Advocacy Priorities

• Local/State - Sign Ordinances and Illegal Sign Enforcement

  Position:
  Recognizing the need to keep highways and roads in Northern Virginia safe and attractive, the Northern Virginia Association of Realtors® (NVAR) supports common-sense sign regulations that balance the needs of home buyers and sellers with that of the general public. NVAR supports limited, reasonable on-site and off-site sign restrictions and the enforcement of sign prohibitions in highway rights-of-way by trained and authorized local government designees.
  
  Discussion:
  

  The importance of on-site and directional signs in the marketing of properties for sale or rent is well documented. Directional signs, in particular, play an important role in guiding buyers to available properties which, in-turn, facilitate real estate transactions and provide revenue for the locality.

  Under legislation enacted in 2003, Virginia State Code § 33.2-1225, authorizes the Commissioner of Highways to enter into agreements with the local governing body of Fairfax County authorizing local law-enforcement agencies or other local governmental entities to act as agents of the Commissioner of Highways for the purpose of (i) enforcing the provisions of § 33.2-1224 (highway right-of-way sign prohibition) and (ii) collecting the civil penalties and costs provided for in that section.  NVAR worked with Fairfax County to devise an enforcement program under this law, first implemented in 2013, to curb the use of illegal signs while still protecting the use of real estate directional signs in approved locations.

  Under this effective program the County selected 99 major highways on which to focus its efforts. Most are two-lane, divided highways like Route 286 (formerly Fairfax County Parkway), Route 50 and Route 28. Signs are not removed from neighborhood streets, nor are they cleaned up based on public complaints. Violators are charged a $10 per sign administrative cost in addition to a $100 per sign civil penalty.  The Sheriff’s Community Labor Force collects signs every week from Tuesday to Thursday. The crews, made up of well-screened offenders monitored by a Sheriff’s deputy, visit each highway in the program at least twice per month. Over the past three years, crews have picked up an average of nearly 30,000 signs per year—more than 75,000 in total since the program started. In May 2016, the county further developed its enforcement efforts by identifying violators, documenting their illegal signs, and issuing warning letters and invoices to the offenders. Since the County began fining sign violators, it has collected more than $30,000 in civil penalties.

  Continued violations of the illegal sign laws, as well as the recent US Supreme Court ruling in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, which requires all sign ordinances to remain “content-neutral” as applied to commercial and noncommercial signs, have forced sign issues into the spotlight in recent months. 

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR recommends opposing any changes to § 33.2-1225 authorizing Fairfax County to act as agents of the Commissioner of Highways for the purpose of enforcing sign restrictions within the limits of a highway. NVAR supports reasonable sign restrictions and the enforcement of sign prohibitions in highway rights-of-way by trained and authorized government designees.

  NVAR urges local government to recognize the importance of on-site and directional signs in the marketing of properties for sale or rent as they discuss amendments to sign ordinances. NVAR opposes local ordinances establishing standards inconsistent with the advertising requirements established by the Virginia Real Estate Board or those creating an undue financial hardship for real estate licensees.

• State - Fair Housing

  Position:
  

  It is the position of the Northern Virginia Association of Realtors® (NVAR) that all consumers should be treated equally in their housing transactions. NVAR supports legislation to prohibit discrimination in housing transactions on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. This position is reinforced by Article 10 of Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice of the National Association of REALTORS®.

  Discussion:
  

  Both federal and state Fair Housing laws define several “protected classes” of individuals who are protected from discrimination in housing transactions. Virginia’s Fair Housing Law specifies that individuals cannot be treated differently because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, elderliness, familial status or disability. The prohibition against discrimination applies to property managers, owners, landlords, real estate agents, banks, savings institutions, credit unions, insurance companies, mortgage lenders and appraisers.

  According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, at least 22 states, including Delaware, Maryland and Washington DC, prohibit sexual orientation housing discrimination. Local governments in Northern Virginia have also recognized the need to extend Fair Housing protections to individuals on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status.  The Arlington County Human Rights Ordinance and the Alexandria City Human Rights Ordinance prohibit discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation and marital status (Arlington County Code § 31-3) (Alexandria Municipal Code Sec. 12-4-4).  The Fairfax County Human Rights Ordinance does not expressly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but does prohibit housing discrimination based on marital status (Fairfax County Code § 11-1-4).

  In addition to the protected classes specified in law, Virginia’s Realtors^® are subject to a higher standard of non-discrimination outlined in the National Association of Realtors^® Code of Ethics.  NAR opposes discrimination in housing based on familial status, sexual orientation, and gender identity. NAR also authorizes sanctions in response to a finding that a member has violated any Fair Housing law, including local and state laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. NAR policy is to support equal opportunity on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity and the NAR Code of Ethics was amended in 2010 and 2013, to include this updated policy in the Code of Ethics.

  While Realtors® are held to this higher standard of non-discrimination, Virginia’s real estate licensees are not. This creates a situation where prospective home buyers and renters could be treated differently based upon the professional status of their agent or landlord.

  There has been some reluctance to formally add sexual orientation and gender identify to the listing of protected classes under Virginia’s Fair Housing Laws due to the possibility of creating liability for real estate licensees and other housing providers.  Some believe that unsubstantiated claims of Fair Housing violations could result in thousands of dollars in legal fees for licensees. While NVAR acknowledges the concern over frivolous lawsuits, the status quo of allowing discrimination in these areas must not continue.

  NAR’s position paper states that most Realtors® would see little impact on their business. In at least 22 states discrimination based on sexual orientation is already illegal. HUD prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in HUD funded housing. Since Fair Housing practices are already the norm, adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protections would require little change in business practices. NAR is not aware of any business impacts caused by state laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

  Status:
  

  Legislation has been introduced each of the past few years, and was again introduced in the 2017 General Assembly which would have prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in the Fair Housing Law. Senator Wexton’s bill, SB 822, passed the Senate 25-14 but failed to report from a House General Laws subcommittee on a 2-4 vote. Legislation, supported by NAR, has also been introduced on the federal level by Rep. Scott Taylor (R-VA02) and Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL10), HR 1447, which would protect Americans from housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

  On April 5, 2017, a U.S. District Judge ruled that denying housing for failure to conform to “sex stereotypes” constitutes sex discrimination under the FHA, federal law and Colorado State laws. In this case, the plaintiffs contend that discrimination against women (like them) for failure to conform to stereotype norms concerning to or with whom a woman should be attracted, should marry, and/or should have children is discrimination on the basis of sex under the FHA. The Court agreed. Depending on the facts of individual cases and how broadly the concept of sexual stereotyping is applied, this case could set precedent for fair housing protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals.
  
  Recommendation: 
  

  It is the position of NVAR that all consumers should be treated equally in their housing transactions, which includes prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. NVAR will support legislation to hold all housing providers to an equal non-discrimination standard for sexual orientation and gender identity.

• State – Industry Competency and Professionalism

  Position:
  

  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors® (NVAR) supports legislative and regulatory solutions to enhance the knowledge and professionalism of Virginia’s real estate licensees and accountability of real estate brokers through new licensing, education, supervision and enforcement requirements.

  Discussion/Background:
  

  The practice of real estate is a complex and ever-changing profession. To protect the needs of the consumer and prevent liability to agents, it is essential that real estate licensees have adequate education, training and broker supervision. Realtors® have always been supportive of maintaining and increasing the professionalism of the real estate industry.

  In the past decade, Realtors® have sought and obtained General Assembly approval on legislation addressing the core competency of real estate licensees, including additional pre- and post-licensing education requirements, written brokerage agreement requirements, increased broker oversight of firm licensees, and background checks for new licensees. These measures have increased the training and education levels of licensees, but more must be done.   Considering that real estate agents facilitate what may be the most expensive transaction individuals will make in their life, agents with minimal education, training and supervision are not sufficiently qualified to advise many homebuyers and sellers as well as they should.

  In 2016, leadership from five local associations (Northern Virginia Association of Realtors®, Prince William Association of Realtors®, Dulles Area Association of Realtors®, Fredericksburg Area Association of Realtors® and Greater Piedmont Association of Realtors®) and brokers from around the region convened a regional broker professionalism meeting.

  This group discussed a wide range of topics related to broker supervision and accountability, pre- and post-licensing education requirements, quality of education, real estate teams, regulatory enforcement and numerous other issues.  Several legislative and regulatory changes gained consensus in the group, and NVAR is recommending the following:

  Separate Licenses for Associate Brokers and Supervising Brokers In an effort to strengthen broker supervision, a Supervising Broker licensing category should be created. In addition to completing 180 hours of VREB-approved broker pre-license education courses, passing the state and national portions of the examination, and submitting verification of experience (actively engaged as a salesperson for five years preceding application for licensure) as required for a broker’s license, a Supervising Broker would be required to have at least two years' full time real estate brokerage experience (or equivalent four years of part-time experience) and a significant number of independent transactions.

  Supervising Broker Course Requirement Once a licensee serves in a supervisory position as a broker, he or she should be required to complete, in addition to required renewal hours, a three-hour course every four years to learn about the management tools needed to be successful in their roles along with essential supervisory guidelines and regulatory updates from VREB.

  Improving Real Estate Schools and Instructors Pre-licensing, post licensing and continuing education instructors should be required to take an 8-hour class and pass a test to teach continuing education. To improve real estate school standards, only an accredited college or university, a public or private vocational school, a real estate board, a real estate office, a real estate-related professional society or organization should provide continuing education courses.

  Strengthening Post License and Continuing Education Require licensees to complete 50% of their renewal hours in-class. All mandatory renewal classes should be completed in-class while electives can be completed on-line or via correspondence. While on-line classes are a great supplement to learning, classroom examples and interaction can’t be replaced by reading a computer screen. Exemptions should be provided to military personnel.

  Bolstering Pre-Licensing Education Requirements Improve pre-licensing curriculum to add three hours of contracts as well as allocating five of the existing sixty hours to cover practical topics such as purchasing and listing paperwork and writing contracts.

  Improving Regulatory Enforcement To improve enforcement of Virginia Real Estate Board (VREB) regulations, there should be consideration of bolstering VREB resources.

  Status:
  

  Numerous professionalism-related measures have been included in NVAR’s legislative agendas over the course of the last 10 years.  Many have been adopted, but others have not advanced beyond the discussion and study phase.  In 2016 the Virginia Association of Realtors® created a Presidential Advisory Group in order to further study the issue.

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR recommends legislative or regulatory action to: (1) separate licenses for Associate Brokers and Supervising Brokers; (2) establish Supervising Broker course requirements; (3) improve the quality of real estate schools and instructors; (4) require mandatory continuing education topics be completed in-class; (5) bolster pre-licensing education requirements; and (6) improve VREB enforcement.

• State - Real Estate Teams

  Position: 
  

  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors® (NVAR) supports legislation to protect the public from the ambiguity of real estate teams by defining teams and regulating the advertising and real estate services provided by licensees as part of a team or group. 

  Discussion/Background:
  

  Real estate teams are a growing force in the marketing of real property. Teams can be highly productive assets, but they also carry legal risks and may confuse members of the public who believe they are a separate brokerage firm or entity.

  Several states have responded to ambiguities surrounding real estate teams with specific regulations. The biggest concern about teams is that customers may get the impression that they are their own brokerage firm or the customers may be misled as to the true broker responsible for the team.

  States such as Colorado, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Washington have rules or laws in place defining and regulating teams, many focusing on branding and advertising requirements. Other concerns surrounding teams include a lack of broker supervision, team leader accountability and ambiguity around how teams get paid.

  In Virginia, when a team advertises, the team must comply with all existing advertising requirements including having the brokerage name and address or phone number appear in the advertisement. Although these requirements exist, teams are not defined in the Virginia Code, so it may be beneficial to strengthen advertising requirements and clarify operating standards in an effort to avoid the perception that teams are operating as separate licensed entities.

  In 2016, leadership from five local associations (Northern Virginia Association of Realtors®, Prince William Association of Realtors®, Dulles Area Association of Realtors®, Fredericksburg Area Association of Realtors® and Greater Piedmont Association of Realtors®) and brokers from around the region convened a regional broker professionalism meeting.

  This group discussed a wide range of topics, including real estate teams. Several changes gained consensus in the group, and NVAR is recommending the following:

  Defining Real Estate Teams In order to regulate teams, they must first be defined in statute. Teams should be defined as two or more real estate licensees working together on a regular basis to provide real estate services who represent themselves to the public as being part of a collective team or group.

  Regulating Team Names The team name in the advertisement should be directly connected to the name of the brokerage and display the name of the brokerage in a meaningful and conspicuous way such as “The ABC Team of XYX Brokerage”. The name of the team should not contain the terms “Real Estate,” “Real Estate Brokerage,” or “Realty” or any other term that would lead the public to believe that the team is offering real estate brokerage services independent of the broker. All team advertising must contain the full name of the brokerage displayed in accordance with VREB regulations.

  Prohibiting Separate Offices The broker must supervise the operations of any branch office. The branch office must be established by the principal brokerage firm and the team cannot pay for the operation of the office. It must be an expense of the brokerage firm and the principal broker under whom the office is established.

  Requiring Broker Supervision Supervising brokers should be required to review and approve team agreements.

  Status:
  

  Numerous professionalism-related measures have been included in NVAR’s legislative agendas over the course of the last 10 years.  Many have been adopted, but others have not advanced beyond the discussion and study phase.  In 2016 the Virginia Association of Realtors® created a Presidential Advisory Group in order to further study the issue.

  Recommendation:
  NVAR recommends legislation regulating the advertising and real estate services provided as part of a team or group by defining “Teams” as two or more licensees and requiring each team to: (1) conduct business only from the branch office of the supervising broker; (2) utilize team names that may not be construed to mean that the team offers real estate services independent of the broker; and (3) have team agreements reviewed and approved by the supervising broker.
  

   

• State - Tolls on the Dulles Greenway

  Position: 
  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors® (NVAR) supports measures that reduce costs for Dulles Greenway users, including legislation granting the state flexibility in the rate setting process and encouraging distance-based tolling.
  
  Discussion/Background:
  

  The Dulles Greenway is one of the first highways of its kind in the United States and is the first private road in Virginia since 1816. It was built under the Virginia Highway Act of 1988 and opened in 1995. By law, the owner of the road, Toll Road Investors Partnership II, L.P. (TRIP II), is permitted to submit requests to the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) to approve increases on the Dulles Greenway. According to the Virginia Highway Corporation Act, three conditions must be met in order for the SCC to allow TRIP II to raise the Greenway toll including: 1) It must be reasonable to the user in relation to the benefit obtained; 2) It should not discourage the use of the roadway by the public and; 3) It should provide the operator with a reasonable rate of return.

  Since 1995, all SCC requests for toll rate increases have been granted despite opposition from public officials, residents and area businesses. The current law, introduced by then Senator Mark Herring and passed in 2008, states that existing flat-rate Greenway tolls are permitted to rise each year through 2020 under a formula tied to inflation. This legislation states that the SCC shall approve toll increases by one of three rates outlined in the statute, adopting the highest calculation. This law is set to expire in 2020.

  In December of 2012, former Delegate David Ramadan (R-87) filed a complaint with the SCC and in January of 2013 the SCC approved an investigation of the Greenway tolls. The complaint argued that the SCC should set tolls at a level “(1) which is reasonable to the user in relation to the benefit obtained; (2) which will not materially discourage use of the roadway by the public; and (3) which will provide the operator no more than a reasonable return as determined by the commission." The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors (LCBOS) supported Ramadan's approach as a party to this legal action. The case initially went to a Hearing Examiner appointed by the SCC, who did not rule in favor. Although the LCBOS and Delegate Ramadan filed legal briefs with the SCC in appeal of its Hearing Examiner's findings, the SCC upheld the ruling that the roadway’s tolls are reasonable when weighed against the benefit it provides users.

  Since the road’s opening, public officials, residents and business have expressed concern over the road’s rising tolls. Commuters who use the Dulles Greenway 50 weeks out of the year now pay $2,950 annually for their weekday round trip making it the most expensive road in the country. Since the Dulles Greenway was built using conventional financing at market rates, the owners are paying more to finance the road and passing along that cost to users via rising tolls.

  Status:
  

  Three bills were introduced in the 2017 General Assembly dealing with the Dulles Greenway.  All died in committee or subcommittee. Two of the bills (HB 1715-Minchew and SB 1209-Wexton) changed “shall” to “may” in the Code of Virginia in order to give the State Corporation Commission (SCC) some flexibility in the rate increases it approves for the toll road. The third bill (HB 1881- Bell, J.) provided for distance-based tolling. Lobbyists for the Greenway pledged that they would be willing to negotiate on issues during the next two years before the Herring legislation – and the guaranteed increases – expires.

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR opposes any legislation extending the expiration date of the current law regarding rates beyond 2020, and recommends supporting legislation granting the state flexibility in the rate setting process and providing for, or encouraging, reasonably apportioned distance-based tolling on the Dulles Greenway.

• State - Timely Disposition of Earnest Money Deposits (EMD)

  Position:
  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors (NVAR) supports regulations which streamline our members' ability to conduct business while ensuring timely and responsive services to the public when dealing with earnest money deposits (EMD).
  
  Discussion/Background:
  

  A troubling practice has developed where sellers are intentionally not responding to the release of funds request and withholding the EMD from the buyer. This often occurs when the buyer has properly terminated and so they are being damaged, sometimes unable to move forward on other properties, with little recourse.  By modifying the delivery method and time frame, it allows the buyer to resolve the disposition of his or her EMD in a timely fashion.  

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR supports legislative and regulatory changes to ensure timely and responsive services to the buyers when dealing with earnest money deposits (EMD) by reducing the time frame for which a buyer has to wait for the EMD to be returned when a seller is non-responsive.

• State/Federal – Student Loan Debt Refinancing

  Position:
  

  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors^® (NVAR) urges Congress and the Virginia General Assembly to develop creative solutions, including authority to refinance student loan debt, to mitigate the impact of rising student debt on home buyers and to protect the dream of home ownership for all Americans.

  Discussion:
  

  According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, student loan default rates have soared from just over six percent in 2003 to nearly 12 percent in 2016. Additionally the Fed has stated that more than two-thirds of student loans are held by people under the age of 40.

  The National Association of Realtors® (NAR) has been monitoring the important discussion on the potential implications that rising student debt may have on consumer access to mortgage credit, and more broadly, home ownership. Federal Reserve Board economists have published the results of a paper estimating the impact of an increase in student debt on home ownership. Among the paper’s results are:

  • A 10 percent increase in student loan debt decreases the home ownership rate by one to two percentage points 24 months out of school.
  • In terms of numbers, a 10 percent increase in tuition fee (which is associated with student debt) reduces the number of potential homeowners by 280 individuals per 10,000 college goers two years after exiting school, which is equivalent to 170 individuals per 10,000 individuals (both college and non-college goers).
  • A 10 percent increase in student loan debt causes a 0.6 percentage point increase in the probability that the borrower falls into the subprime category (credit score of 620 or less) and a 0.8 percentage point increase in the probability that a borrower falls into deeply subprime (500 or less).
  • A 10 percent increase in debt is associated with a 0.7 percentage points increase in delinquency rates

  Additionally, a survey of home buyers and sellers conducted by NAR indicates that student debt liability is of particular concern to potential buyers trying to save for or meet down payment requirements. Should student loan burdens continue to impact the ability of responsible borrowers to save for a down payment, potential borrowers will be unable to access the most affordable mortgage options. Though a vast majority of borrowers have been responsible and diligent in making their student loan payments, the ability of borrowers to save for priorities such as emergency savings, medical expenses, and down payments may become more difficult and ultimately impact their future decisions to purchase a home. This effect is illustrated through NAR research showing that in 2014 the share of first-time buyers fell to its lowest point in nearly three decades.

  States and localities have taken steps to combat this trend.  California, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, and North Dakota all passed legislation related to refinancing programs, while Iowa and Rhode Island have started programs without needing legislative authorization. These programs are designed to offer lower interest rates, which allow borrowers to repay loans at a lower total cost. To start refinancing programs, states are granting existing student loan authorities the power to refinance loans. Locally, the Maryland General Assembly gave approval to allow Montgomery County to establish a loan authority to refinance the college loans of people who live there at lower interest rates.
  
  Status:
  

  Legislation introduced in the 2017 general Assembly by Del. Marcus Simon (HB 1915, HB 1916), Del. Marcia Price (HB 1895) and Sen. Janet Howell (SB 1035, SB 1036) establishes a Virginia Student Loan Refinancing Authority for the purpose of developing and implementing a program by which individuals may receive a loan from the Authority to refinance all or part of qualified education loans, and creates an Office of the Student Loan Ombudsman. All legislation was left in committee or passed by indefinitely.

  Recommendation:
  NVAR will support legislation in the Virginia General Assembly to develop creative solutions, including policies to allow and encourage refinancing of student loan debt, to mitigate the impact of rising student debt on homebuyers.

• Federal – Conventional Residential Lending/ G-fees

  Position:
  

  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors^® (NVAR) supports efforts to ensure that qualified borrowers have access to safe and affordable mortgage financing and urges Congress to enact legislation that prohibits guarantee fees (G-fees) from being extended, increased and diverted for unrelated government spending.

  Discussion:
  

  GSE guarantee fees are charged by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, to lenders for bundling, selling, and guaranteeing the payment of principal and interest on their Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS). These fees are generally passed on to consumers in the form of higher interest rates. The main component of guarantee fee covers projected credit losses from borrower defaults over the life of the loans, administrative costs, and a return on capital (think of it like MBS insurance). The fees are also used to cover internal expenses for such services as:

  • Managing and administering the securitized mortgage pools,

  • Selling the MBS to investors,

  • Reporting to investors and the SEC, and

  • Maintaining the MBS on the open market, and selling, general and administrative expense.

  Any proposed extension of the g-fee increase will maintain the higher cost of a mortgage credit and continue to cause homebuyers to reconsider a potential home purchase or refinance. At a time when the housing market is beginning to show signs of recovery, and inventories are beginning to fall, a punitive fee that does not support the safety and soundness of the housing finance sector, will likely exacerbate the problem it was intended to fix. A slowdown in housing means higher unemployment, but more importantly, a slowdown in loan originations which is what is required to fuel the “pay-for” via the g-fee.

  Status:
  

  Reps. Sanford (R-SC) and Sherman (D-CA) have reintroduced their g-fee legislation in 2017, which is now referred to as H.R. 916, the “Risk Management and Homeowner Stability Act." This legislation amends the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to prohibit the use of G-fees as offsets. Currently, it is unclear whether similar legislation will be introduced in the U.S. Senate.

  In 2016, Sens. Crapo (R-ID) and Warner (D-VA) introduced S. 752 which would establish a score-keeping rule to ensure that increases in G-fees shall not be used to offset provisions that increase the deficit.

   On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed into law a transportation reauthorization bill, which removed a provision passed by the U.S. Senate to extend an increase in the average G-fee that was enacted in 2011.

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR and NAR strongly oppose the use of guarantee fees for any use other than intended purpose and the associations will work to prohibit G-fees from being extended, increased and diverted for unrelated government spending.

• Federal – National Flood Insurance Program

  Position:
  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors^® (NVAR) urges Congress to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to continue providing flood insurance after September 30, 2017.
  
  Discussion:
  

  Without the NFIP, millions of home- and small business owners nationwide, not just those in coastal or waterfront areas, will not be able to obtain a mortgage or insurance to protect their property against the most expensive and common natural disaster in the U.S.: flooding. A program lapse could delay or derail over 1,300 transactions a day, or nearly 40,000 real estate transactions every month.

  The NFIP was created because of the lack of access to affordable flood insurance coverage in the private market. It also reduced the number of uninsured properties that otherwise would rebuild with taxpayer-funded disaster relief after major floods.

  Federal law requires that property owners with federally related mortgages buy and maintain a minimum amount of flood insurance coverage for properties located in Special Flood Hazard Areas. Currently, property owners may not satisfy this “continuous coverage” requirement with some private market alternatives to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). If a policyholder leaves the NFIP for one of these market options, they could jeopardize their grandfathered status and face substantial rate increases should they later return to the NFIP.
  
  Status:
  

  The NFIP is again up for renewal on September 30, 2017. The last Congress began the process of drafting the next reauthorization package by holding hearings and acting on several reform bills that could be considered for inclusion, such as:

  • H.R. 2901, "The Flood Insurance Market Parity and Modernization Act" to encourage the development of a private market that offers comparable flood insurance coverage at lower cost than the NFIP.
    • On April 28, 2016, the House of Representatives passed this bill by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 419-0.
    • The Senate did not act on the measure before the end of the session.
  • H.R. 2029, "The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016" to fund NFIP flood mapping ($190 million), property mitigation grants ($175 million), and the Office of the Flood Insurance Advocate ($5 million).
    • Enacted into law on December 18, 2015.

  • H.R. 3297, "The Fairness in Flood Insurance Act" to streamline the flood mapping process and reimburse property owners when they appeal and win.
    • Introduced July 29, 2015 but was not taken up in the 114th Congress.

  The 115th Congress is expected to move quickly toward reauthorization, with the House likely to consider legislation first. NAR will continue to urge swift action and work with Congress to fully reauthorize and reform the NFIP before the current authority expires on September 30, 2017.

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR and NAR support: 1. Reauthorizing and gradually strengthening the NFIP so it is sustainable over the long run; 2. Providing federal assistance to high risk property owners, including guaranteed loans, grants and buyouts in order to build higher and keep NFIP rates affordable; 3. Encouraging the development of private market options to offer comparable flood insurance coverage at lower cost than NFIP; 4. More granularly pricing NFIP policies to better reflect the property's specific risk; and 5. Improving flood map accuracy so fewer property owners have to file expensive appeals.

• Federal – Federal Tax Reform

  Position:
  

  The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors^® (NVAR) opposes tax reform ideas that repeal or weaken tax provisions that encourage homeownership. 

  Discussion:
  

  The leaders of the Congressional tax-writing committees and President Trump have expressed a strong desire to accomplish tax reform. Realtors® are facing an environment looking at the real possibility of serious changes being enacted to the tax law. 

  Realtors® have successfully lobbied to protect the Mortgage Interest Deduction (MID), which most legislators support.  However, proposed tax reform plans might unwittingly cause more harm to the real estate industry.

  The reason for concern is that a central feature of each of the proposed tax reform plans (Camp Plan, Wyden Plan, and Blueprint) is the elimination of all or most itemized deductions, except the Mortgage Interest Deduction (MID) and the deduction for charitable contributions. Along with these changes, the standard deduction would be nearly doubled under these plans.

  A plan that eliminates most itemized deductions, such as the deduction for state and local taxes, while doubling the standard deduction would mean that only about 5 percent of taxpayers would claim itemized deductions, down from about a third under the current law. For the great majority of Americans, there would no longer be a tax difference between owning a home and renting one. Any modification of real estate-related tax benefits in the current economy could do serious damage, would create uncertainty for prospective purchasers, would decrease the incentive for first-time home buyers, and could lead to a drop in the value of existing homes.
  
  Status:
  

  Though no viable tax reform legislation has been introduced in the current Congress, House and Senate leaders on both sides of the aisle, and President Trump are developing plans to move their vision of tax reform this year. Tax reform legislation is likely to come into focus in late summer 2017.

  Recommendation:
  

  NVAR and NAR acknowledge the complexity of the current tax system and seek tax reforms that support the goals of homeownership and freedom to buy, maintain and sell real estate. Reform ideas that repeal or weaken tax provisions that encourage homeownership must be rejected.