potential range of outcomes from the trade negotiations — let alone the final policy implementations — is too broad to adjust monetary policy preemptively. Instead, they say, policy is restrictive enough to deal with lingering inflation but can be lowered swiftly if the case of economic deterioration.The next Federal Open Market Committee meeting will be held on May 6 and 7.The IMF report also warns of financial system vulnerabilities that can arise in conjunction with monetary policy adjustments, stating that it is "crucial to strike a balance between maintaining stable inflation expectations and ensuring that financial stability is not compromised, particularly amid financial market volatility."Overall, careful observers of the international organization say the report paints a bleak picture for both the economy and the banking system. Eric LeCompte, executive director of the globally active religious development group Jubilee USA Network, said the report should be taken as a warning to U.S. policymakers."The IMF is asserting we are facing severe risks in the financial system due to concerns with the banking system, possible stock declines and countries having unsustainable debts," LeCompte said in a written statement. "The news of these IMF meetings is simple: unless we start to address major risks to the financial system, our economy will get much worse."

A new lawsuit filed by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost claims the nation’s top mortgage lender is ripping off Ohio consumers.It’s an interesting one because the role of a mortgage broker is to shop on a consumer’s behalf so they don’t have to.Instead of working with a captive lender like a retail bank, homeowners can enlist a broker to do the comparison shopping for them among their wholesale lender partners.But Yost claims Pontiac, Michigan-based United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) colluded “with many brokers to funnel nearly all loans back to itself.”In other words, instead of searching for the lowest rate, or fewest fees, they sent the majority of their loans to their preferred lender.In the process, it may have cost these customers more thanks to higher closing costs and/or an elevated mortgage rate.Is Your Mortgage Broker Shopping Around or Using a Preferred Lender?At issue is the very nature of a mortgage broker, which as stated is a personal home loan shopper.When you work with one, they are supposed to be an independent entity that acts as a middleman between you and their lender partners.A typical broker might have a dozen or more wholesale lender partners they work with.This means X percentage of their loans might go to lender A, another portion to lender B, and the rest are spread out among several other lenders.If this is how their business is spread among partners, it would appear their doing their job properly.But what if nearly all of their loans are going to just one lender? At that point, they might be no different than a captive loan officer who works for one bank.Why even bother being independent at that point? Well, this is what Yost alleges in his suit.It focuses on mortgages originated from 2021 through 2023, when UWM issued roughly $605 million in home loans to Ohioans.While these were funded by “independent brokers,” the lawsuit states that they “directed 99% of their business back to United Wholesale Mortgage.”And in the year 2023 alone, 50 of the brokers in question “funneled a combined $215 million in mortgages to the company.”In other words, a lot of loan volume was winding up at one wholesale lender, instead of perhaps going to many different lenders, as the mortgage broker model intends.As such, Yost has alleged violations of Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, the Corrupt Practices Act, the Residential Mortgage Lending Act, and others.And seeking damages, including compensation for affected homeowners who may have received “above-market rates and fees.”For its part, UWM has denied the allegations, referring to them as “frivolous” and “suspicious,” and saying it would defend itself to the fullest extent.The Challenges of Growing to #1 as a Wholesale Mortgage LenderWhile this is all up in the air, it does illustrate the difficulty of becoming the nation’s top lender when you’re a wholesale lender.The entire mortgage broker business model is built on choice, and when you’re a single lender, it’s perhaps tricky to grow while still leaving room for the others.On the one hand, if you’re the largest lender in the space, it means more brokers are sending you business.And perhaps they’re doing so because you’ve proven yourself to be a reliable (and easy to work with) lender partner.But it also means fewer loans are going to competing wholesale lenders, which ostensibly reduces competition and weakens the very business model built on choice and independence.At the same time, lenders like UWM want to maintain their top position (they were the top mortgage lender in 2024).This means offering special perks to brokers, whether it’s free credit pulls or discounted pricing on certain products, along with a suite of tools to make their lives easier.UWM also launched a consumer-facing portal called Mortgage Matchup, which allows borrowers to find a local independent mortgage broker near them to work with.But these brokers are typically approved to work with any number of wholesale lenders, including lenders other than UWM.From UWM’s point of view, it’s promoting the wholesale channel. The question is if you become the go-to destination for brokers, when is it too much?As a broker, do you still need to send X percentage of your loans elsewhere? I guess we’ll find out as this suit proceeds.Either way, as I always say, you need to compare mortgage brokers too, even though they can shop on your behalf.This means speaking to two or three brokers, along with retail loan officers, credit unions, etc. when doing your mortgage rate shopping to ensure you land the best deal. Before creating this site, I worked as an account executive for a wholesale mortgage lender in Los Angeles. My hands-on experience in the early 2000s inspired me to begin writing about mortgages 19 years ago to help prospective (and existing) home buyers better navigate the home loan process. Follow me on X for hot takes.Latest posts by Colin Robertson (see all)

Treasury Secretary Scott BessentBloomberg News WASHINGTON — House Democrats led by House Financial Services Committee ranking member Maxine Waters, demanded clarity from the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent regarding the future of the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. The lawmakers in a letter sent Monday to Bessent, Waters and other HFSC Democratic lawmakers highlighted contradictions between the Trump administration's March 14 executive order from President Donald Trump that targeted the CDFI Fund as part of a broader initiative to reduce "elements of the Federal bureaucracy that the President has determined are unnecessary," and Bessent's assurances to the industry that the programs encompassed in the fund are statutorily mandated."We, along with industry and community stakeholders, reject the premise that anything about the CDFI Fund and the CDFIs it supports is 'unnecessary,'" the lawmakers said in the letter. The letter highlights what Democrats describe as a fundamental contradiction: While Secretary Bessent recently stated that "this Administration recognizes the important role that the CDFI Fund and CDFIs play in expanding access to capital and providing technical assistance to communities across the United States," the executive order explicitly lists the Fund among entities to be eliminated "to the maximum extent.""Your words are in direct conflict with the plain language of the President's Executive Order characterizing the CDFI Fund as 'unnecessary,'" the letter said.The Democrats' letter cites specific operational concerns that suggest more than rhetorical inconsistency, saying that "staff at the CDFI Fund has been left with the impression that they would be engaging in 'minimal operations,' while the staff was apparently relocated in January to a building outside of the main Treasury building that has no Internet connection, and that service has yet to be connected."The letter also references a statement from the White House provided to American Banker indicating that "no final decisions have been made" and suggesting Treasury could still "consolidate aspects of the program," despite Treasury informing the Office of Management and Budget that CDFI Fund programs are legally required.Established with bipartisan support and maintained across administrations of both parties, the CDFI Fund supports 1,440 certified community development financial institutions operating in all 50 states, D.C., Guam, and Puerto Rico. According to Treasury data cited in the letter, these institutions collectively have over 19 million loans totaling more than $300 billion outstanding, despite their relatively modest size — CDFI banks and credit unions average about $570 million in assets, while loan funds average $67.8 million."During the pandemic and the Trump Administration's first term, Democrats and Republicans worked with your predecessor, former Secretary Mnuchin, to provide historic support to CDFIs because they serve as lifelines for underserved communities and play a pivotal role in helping small businesses keep the lights on and to pay the workers they employ," the lawmakers said.The letter calls for immediate action, asking Bessent to "promptly update the Executive Order to exempt the CDFI Fund from its application, ensure that the staff has access to the Internet to do their jobs, and work with Congress to strengthen and expand the work of the CDFI Fund.""It would be a shame if this becomes the first Administration to forsake the long bipartisan tradition of collaborating with Congress to support our CDFIs and the communities they serve," the lawmakers concluded.The challenge to the administration's CDFI policy comes as Rep. Waters has simultaneously escalated criticism of the recently approved Capital One-Discover merger."The Trump Administration's approval of the Capital One-Discover merger will create yet another ultra-wealthy megabank in America that our nation's consumers, small businesses, and working-class families cannot afford," Waters said in a separate statement. "This merger will create a $637 billion bank, making it the sixth-largest bank overall and the nation's largest issuer of credit cards."Waters emphasized concerns about the regulatory history of both institutions. "Last year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sued Capital One for cheating millions of their customers out of $2 billion in interest payments," she said. "Unfortunately, the Trump Administration dropped this suit and let the bank off the hook. Similarly, regulators took an enforcement action against Discover after the bank 'recklessly engaged in unsafe or unsound banking practices' by overcharging small businesses excessive interchange fees for 16 straight years."Waters said that regulators have disregarded public input on the merger. "A staggering 91% of the 6,132 comments regulators received from the public raised concerns about the merger leading to less competition and causing financial instability," she said. "Despite the fact that commenters overwhelmingly urged regulators to oppose the merger, their voices in the process went unheeded and this merger was rubber stamped like so many bank mergers before it."She said that Democratic lawmakers will "use every tool at our disposal" to oversee the large banks that this merger will create, as well as others. "Megabanks, including the new one created with this merger approval, should know that I and my Democratic colleagues will use every tool at our disposal to oversee them, and will not tolerate any abuse of hard-working American consumers," she said. 

Equifax Inc.'s first-quarter profit beat estimates, although the credit-reporting agency declined to raise its guidance, citing the tariff-induced uncertainty in the economy and falling consumer confidence."Given the strength in the first quarter and our current run rates in key verticals, we would normally be increasing our 2025 revenue and adjusted EPS guidance" Chief Executive Officer Mark Begor said on a call with analysts.The stock rose as much as 13% in New York, the most since November 2022.The Atlanta-based firm maintained its outlook for full-year constant-currency revenue growth and adjusted earnings per share, according to a statement Tuesday. First-quarter sales and profit both surpassed the average analyst estimate.The company has seen declines in mortgage activity and expects challenges in that area to continue "until there's some stability in Washington," Begor said.Equifax also raised its dividend 28% after keeping it stable for eight years and authorized a new $3 billion share buyback program.