Advocacy

CREFC Government Relations: Shaping Our Industry

CREFC’s Government Relations team serves as the primary interface between the CRE Finance industry and policymakers. Through a collaborative process with our members, CREFC engages with legislators, regulators, and other policy stakeholders to advocate for policies that promote the interests of our membership and the broader industry.

View CREFC's Advocacy resources below, and get involved today!


Latest News

News

CREFC and NCREIF Launch Open-End Moderate-Yield Debt Fund Index

December 5, 2025

NEW YORK, December 5, 2025 – The CRE Finance Council (CREFC) and the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF) announce the launch of the NCREIF/CREFC Fund Index Open-End Moderate-Yield Debt, the first-ever institutional fund-level benchmark for private real estate debt funds. As of June 30, 2025, the Index comprises 12 open-end debt funds representing more than $30 billion in assets and over 500 underlying loans with posted returns since the fourth-quarter 2017, providing a robust, representative measure of performance for the sector. 

Developed jointly by NCREIF and CREFC, the Moderate-Yield Debt Index fills a long-standing market need for a standardized, transparent benchmark that reflects the risk-return characteristics of actively managed open-end commercial real estate debt strategies.

Consultation Phase. The Moderate-Yield Debt Index will be issued in a consultation phase for one to two years to solicit the appropriate level of feedback from industry professionals and ensure the index’s methodology and governance align with market expectations. During this period NCREIF and CREFC will engage stakeholders on methodology refinements, data standards, and reporting practices. After the initial consultation, if appropriate, the NCREIF/CREFC Fund Index Open-End Moderate-Yield Debt will be memorialized as an official NCREIF/CREFC product. 

CREFC and NCREIF also publish an Open-End Debt Fund Aggregate, a research database of funds with a mix of Core, Moderate-Yield and High-Yield investment styles. New data contributors are welcome for both the Aggregate and the Moderate-Yield Debt Index. Depending on market demand and growth of the open-end private real estate debt fund space, Core-Yield and/or High-Yield Debt Indices may be possible in the future. 

For more information or to provide feedback, please contact Lisa Pendergast at LPendergast@CREFC.org or Dan Dierking at DDierking@NCREIF.org.

 

Media Contact:
Mary Beth Ryan
Senior Director, Communications
646-884-7567
mryan@crefc.org

Contact 

Mary Beth Ryan
Senior Director,
Communications
646.884.7567
mryan@crefc.org
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
CREFC and NCREIF Launch Open-End Moderate-Yield Debt Fund Index
December 5, 2025
The CRE Finance Council (CREFC) and the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF) announce the launch of the NCREIF/CREFC Fund Index Open-End Moderate-Yield Debt.

News

Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) Act on NYC Council Agenda

November 25, 2025 

A New York City Council proposal could materially reshape multifamily transactions across the country’s largest rental market, New York City. 

The bill would apply to every NYC residential building with three or more units and would create a city-administered first-offer and matching-right process for approved nonprofits and community land trusts. 

Why it matters: As drafted, the broad scope of the legislation would apply an additional waiting period and processes to every multifamily building in the city. 

  • Industry participants are concerned that mandatory standstill periods and discretionary extensions could introduce long, unpredictable delays into ordinary sales, chill competitive bidding, and increase transaction and operation costs.
  • Supporters argue COPA would help preserve and expand affordable housing by giving mission-driven buyers an opportunity to acquire inventory before displacement or speculative repositioning occurs.

Go deeper: Under COPA, a multifamily owner planning to sell would have to file a notice with the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) 180 days in advance and provide a detailed package of property and financial information.

 

A qualified buyer will have 120 days from the date of notice to submit an offer, during which time the seller may not accept any outside offers with HPD having discretion to extend timelines. Noncompliance could trigger civil penalties of up to $30,000. 

Each seller must provide to HPD: 

  • Building address, the type of sale and estimated sale date, the provision of law, rule, or regulation pursuant to which such action is authorized, if any, and number of dwelling units. 
  • The rent roll, a 12-month income and expense statement, the amount of outstanding debt, the two most recent inspection reports conducted by HPD or the New York City Department of Buildings, if any, and any other information HPD may require.

The bottom line: For lenders and capital-markets participants, the slower, less certain transactions and heavier disclosure burdens could weaken liquidity, complicate financing execution, and ultimately pressure valuations in the New York City market. 

What’s next: CREFC is working with its local partners to analyze the proposal and discuss next steps. 

Contact David McCarthy (dmccarthy@crefc.org) with questions or to get involved.

Contact  

David McCarthy
Managing Director,
Chief Lobbyist, Head of Legislative Affairs
202.448.0855
dmccarthy@crefc.org
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) Act on NYC Council Agenda
November 25, 2025
A New York City Council proposal could materially reshape multifamily transactions across the country’s largest rental market, New York City.

News

FHFA Raises Multifamily Caps by $30 Billion

November 25, 2025

On November 24, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced that the 2026 multifamily loan purchase caps for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises) will be $88 billion for each Enterprise, for a combined total of $176 billion. 

  • Caps Increased to $88 billion: This is an increase from the $73 billion loan purchase caps per Enterprise in 2025.
  • FHFA will closely monitor the multifamily mortgage market and may increase the caps if necessary. Should the actual size of the 2026 market be smaller than initially projected, FHFA will not reduce the caps.
  • 50% Mission-Driven Maintained: To maintain a strong emphasis on affordable housing and underserved markets, FHFA will continue to require that at least 50% of the Enterprises’ multifamily businesses be mission-driven, affordable housing.
  • Workforce Housing Continues to Be Exempt from Caps: To further promote affordable housing preservation, loans classified as supporting workforce housing properties in the definitions will remain exempt from the volume caps. (All other mission-driven loans remain subject to the volume caps.)

Go deeper: CLICK HERE for CREFC’s Side-by-Side analysis of the 2026 Multifamily Caps.

 

Please contact Sairah Burki at sburki@crefc.org or David McCarthy at dmccarthy@crefc.org with any questions.

Contact 

Sairah Burki
Managing Director,
Head of Regulatory Affairs
703.201.4294
sburki@crefc.org

David McCarthy
Managing Director,
Chief Lobbyist, Head of Legislative Affairs
202.448.0855
dmccarthy@crefc.org
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
FHFA Raises Multifamily Caps by $30 Billion
November 25, 2025
On November 24, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced that the 2026 multifamily loan purchase caps for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises) will be $88 billion for each Enterprise, for a combined total of $176 billion.

News

CREFC Sponsors Breaking Ground Gala

November 25, 2025

What happened: CREFC was proud to be a sponsor of Breaking Ground's Celebrating Home and Community Gala last month. CREFC members and leadership attended the inspiring evening, which raised more than $3.5 million to support homeless and vulnerable New Yorkers.

Through its residences and outreach programs across Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan, Breaking Ground touches the lives of over 13,000 New Yorkers each year, providing safe, permanent housing and comprehensive support services. 

CREFC is honored to stand alongside Breaking Ground in their essential work building and restoring lives throughout our community.

 

Contact Mary Beth Ryan (MRyan@crefc.org) with any questions.

Contact  

Mary Beth Ryan
Senior Director,
Communications
646.884.7567
mryan@crefc.org
Pictured, from left: Rohit Narayanan, Edward DeAngelo, and Raj Aidasani
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
CREFC Sponsors Breaking Ground Gala
November 25, 2025
CREFC was proud to be a sponsor of Breaking Ground's Celebrating Home and Community Gala last month.

News

Congressional Update: Housing Legislation in Flux

November 25, 2025

As we’ve previously covered, the ROAD to Housing Act passed the Senate after being tacked onto the annual National Defense Appropriations Act (NDAA). However, certain House leaders have indicated they may not accept the whole bill and would instead prefer negotiated package. 

Why it matters: While the housing legislation had unanimous support in the Senate Banking Committee prior to passage, the House had not been engaged in negotiations and not all the provisions have majority party support in that chamber. 

  • Legislation attached as an amendment to a larger, non-relevant bill usually requires sign-off from the “four-corners,” which includes the Republican and Democratic leadership of the relevant congressional committee. 
  • For the ROAD to Housing Act to be included in NDAA, the House Financial Services Committee (HFSC) and the Senate Banking Committee would need to sign off: HFSC Chairman French Hill (R-AR); Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA); Senate Banking Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC); and Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

What they’re saying: According to Politico, HFSC Chairman Hill rejected the housing legislation inclusion in the NDAA.

Hill has told his counterparts that he is hopeful about the prospects of a bicameral deal and supports some provisions of the Senate’s ROAD bill, according to a House GOP aide with knowledge of the matter. But he has said throughout the negotiations that some portions of the Senate plan are unpalatable to the majority of House Republicans and therefore cannot be tucked into the NDAA, the aide said. -Politico

Yes, but: Both parties remain committed to acting on housing legislation, and the HFSC will hold a hearing on housing supply on Dec. 3. The committee is expected to mark up legislation on housing in the near-term too. 

What’s next: The NDAA text is expected when Congress returns after Thanksgiving, but it is not likely to include housing provisions as of now. Still, lawmakers will have other opportunities to advance compromise legislation in 2026 with the January 30 spending deadline or on other must-pass priorities. 

Contact David McCarthy (dmccarthy@crefc.org) with questions.

Contact  

David McCarthy
Managing Director,
Chief Lobbyist, Head of Legislative Affairs
202.448.0855
dmccarthy@crefc.org
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
Congressional Update: Housing Legislation in Flux
November 25, 2025
As we’ve previously covered, the ROAD to Housing Act passed the Senate after being tacked onto the annual National Defense Appropriations Act (NDAA).

News

Deposit Insurance Hearing Overview

November 25, 2025

The House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing on November 18, 2025, titled “The Future of Deposit Insurance: Exploring the Coverage, Costs, and Depositor Confidence.” The hearing focused on whether the U.S. deposit insurance framework remains fit for purpose after the 2023 regional bank failures. 

Members and witnesses examined the banking sector’s resilience, the role of regulatory oversight, and various approaches to reforming deposit insurance coverage. The witness list included:

What they’re saying: Discussion centered on uninsured transaction balances, depositor behavior in crises, and potential impacts on community, regional, and large banks. 

  • The issue of increasing deposit insurance largely fell along party lines, with support from Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA), and disapproval from Chairman French Hill (R-AR). 
  • Much of the discussion focused on the Hagerty-Alsobrooks proposal, also known as the Main Street Depositor Protection Act (S. 2999). This bill would:
    • Expand coverage for business operating accounts: If enacted, this bill would raise FDIC/NCUA insurance to $10M per depositor for non-interest-bearing transaction accounts at eligible banks and credit unions. The aim is to reduce run risk and help smaller banks compete with “too-big-to-fail” giants.
    • Cost shielding/structure: A 10-year transition period would prevent community banks with less than $10B in assets from higher assessments or increased premiums tied to the new coverage.
  • Many members and witnesses supported a reimagining of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP). The temporary FDIC crisis program started in 2008 during the GFC and fully insured non-interest-bearing transaction accounts above the normal limit.
  • ETAG: Members discussed creating a new similarly designed program called the Emergency Transaction Account Guarantee (ETAG), as that would let FDIC/NCUA quickly guarantee transaction accounts system-wide during a panic for a limited time. 
    • It was noted that with the speed of electronic transactions, this program would need be deployed at the beginning of a crisis to operate effectively.
    • The ETAG program had bipartisan interest, with many witnesses and members in favor of ETAG reform proposals.
    • Rep. Barr (R-KY) questioned Mr. Furlow as to how ETAG could be preferable to an increase in deposit insurance. Mr. Furlow noted that ETAG would apply to all banks equally and ensure they are safe during a crisis. he notes that it is a reactive measure to a crisis, while increasing deposit insurance is a measure taken beforehand.
  • Data collection: Members on both sides of the aisle raised concerns that the FDIC does not collect enough data to monitor uninsured deposits and that a thorough review of the data that is needed will be crucial before reforms can be made.

What they’re saying: Witnesses split into two camps. Bank CEOs and trade groups supported targeted higher coverage for non-interest-bearing business transaction accounts used for payroll and operations.

  • Old National’s James Ryan said about 30% of his bank’s deposits are uninsured and argued that $10M coverage for these accounts would protect most mid-sized bank relationships, helping community and regional banks compete against perceived “too-big-to-fail” large banks.
  • Skeptics led by Grover Norquist argued coverage is sufficient. According to their testimony, nearly 99% of accounts have under $250K, and the 2023 failures were supervisory and management breakdowns, not insurance shortfalls.
  • The skeptics warned that higher guarantees create moral hazard and act like an industry tax passed to consumers.

Deposit Insurance Level Raise: Chairman Hill (R-AR) questioned whether increasing the limit to $10M per depositor is needed noting that 99% of depositors fall under the current $250k limit. He also noted that the failure of Silicon Valley Bank was at its core a management problem. 

Let’s be clear. Deposit insurance was not the cause of those bank failures. The banks were insolvent and increased deposit insurance wouldn’t have fixed that.

Additionally, Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY) noted that increasing the limit could created “moral hazard” and that the liability could be shifted to taxpayers if the deposit limit is increased.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) noted that her bill, the Employee Paycheck and Small Business Protection Act would raise deposit insurance levels for business payroll/operating accounts after a FDIC/NCUA study. Waters also supports giving regulators authority to rapidly launch a TAG-style emergency guarantee to stop contagion.

Separately, Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) landed somewhere in the middle on both proposals, noting that he supports “targeted reform” and that banks of different sizes have different needs.

The takeaway: The hearing showed growing bipartisan momentum for a TAG/ETAG-style emergency backstop. There was sharp disagreement over making large permanent FDIC limit hikes without better data on costs, moral hazard, and Deposit Insurance Fund risk.

Contact James Montfort (jmontfort@crefc.org) with any questions.

Contact 

James Montfort
Manager,
Government Relations
202.448.0857
jmontfort@crefc.org
The information provided herein is general in nature and for educational purposes only. CRE Finance Council makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, usefulness, or suitability of the information provided. The information should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal, financial, tax, accounting, investment, commercial or other advice, and CRE Finance Council disclaims all liability for any such reliance. © 2025 CRE Finance Council. All rights reserved.
Deposit Insurance Hearing Overview
November 25, 2025
The House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing on November 18, 2025, titled “The Future of Deposit Insurance: Exploring the Coverage, Costs, and Depositor Confidence.”

Become a Member

CREFC offers industry participants an unparalleled ability to connect, participate, advocate and learn!
Join Now

Sign Up for eNews

Subscribe