Core Viewpoint - The potential shift from tri-merge credit reporting to single or bi-merge credit reporting poses significant risks to both lenders and borrowers, potentially leading to higher costs and reduced access to mortgage financing for many consumers [1][2][3]. Group 1: Credit Reporting Models - The tri-merge credit report model, which consolidates data from all three major credit bureaus, provides a comprehensive view of a consumer's creditworthiness, essential for accurate mortgage lending [4][6]. - A single-pull credit report relies on data from one source, while a bi-merge report combines information from two bureaus, which may lead to incomplete assessments of creditworthiness [3][6]. - Research indicates that omitting even one tradeline can significantly impact a consumer's credit score, with up to 27.8 million consumers potentially dropping to lower score bands if one bureau is excluded [8]. Group 2: Impact on Consumers - Integrating rental payment data into credit reports can enhance the credit scores of many credit-invisible consumers, enabling them to qualify for loans and access better interest rates [7]. - Borrowers affected by a bi-merge system could incur an additional $6,600 in mortgage interest over the life of the loan, highlighting the financial consequences of changing the reporting structure [8]. - The current tri-merge model supports financial inclusion by providing a more accurate assessment of creditworthiness, particularly for those who may be overlooked under a single or bi-merge system [7][11]. Group 3: Regulatory and Legislative Support - The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte has reaffirmed the importance of maintaining the tri-merge requirement, indicating a commitment to both consumer protection and innovation in credit scoring [5][12]. - Lawmakers are advocating for legislation to codify the tri-merge requirement, emphasizing the need for a stable and trustworthy mortgage lending environment [13]. - The approach taken by Director Pulte reflects a balance between necessary reforms and the preservation of effective existing systems, which is crucial for managing risk in mortgage lending [14][15].