< img src="https://www.housingwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/AI-framework.jpg"alt =" "> A crucial part of the proposal is the push for a single federal requirement, with authorities warning that a patchwork of state-level regulations “would weaken American development and our ability to lead in the worldwide AI race.”
“The Administration eagerly anticipates dealing with Congress in the coming months to turn this structure into legislation that the President can sign,” the announcement stated.
Diane Yu, CEO of home loan innovation platform Tidalwave, told HousingWire that a federal requirement would accelerate AI adoption in the market.
“We have loan providers in all 50 states utilizing our point-of-sale platform today. That indicates every brand-new state-level AI law is something our compliance and engineering teams have to assess, interpret and develop for, rather of costs that time making the item better for customers and loan officers,” Yu said. “A single federal standard would let us invest that energy into the product itself.”
Yu stated she’s had discussions with loaning executives who are all set to adopt AI but are stuck in legal review because their counsel can’t provide clear responses for what’s needed on a state-by-state basis.
“Lenders already follow one nationwide set of underwriting standards through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Adding a second, fragmented layer of AI-specific state guidelines on top of that doesn’t produce clearness. It creates paralysis,” she stated, including that “the direction [of the structure] is best” and that the mortgage industry is a federally managed industry at its core.
“Lenders already comply with ECOA, Fair Housing Act, TILA, and RESPA. The GSEs set underwriting requirements nationally through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the federal guardrails aren’t theoretical. Freddie Mac’s Publication 2025-16, which entered into result March 3, needs every seller/servicer to establish a detailed governance structure for AI and artificial intelligence systems,” Yu said.
“That implies continuous monitoring, formal predisposition screening, positioning with NIST and ISO cybersecurity requirements, senior management accountability, segregation of duties between AI advancement and danger oversight, and independent audits. That’s not light touch. That’s extensive, mortgage-specific AI oversight, and it’s already taking place at the federal level.”
While Yu is positive about the principles of the structure, she said she wished the structure addressed mortgage-specific AI use cases.
“One thing that’s missing out on from the majority of the AI policy discussion is the difference in between business that are in fact deploying AI in production and companies that are just discussing it. In home loan, that gap is broad. We have actually been in production with national lending institutions for over a year. That’s a different discussion [from] a business revealing a demonstration at a conference,” Yu said.
“I ‘d likewise like to see the framework address something specific to home loan: the market currently loses roughly $600 per loan on origination costs, and closing a loan still takes 43 days usually,” she included. “If the objective is to protect customers, faster approvals, lower expenses, and less mistakes are [essential to] customer protection. The best regulatory framework must make it simpler for loan providers to embrace technology that delivers those outcomes, not harder.”