The funding is part of the larger Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. While the mortgage industry expressed joy over the Senate's actions, the differences between the bills likely tempered the response in some quarters.

The Mortgage Bankers Association "will continue to analyze the differences between the House and Senate FY25 T-HUD bills against our requested priorities — and push for the most favorable resolution of those differences in a final 'omnibus' or 'minibus' bill — most likely during a 'lame-duck' legislative session after the November elections," an update sent to organization members said. The federal fiscal year starts on Oct. 1, but Congressional observers feel that it would need to pass a continuing resolution as of that date to maintain government funding.

The House committee approved the bill on July 10, the Senate two weeks later.

Among the major differences is the amount to fund Ginnie Mae's administrative expenses.

The housing industry, including both the Community Home Lenders of America and the MBA, supported the Senate bill which fully funds the Department of Housing and Urban Development's request of $67 million to cover Ginnie Mae-related administrative expenses, including personnel and consultants. That is a $13 million increase over fiscal year 2024 levels, the MBA noted.

The House bill keeps that amount at $54 million. Both bills cap Ginnie Mae's guarantee authority for the fiscal year at $550 million.

"CHLA is thrilled to see the Senate boost in funding for Ginnie Mae, which plays a critical role for independent mortgage banks, and particularly for smaller issuers," said Scott Olson, the organization's executive director, in a statement.

In June, CHLA and MBA, along with the Housing Policy Council, the Leading Builders of America, the National Association of Home Builder, the National Association of Realtors and the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association, sent a letter to the chairs and ranking members of both the House and Senate, in support of the Ginnie Mae request.

A month prior to that, the CHLA came out with its own plan to modernize Ginnie Mae around the time the Financial Stability Oversight Council issued a report calling for boosting nonbank authority at both that agency as well as the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

The bill covers other areas of HUD funding, including for the Federal Housing Administration program, with both capping the guarantee for the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund at $400 billion.

"The Senate proposal does not include the harmful policy changes included in the House draft," a blog from the Low Income Housing Coalition stated. "The House bill included policy provisions that would limit HUD's ability to use funds to implement, administer, or enforce the department's own 'Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing' rule; bar appropriated funds from going to 'sanctuary communities'; and eliminate the 30-day eviction notice requirement for HUD-assisted households, among other harmful provisions."