PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 382.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · May 1, 2008
Emergency Mortgage Loan Modification Act of 2008 - Establishes a standard for loan modifications or workout plans for pools of certain residential mortgage loans.
States that the servicer of such pooled loans owes a duty to the securitization vehicle to maximize recovery of proceeds for the benefit of all investors and holders of beneficial interests in the pooled loans, in the aggregate, and not to any individual party or group of parties.
Deems the loan servicer to be acting on behalf of the securitization vehicle in the best interest of all such investors and holders if the servicer makes certain loss mitigation efforts for a loan in or facing payment default in the reasonable belief that the particular modification, workout plan, or other mitigation actions will maximize the net present value to be realized over that which would be realized through foreclosure.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Declares that, absent contractual provisions to the contrary, a servicer acting in a manner consistent with such duty shall not be liable to specified persons (including any person obligated pursuant to a derivatives instrument to make specified payments) for entering into a qualified loan modification or workout plan for loss mitigation purposes.
Defines "qualified loan modification or workout plan" as one that: (1) is scheduled to remain in place until the borrower sells or refinances the property, or for at least five years from the date of adoption of the plan, whichever is sooner; (2) does not provide for a repayment schedule that results in negative amortization at any time; and (3) does not require the borrower to pay additional points and fees.
States that, for purposes of a qualified loan modification or workout plan, negative amortization does not include capitalization of delinquent interest and arrearages.
Defines "securitization vehicle" as a trust, corporation, partnership, limited liability entity, special purpose entity, or other structure that: (1) is the issuer, or is created by the issuer, of mortgage pass-through certificates, participation certificates, mortgage-backed securities, or other similar securities backed by a pool of assets that includes residential mortgage loans; and (2) holds such loans.
People & committees
Rep. Castle, Michael N. [R-DE-At Large] · R–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 382.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 110-615.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 110-615.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5579 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5579 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5579 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5579 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.