TABLE 5.—Statutory and regulatory provisions for the maximum loan-value ratio of the National Housing Act, as amended, on 1-family owner

Existing construction completed less than 1 year and not approved prior to beginning of construction.

88 percent of
$9,000 of value
plus 73 per-
cent of excess
value to max-
imum mort-
gage of $20,-
000.
90 percent of
value of $9,000
or less; for
value in ex-
cess of $9,250,
88 percent of
$9,000 of value
plus 73 per-
cent of excess
value to max-
imum mort-
gage of $20,000.
90 percent of
$9,000 of value
plus 75 per-
cent of excess
value to max-
imum mort-
gage of $20,000.
90 percent of 1st
$10,000 of
value plus 85
percent of

next $6,000
plus 70 per-
cent of value
in excess of
$16,000 to
maximumu
mortgage of
$20,000.

and the maximum mortgage term for FHA home mortgages insured under sec. 203 occupied dwellings, June 27, 1934 to Apr. 29, 1960-Continued

TABLE 5.—Statutory and regulatory provisions for the maximum loan-value ratio of the National Housing Act, as amended, on 1-family owner

Existing construction

90 percent of 1st
$13,500 of
value plus 85
percent of
next $2,500
plus 70 per-
cent of value
in excess of
$16,000 to
maximum
mortgage of
$20,000.

90 percent of 1st
$13,500 of
value plus 85
percent of
next $2,500
plus 70 per-
cent of value
in excess of
$16,000 to
maximum
mortgage of
$22,500.

90 percent of 1st
$18,000 of
value plus 70
percent of
value in ex-
cess of $18,000
to maximum
mortgage of
$22,500.

1 Also eligible for mortgage insurance are properties the construction of which was begun between Jan. 1, 1937, and Feb. 3, 1938, but not sold or occupied since completion.

2 If, in the determination of the Commissioner, insurance of such mortgages would not reasonably be expected to contribute to substantial increases in cost and prices of housing facilities for families of moderate income.

3 The Commissioner may by regulation increase the $7,000 value mit for such 95-percent mortgage to $8,000 in any geographical area when he finds that cost levels so require.

If the Commissioner finds that it is not feasible to construct dwellings containing 3 and 4 bedrooms without sacrifice of sound standards of construction, design, and livability, he may increase the dollar amount limitation of $6,650 (i.e., 95 percent of $7,000 of value), or $7,600 (i.e., 95 percent of $8,000 of value) by $950 for each additional bedroom in excess of 2 but not more than a total of 4.

and the maximum mortgage term for FHA home mortgages insured under sec: 203 occupied dwellings, June 27, 1934 to Apr. 29, 1960-Continued

If the Commissioner finds that it is not feasible to construct dwellings containing 3 and 4 bedrooms without sacrifice of sound standards of construction, design, and livability, he may increase the dollar amount limitation of $6,300 (i.e., 90 percent of $7,000 of value), or $7,200 (i.e., 90 percent of $8,000 of value) by $900 for each additional bedroom in excess of 2 but not more than a total of 4.

6 Amendment to administrative rules relating to exceptions from credit control restrictions made the 25year maturity available to a 2-family unit where the mortgage amount does not exceed $5,800 per family unit.

? Discretionary authority given the President after taking into account the general effect of the higher ratio or longer maturity upon conditions in the building industry and the national economy. This author. ity was not exercised.

Table 6 shows the median maturity separately for new and existing home mortgage transactions insured in the first and second quarters of 1960 and, in addition, in recent calendar year periods. The purpose in showing figures for new and existing homes separately is to show not only that the maturity terms for both types of security have increased but also to show how the figure for existing homes has since 1955 begun to approach the figure for new homes. After the 1938 amendment and prior to the 1954 amendment to the National Housing Act, as amended, new home mortgages were always eligible for a higher maximum term than were existing home mortgages. The amendment of August 2, 1954, equalized the maximum terms for both. The median figures in the table reflect the increase in the net amount at risk for the fund since both new and existing homes are eligible for the maximum term of 30 years.

TABLE 6.-Median terms of mortgage in 1-family home transactions of sec. 203 mortgages insured 1955-60

TABLE 7.-Median loan-value ratios in 1-family home transactions of sec. 203

mortgages insured 1950-60

[In percent]

June
19601

March 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 1960 1

93.4 93.5 91.5 85.1 86.6 88.7 85.3 86.5 83.7 86.5 88.0 92.2 92.0 90.2 84.9 82.9 85.0 78.5 78.3 77.9 76.6 77.8

1 Quarterly period ended.

Table 7 shows the median loan-value ratios separately also for new and existing home mortgage transactions insured in the first and second quarters of 1960, and, in addition, in recent calendar year periods. The purpose in showing figures for new and existing homes separately again is to show not only that the loan-value ratios for both types of security have increased but also to show how the figure for existing homes since 1956 has begun to approach the figure for new homes. Between the 1938 amendment and the 1956 amendment, new home mortgages were always eligible for higher loan-value ratios than were existing home mortgages. The amendment of August 7, 1956, equalized the maximum loan-value ratios for both. The median figures in the table reflect the increase in the net amount at risk for the fund on this account and also the three subsequent liberalizing amendments of July 12, 1957, April 1, 1958, and September 29, 1959, which maintained equality in loan-value terms for both new and existing homes. (It might be noted that all four amendments provide for less liberal terms for new homes less than 1 year old, but such