Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7049

Bill Overview

Title: Mortgage Borrower Protection Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires an entity extending a Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing agreement to receive written consent from each owner of any residential mortgage loan or other recorded lien on the property before extending such financing to the dwelling owner. (PACE financing is used to cover the costs of home improvements such as energy-efficient improvements. The subsequent lien is tied to the specific property in the form of a tax assessment.) Consent is not required if the PACE financing does not have priority over the mortgage loan or lien.

Sponsors: Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-30]

Target Audience

Population: Property owners using mortgage financing for home improvements

Estimated Size: 25000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Real Estate Agent (California)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is necessary to protect property owners like myself who might not fully understand the implications of an additional lien from PACE financing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Engineer (Texas)

Age: 53 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm glad the policy requires transparency, but since I own my home outright, it doesn't affect me much directly. Still, it’s reassuring for overall consumer protection.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Tech Startup Founder (New York)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see the value in protecting homeowners, but getting lender consent might complicate things logistically and deter some from taking up PACE.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Retired (Florida)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This will safeguard my investment by ensuring no unexpected financial hurdles, which is a relief as I live on retirement savings.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Nurse (Illinois)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The process might slow things down, but knowing I won't jeopardize my new home-ownership stability is worth it.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Contractor (Oregon)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As someone who deals with both ends, property owner and contractors, this rule makes it clear and reduces disputes, although it might add steps to the process.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 5

Public School Teacher (Nevada)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This regulation gives me added confidence to proceed with such investments without the fear of unexpected financial burdens.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Auto Mechanic (Ohio)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The contradictions between loans and PACE could have me second-guessing improvements, but this policy would provide needed clarity.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Software Developer (Arizona)

Age: 34 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As someone who values eco-friendly initiatives, I appreciate measures that protect me from financial surprises while pursuing them.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Stay-at-Home Parent (Colorado)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having multiple financial responsibilities, this policy ensures I make informed decisions and manage risks wisely.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $15000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)

Key Considerations