Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac forced to buy title insurance—cost may hit borrowers

What it does

This bill requires Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the 'Enterprises') to use title insurance or similar lien/title-protection products that are regulated by state insurance or financial regulators when they purchase mortgages. Mortgages that don't meet this requirement trigger an additional 1% capital reserve. The bill aims to shift risk of title defects from the Enterprises (and ultimately taxpayers) to regulated third-party insurers.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is a regulatory mandate requiring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to use state-regulated title-protection products, backed by a capital-reserve penalty for non-compliance. This is a risk-transfer and prudential-management measure, not a subsidy or deregulation.

What the text implies

• The 1% capital requirement may reduce the Enterprises' mortgage-purchase capacity, potentially tightening credit availability in the secondary mortgage market if not offset by regulatory relief elsewhere.
• Title insurers and lenders may capture the risk premium created by the capital requirement, with no guarantee that cost savings flow to borrowers rather than to intermediaries.
• The bill does not specify whether the title-protection products must be title insurance specifically or can include other state-regulated alternatives (e.g., title-guarantee funds), creating potential regulatory arbitrage.
• Implementation depends on FHFA Director's rulemaking within 180 days; the bill does not define 'appropriately regulated' or specify enforcement mechanisms if Enterprises or lenders misrepresent compliance.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Citizens may benefit from stronger title protection and reduced taxpayer exposure to title-defect losses borne by the Enterprises. However, the capital requirement may increase mortgage costs or reduce credit availability if lenders pass the cost forward, and the bill does not mandate that title-insurance savings flow to borrowers rather than to lenders or insurers.

Who stands to gain

• title insurance companies
• mortgage lenders (via risk transfer and potential cost pass-through)
• state insurance regulators (expanded oversight jurisdiction)

Named in the bill

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), State insurance authorities, Title insurance industry, Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, 15 U.S.C. § 6809(11), 12 U.S.C. § 5481(22), 12 U.S.C. § 4612, 12 U.S.C. § 4502(10), 12 U.S.C. § 4052(9)

Where it stands

24 cosponsors: 13 Republicans, 11 Democrats.

• May 6, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• May 6, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Financial Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

7 lobbying clients named this bill on 11 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $1,020,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 3 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 86% of bills with at least one filing.

Andrew Garbarino, the sponsor, reported $1,954,500 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• American Land Title Association — $530,000 on 2 filings
• Broker Action Coalition — $160,000 on 2 filings
• Fidelity National Financial — $100,000 on 2 filings
• First American Financial Corporation — $100,000 on 1 filing
• American Land Title Association — $70,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.