Connect with us

Accounting

Barry Melancon: The most important man in accounting

Published

on

Barry Melancon

The most important man in accounting originally intended to be a lawyer.

When Barry Melancon — who is retiring at the end of this year after three decades of leading the accounting profession as president and CEO of the American Institute of CPAs — started college at Nicholls State University in Louisiana in 1975, accounting wasn’t even on his radar.

“If you went back to my high school yearbook, I believe it would tell you that I wanted to be a lawyer,” he recalled, and when he started in his first semester, he was majoring in pre-law.

Coming from what he describes as “a very modest family” — his father had been pulled out of school in sixth grade to cut sugarcane by hand on the family farm — he explained that, “There wasn’t a frame of reference for me, really, about the CPA profession.”

That changed in his second semester, though, because he realized that he wanted to know more about business, and he chose accounting as a concentration largely because it offered the most comprehensive introduction to business: “If I majored in accounting, I would take all the other disciplines, because it was required — I would take management and marketing and economics and finance and, of course, accounting. And it just felt like if I wanted to know business — still probably within the back of my mind being a lawyer — that was going to give me the broadest base of knowledge.”

Then, in an epiphany experienced by countless CPAs before and since, he took the entry-level accounting course and was hooked.

“I liked it — I don’t think it’s the right course and we’re talking about changing it today, and I never thought it was the right course then,” he said. “It was way too mechanical to teach accounting. But I grasped the notion of what accountants really were doing, and so I changed my major into accounting after that first year.”

(See our 2024 list of the most influential people in the accounting profession.)

Having made the choice, he charged ahead at full speed, finishing his undergraduate accounting degree in 3 ½ years, quickly landing a job at a small local firm, Bergeron & Co., and making partner there by the unprecedented age of 25. Not long after that he became the head of the Society of Louisiana CPAs, and seven years later he was named the youngest-ever head of the AICPA at 37. (He was actually hired when he was 36, but they delayed his start date until after his birthday so it would look better in the press release.)

By the time he arrived at the institute, Melancon had long since fully committed himself to accounting — and he had strong ideas about where he wanted to take the profession, and that would mean major changes at its main membership organization.

“Professional bodies in any profession usually have a DNA about saying why a profession couldn’t or shouldn’t do things,” he explained. “And I think what we created and what I had a passion about was to be an organization that led a profession, that worked with the profession to actually give permission to be much broader than what it was, to see those opportunities and what was in the best interest of the profession and the public interest — not to be an organization that tried to figure out why you might want to be really careful, or to say you shouldn’t do these types of things.”

While it’s far from the only thing Melancon has accomplished during his long tenure, shifting the AICPA from being an inhibitor to an enabler — and driving the profession as a whole to be more open to new opportunities and approaches and risks — may well be how he’s had the most influence.

“We need to have a mindset of the things we can do, rather than the reasons why we can’t,” he said, “and I think the profession embodies that today.”

Getting it in writing

To understand how Melancon rose to the level where he was able to wield that kind of influence, it helps to know that he had it written on his list of goals from the get-go.

Early in his career at Bergeron, Melancon started keeping a written list (he still keeps it, only now it’s on his phone), because a partner at the firm suggested it.

“One time this partner and I were going to a client, and the partner was building a new house and we passed in front of his house and he said, ‘You see, even before my house is being built, we have a pool in it. I had a written goal.’ This is what he said: ‘I had a written goal to have a pool, and now I’m able to achieve that.’ And he basically impressed upon me — I might have been 21 at that point — how important written goals were.”

And high on the list Melancon started keeping was a goal that sounds an awful lot like a job description for the head of the AICPA: “Literally I had a written goal to fly around, get off a plane and give speeches,” he said with a laugh. “I mean, it wasn’t worded exactly like that.”

AICPA CEO and president Barry Melancon addressing the 2018 Engage event
Melancon at the 2018 Engage

AL POWERS

Also on the list was making partner by 25 — an objective he almost didn’t fulfill, because a client offered him a job at a substantially higher salary than he was making at his firm.

“I was at Bergeron & Co. about nine months, and I was making $15,000 a year, and I had a client offer me a job at $25,000,” he recalled. “And when you’re making $15,000, $25,000 is a big increase, right?”

Feeling tempted, he told the partners of the firm about the offer — and even today, 40 years later, he makes a point of telling firm leaders about their response: “What they did is they said, ‘Let’s go to lunch.’ We had a 2 ½-hour lunch and basically they painted a picture for me of what being a partner was going to be like in the firm — basically what they made — and they painted the picture so well and it was one of my goals, that it caused me to say, ‘I am not doing this.’ I’m not leaving because I will always regret not experiencing that outcome.”

Not every goal on the list gets fulfilled, though; for instance, he originally had a goal to retire at 55: “But when I got later in my career, I said that’s a really dumb goal.”

The people around you

Of course, merely willing a thing (even in writing) isn’t always enough to make it come true. It also takes hard work and determination, which Melancon has always been willing to put in — and it certainly helped that leaders all around him recognized his talent early.

“The people around you in your life really determine who you are, and it’s important to understand that,” he said.

The day he passed the CPA exam, for instance, a partner at Bergeron & Co. congratulated him by taking his own name off an LSCPA committee, and having them put Melancon on it.

“So literally I was on a society or a professional committee the first day I was a CPA in my career,” he said, and he only got more involved, chairing committees and putting his minor in government from Nicholls to good use on advocacy work in the state.

(See who the most influential people in the profession think are the most influential people for 2024.)

He was so active, in fact, that when the then-CEO of the society moved to the top spot at the Texas state society, both he and the CPA who succeeded him as head of the LSCPA offered Melancon the No. 2 spot at their respective organizations. Having just made partner at Bergeron, he turned them both down — but three years later when the Louisiana position opened up again and the then-chair made it clear that the job was his for the taking, he said yes.

“Really, what my wife and I talked about was that, in reality, we can go do this, and what’s the worst case? If I don’t like it, I can go back into public practice,” he said. “Those doors aren’t going to be closed to me.”

He couldn’t know that he wouldn’t return to public practice, and that his seven years at the Louisiana society would lead to him being so active with the AICPA that he would be considered a potential candidate to succeed then-president and CEO Phil Chenok in the mid-1990s.

But when the call came from search firm Korn Ferry, Melancon initially turned them down, too. “I told them no,” he recalled. “I said, ‘I’m probably too young for the institute to hire me and I don’t think that’s going to happen, and so I don’t think I’m going to put my name in.’ And about a month later, they called me back and they said, ‘Look, people want you to put your name in, and if you put your name in, I can guarantee you that you will be one of nine that gets interviewed.’ So, at that point, it’s sort of hard to say no to that.”

It wasn’t just the accountants recommending him to Korn Ferry who envisioned Melancon at the head of the institute. Much earlier, one of the leaders of the LSCPA saw it too. One component of his compensation involved deferred comp that would be forfeited if he left before serving for 10 years; at the time the position at the AICPA came open, Melancon had served seven years, but “unbeknownst to me, one of the society leaders had written into my contract a provision that said — and I didn’t ask for this — you forfeit unless you leave to be CEO of the AICPA. And that was written when I was 30.”

“It’s people around you who see things in you, at least in my case, that have been unbelievable in life,” he said. “For someone to see that in you, to me, is about what people around you make of you and what people around you contribute to you. When someone that was around me saw that — what an incredible compliment and support mechanism that was — it is amazing. I’ve had a lot of luck.”

Promising change

Melancon put his name in the ring, but still didn’t think he had a chance, even though he flew to California to meet the recruiter from Korn Ferry.

“We were supposed to have a one-hour dinner in the San Francisco airport,” he recalled. “And essentially I started that dinner off with, ‘Look, I didn’t go to a name-brand university. I’m 36 years old. I never worked in a big firm. I’m not from the Northeast. You and I both know that the institute is not going to hire me in this job. So, let me tell you what I think ought to happen.'”

The one-hour dinner ended four hours later, after Melancon had outlined all the changes he thought should be made at the institute. “And when I ultimately got into the role,” he said, “I did a lot of the stuff that we talked about.”

Barry Melancon - Engage 2021

Melancon speaking at Engage 2021

Despite — or perhaps because of — his candor with Korn Ferry, Melancon got the job, and felt empowered to implement the changes he had suggested. “I went in with the notion that people put me here and I was going to change the place,” he said. “And in the first 90 days I did a massive reorganization, including many people being asked to leave the institute.”

He cut headcount at the AICPA from 863 to below 600 (a level it maintained for 20 years, until it merged with the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants in 2016). He also began to build up the institute’s advocacy muscles, speed up its processes, promote high-potential talent (including current CEO of public accounting Sue Coffey), and to change what the institute meant to firms — particularly those below the Big Four, who had not been as engaged with the AICPA before.

“I knew the profession was changing and I knew that the institute could not be what a lot of people would have said that it was then — an ivory tower institute — and I also knew that we had to be more entrepreneurial and that the profession had to be more entrepreneurial and that’s what drove me, and we did it,” he said.

From there to the future

A wholesale reorganization of the leading organization in the profession would be accomplishment enough for many, but for Melancon, it served to give him a strong platform from which to lead accounting into the future.

The three decades of his tenure have been among the most tumultuous, unpredictable and full of change in accounting’s history, and Melancon has taken the lead in navigating the profession through two recessions, the collapse of Arthur Andersen and the Enron crisis, the creation of major new regulatory regimes in the form of Sarbanes-Oxley and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the rise of the internet and the cloud, a global pandemic, and most recently, the birth of artificial intelligence, through all of which he has charted a proactive course forward, rather than merely reacting.

All that time, Melancon and the institute were pursuing their own agenda — computerizing the CPA exam and taking it international, launching

CPA.com as its technology arm, exploring and proselytizing new services, launching initiatives to boost audit quality, working to promote diversity, aggressively pursuing solutions to the current pipeline program, and, perhaps most ambitiously, merging with CIMA to create an international powerhouse.

With so much to do, it’s easy to see why Melancon has stayed in his role longer than any other leader in AICPA history. “I went in at first with a five-year commitment, so you don’t really know how that is going to play out,” he said. “But I had a passion for the profession and I always have had confidence in myself, so I did not go in to the institute with the notion that this was going to be a short-term process.”

Even with his time at the institute almost up, Melancon is still looking forward, seeing the future course of the profession in his mind, spying out both challenges and opportunities.

He highlights artificial intelligence as a transformational technology that will, like the rise of the internet three decades ago, have repercussions for both society at large and the accounting profession.

“I am not one who’s going to say that with AI, the role of the human is going to be fine, or that it’s always going to be there. I don’t believe that at all,” he said. “I believe that just like a lot of other technologies change jobs, change the quantity of jobs in certain areas, change the expectations of what people do in jobs, it’s going to have an impact; it’s going to change how we define work in society not in the next two years but in the next decade.”

AI’s impact on the profession is going to be tied into an ongoing evolution in the structure of firms and how accountants progress in their careers. “The fundamental change for the profession is that we have been a profession that takes entry-level people … we take in entry-level people and we put them in an environment to progress upward to the middle of the organization,” he explained. “And it takes a while, and the key component of that is a broader set of competencies than just accounting and a broad notion of what you can call business acumen. And when you get to the middle part of an organization, whether it’s a finance function or a firm, your value-add to a client or to your employer is really about those broader skills and your business acumen.”

“Organizations like the AICPA and firms and professional accountancy bodies around the world need to think about how we take an entry-level accountant where technology is going to do the bulk of that entry-level accounting work and how we move them up quickly and get them those broader skills quicker so that they’re value-add players,” he explained. “It is an immense challenge, but we’re going to have to figure it out. And if we figure it out, then starting from human capital, our services are going to change.”

Those challenges will be for the next generation of leaders of the profession to deal with, but Melancon does have some advice for the accountants of the future ­— and it is, naturally, about taking a broader view of what they, and the profession, can do.

“If we go into every morning and we think, ‘We know accounting,’ we’re not going to have the same future as if we think, ‘We know business information,'” he said. “We really need to take our skills and our competencies and apply it to the broader footprint of business and do it right and effectively, with ethics. And if we do that, we’re going to have a lot of new and different opportunities, and the next generation of our profession is going to be even more successful than the current generation of our profession.”

Much of Melancon’s career can be summed up by a relentless drive to move accounting forward, to improve every aspect of it — but as he looks back, it’s not the impact he has had on the profession that is foremost in his mind, but rather the impact that the people in the profession had on him.

“I would thank the people that I have interacted with, the people in our profession, for how much I’ve learned from so many different people,” he said. “I find it really hard to believe someone can have a career that gets exposed to anything like what I’ve been exposed to, because CPAs and the profession are fantastic, and the people who interact with you and the questions they ask and the contributions they make are just tremendous. … And that knowledge makes one’s life — in my case, my life — so incredibly enjoyable and fulfilled that I’m very appreciative of the profession.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

Senate unveils plan to fast-track tax cuts, debt limit hike

Published

on

Senate Republicans unveiled a budget blueprint designed to fast-track a renewal of President Donald Trump’s tax cuts and an increase to the nation’s borrowing limit, ahead of a planned vote on the resolution later this week. 

The Senate plan will allow for a $4 trillion extension of Trump’s tax cuts and an additional $1.5 trillion in further levy reductions. The House plan called for $4.5 trillion in total cuts.

Republicans say they are assuming that the cost of extending the expiring 2017 Trump tax cuts will cost zero dollars.

The draft is a sign that divisions within the Senate GOP over the size and scope of spending cuts to offset tax reductions are closer to being resolved. 

Lawmakers, however, have yet to face some of the most difficult decisions, including which spending to cut and which tax reductions to prioritize. That will be negotiated in the coming weeks after both chambers approve identical budget resolutions unlocking the process.

The Senate budget plan would also increase the debt ceiling by up to $5 trillion, compared with the $4 trillion hike in the House plan. Senate Republicans say they want to ensure that Congress does not need to vote on the debt ceiling again before the 2026 midterm elections. 

“This budget resolution unlocks the process to permanently extend proven, pro-growth tax policy,” Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican, said. 

The blueprint is the latest in a multi-step legislative process for Republicans to pass a renewal of Trump’s tax cuts through Congress. The bill will renew the president’s 2017 reductions set to expire at the end of this year, which include lower rates for households and deductions for privately held businesses. 

Republicans are also hoping to include additional tax measures to the bill, including raising the state and local tax deduction cap and some of Trump’s campaign pledges to eliminate taxes on certain categories of income, including tips and overtime pay.

The plan would allow for the debt ceiling hike to be vote on separately from the rest of the tax and spending package. That gives lawmakers flexibility to move more quickly on the debt ceiling piece if a federal default looms before lawmakers can agree on the tax package.

Political realities

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters on Wednesday, after meeting with Trump at the White House to discuss the tax blueprint, that he’s not sure yet if he has the votes to pass the measure.

Thune in a statement said the budget has been blessed by the top Senate ruleskeeper but Democrats said that it is still vulnerable to being challenged later.

The biggest differences in the Senate budget from the competing House plan are in the directives for spending cuts, a reflection of divisions among lawmakers over reductions to benefit programs, including Medicaid and food stamps. 

The Senate plan pares back a House measure that calls for at least $2 trillion in spending reductions over a decade, a massive reduction that would likely mean curbing popular entitlement programs.

The Senate GOP budget grants significantly more flexibility. It instructs key committees that oversee entitlement programs to come up with at least $4 billion in cuts. Republicans say they expect the final tax package to contain much larger curbs on spending.

The Senate budget would also allow $150 billion in new spending for the military and $175 billion for border and immigration enforcement.

If the minimum spending cuts are achieved along with the maximum tax cuts, the plan would add $5.8 trillion in new deficits over 10 years, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

The Senate is planning a vote on the plan in the coming days. Then it goes to the House for a vote as soon as next week. There, it could face opposition from spending hawks like South Carolina’s Ralph Norman, who are signaling they want more aggressive cuts. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson can likely afford just two or three defections on the budget vote given his slim majority and unified Democratic opposition.

Continue Reading

Accounting

How asset location decides bond ladder taxes

Published

on

Financial advisors and clients worried about stock volatility and inflation can climb bond ladders to safety — but they won’t find any, if those steps lead to a place with higher taxes.

The choice of asset location for bond ladders in a client portfolio can prove so important that some wealthy customers holding them in a taxable brokerage account may wind up losing money in an inflationary period due to the payments to Uncle Sam, according to a new academic study. And those taxes, due to what the author described as the “dead loss” from the so-called original issue discount compared to the value, come with an extra sting if advisors and clients thought the bond ladder had prepared for the rise in inflation.

Bond ladders — whether they are based on Treasury inflation-protected securities like the strategy described in the study or another fixed-income security — provide small but steady returns tied to the regular cadence of maturities in the debt-based products. However, advisors and their clients need to consider where any interest payments, coupon income or principal accretion from the bond ladders could wind up as ordinary income, said Cal Spranger, a fixed income and wealth manager with Seattle-based Badgley + Phelps Wealth Managers.

“Thats going to be the No. 1 concern about, where is the optimal place to hold them,” Spranger said in an interview. “One of our primary objectives for a bond portfolio is to smooth out that volatility. … We’re trying to reduce risk with the bond portfolio, not increase risks.”

READ MORE: Why laddered bond portfolios cover all the bases

The ‘peculiarly bad location’ for a bond ladder

Risk-averse planners, then, could likely predict the conclusion of the working academic paper, which was posted in late February by Edward McQuarrie, a professor emeritus in the Leavey School of Business at Santa Clara University: Tax-deferred retirement accounts such as a 401(k) or a traditional individual retirement account are usually the best location for a Treasury inflation-protected securities ladder. The appreciation attributes available through an after-tax Roth IRA work better for equities than a bond ladder designed for decumulation, and the potential payments to Uncle Sam in brokerage accounts make them an even worse asset location.

“Few planners will be surprised to learn that locating a TIPS ladder in a taxable account leads to phantom income and excess payment of tax, with a consequent reduction in after-tax real spending power,” McQuarrie writes. “Some may be surprised to learn just how baleful that mistake in account location can be, up to and including negative payouts in the early years for high tax brackets and very high rates of inflation. In the worst cases, more is due in tax than the ladder payout provides. And many will be surprised to learn how rapidly the penalty for choosing the wrong asset location increases at higher rates of inflation — precisely the motivation for setting up a TIPS ladder in the first place. Perhaps the most surprising result of all was the discovery that excess tax payments in the early years are never made up. [Original issue discount] causes a dead loss.”

The Roth account may look like a healthy alternative, since the clients wouldn’t owe any further taxes on distributions from them in retirement. But the bond ladder would defeat the whole purpose of that vehicle, McQuarrie writes.

“Planners should recognize that a Roth account is a peculiarly bad location for a bond ladder, whether real or nominal,” he writes. “Ladders are decumulation tools designed to provide a stream of distributions, which the Roth account does not otherwise require. Locating a bond ladder in the Roth thus forfeits what some consider to be one of the most valuable features of the Roth account. If the bond ladder is the only asset in the Roth, then the Roth itself will have been liquidated as the ladder reaches its end.”

READ MORE: How to hedge risk with annuity ladders

RMD advantages

That means that the Treasury inflation-protected securities ladder will add the most value to portfolios in a tax-deferred account (TDA), which McQuarrie acknowledges is not a shocking recommendation to anyone familiar with them. On the other hand, some planners with clients who need to begin required minimum distributions from their traditional IRA may reap further benefits than expected from that location.

“More interesting is the demonstration that the after-tax real income received from a TIPS ladder located in a TDA does not vary with the rate of inflation, in contrast to what happens in a taxable account,” McQuarrie writes. “Also of note was the ability of most TIPS ladders to handle the RMDs due, and, at higher rates of inflation, to shelter other assets from the need to take RMDs.”

The present time of high yields from Treasury inflation-protected securities could represent an ample opportunity to tap into that scenario.

“If TIPS yields are attractive when the ladder is set up, distributions from the ladder will typically satisfy RMDs on the ladder balance throughout the 30 years,” McQuarrie writes. “The higher the inflation experienced, the greater the surplus coverage, allowing other assets in the account to be sheltered in part from RMDs by means of the TIPS ladder payout. However, if TIPS yields are borderline unattractive at ladder set up, and if the ladder proved unnecessary because inflation fell to historically low levels, then there may be a shortfall in RMD coverage in the middle years, requiring either that TIPS bonds be sold prematurely, or that other assets in the TDA be tapped to cover the RMD.”

READ MORE: A primer on the IRA ‘bridge’ to bigger Social Security benefits

The key takeaways on bond ladders

Other caveats to the strategies revolve around any possible state taxes on withdrawals or any number of client circumstances ruling out a universal recommendation. The main message of McQuarrie’s study serves as a warning against putting the ladder in a taxable brokerage account.

“Unsurprisingly, the higher the client’s tax rate, the worse the outcomes from locating a TIPS ladder in taxable when inflation rages,” he writes. “High-bracket taxpayers who accurately foresee a surge in future inflation, and take steps to defend against it, but who make the mistake of locating their TIPS ladder in taxable, can end up paying more in tax to the government than is received from the TIPS ladder during the first year or two.”

For municipal or other types of tax-exempt bonds, though, a taxable account is “the optimal place,” Spranger said. Convertible Treasury or corporate bonds show more similarity with the Treasury inflation-protected securities in that their ideal location is in a tax-deferred account, he noted.

Regardless, bonds act as a crucial core to a client’s portfolio, tamping down on the risk of volatility and sensitivity to interest rates. And the right ladder strategies yield more reliable future rates of returns for clients than a bond ETF or mutual fund, Spranger said.

“We’re strong proponents of using individual bonds, No. 1 so that we can create bond ladders, but, most importantly, for the certainty that individual bonds provide,” he said.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Why IRS cuts may spare a unit that facilitates mortgages

Published

on

Loan applicants and mortgage companies often rely on an Internal Revenue Service that’s dramatically downsizing to help facilitate the lending process, but they may be in luck.

That’s because the division responsible for the main form used to allow consumers to authorize the release of income-tax information to lenders is tied to essential IRS operations.

The Income Verification Express Service could be insulated from what NMN affiliate Accounting Today has described of a series of fluctuating IRS cuts because it’s part of the submission processing unit within wage and investment, a division central to the tax bureau’s purpose.

“It’s unlikely that IVES will be impacted due to association within submission processing,” said Curtis Knuth, president and CEO of NCS, a consumer reporting agency. “Processing tax returns and collecting revenue is the core function and purpose of the IRS.”

Knuth is a member of the IVES participant working group, which is comprised of representatives from companies that facilitate processing of 4506-C forms used to request tax transcripts for mortgages. Those involved represent a range of company sizes and business models.

The IRS has planned to slash thousands of jobs and make billions of dollars of cuts that are still in process, some of which have been successfully challenged in court.

While the current cuts might not be a concern for processing the main form of tax transcript requests this time around, there have been past issues with it in other situations like 2019’s lengthy government shutdown.

President Trump recently signed a continuing funding resolution to avert a shutdown. But it will run out later this year, so the issue could re-emerge if there’s an impasse in Congress at that time. Republicans largely dominate Congress but their lead is thinner in the Senate.

The mortgage industry will likely have an additional option it didn’t have in 2019 if another extended deadlock on the budget emerges and impedes processing of the central tax transcript form.

“It absolutely affected closings, because you couldn’t get the transcripts. You couldn’t get anybody on the phone,” said Phil Crescenzo Jr., vice president of National One Mortgage Corp.’s Southeast division.

There is an automated, free way for consumers to release their transcripts that may still operate when there are issues with the 4506-C process, which has a $4 surcharge. However, the alternative to the 4506-C form is less straightforward and objective as it’s done outside of the mortgage process, requiring a separate logon and actions.

Some of the most recent IRS cuts have targeted technology jobs and could have an impact on systems, so it’s also worth noting that another option lenders have sometimes elected to use is to allow loans temporarily move forward when transcript access is interrupted and verified later. 

There is a risk to waiting for verification or not getting it directly from the IRS, however, as government-related agencies hold mortgage lenders responsible for the accuracy of borrower income information. That risk could increase if loan performance issues become more prevalent.

Currently, tax transcripts primarily come into play for government-related loans made to contract workers, said Crescenzo.

“That’s the only receipt that you have for a self-employed client’s income to know it’s valid,” he said.

The home affordability crunch and rise of gig work like Uber driving has increased interest in these types of mortgages, he said. 

Contract workers can alternatively seek financing from the private non-qualified mortgage market where bank statements could be used to verify self-employment income, but Crescenzo said that has disadvantages related to government-related loans.

“Non QM requires higher downpayments and interest rates than traditional financing,” he said.

In the next couple years, regional demand for loans based on self-employment income could rise given the federal job cuts planned broadly at public agencies, depending on the extent to which court challenges to them go through.

Those potential borrowers will find it difficult to get new mortgages until they can establish more of a track record with their new sources of income, in most cases two years from a tax filing perspective. 

Continue Reading

Trending