S-5639-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Sponsored by Mike Rounds (R-SD)
What it does
The bill would require the Appraisal Subcommittee to establish and maintain a cloud-based portal where appraisers and appraisal management companies (AMCs) can file license, certification and registration applications and renewals, pay fees, and get good-standing letters. It would require the Attorney General to give State licensing officials access to criminal history information where state law requires background checks, and would let the Subcommittee charge revenue-neutral user fees. States would keep the power to act on applications, and the Subcommittee would be required to make grants to help states connect their systems. The portal may use an existing platform, and an advisory committee would advise on setup.
Who benefits
Appraisers and AMCs that work in several states and would use one central filing and payment point instead of separate state systems. State appraiser licensing agencies that would get shared access to education records, exam results and background check data, plus federal grants to connect their systems. Lenders and regulators that may gain more consistent credential records. Federal financial regulators, because portal background checks would satisfy their third-party oversight requirements.
Who is hurt
Appraisers and AMCs that may pay new portal user fees, even though the fees are limited to revenue-neutral recovery of costs. Applicants who would have to submit fingerprints through the portal where state law requires FBI checks, raising privacy and data-security concerns. State agencies that may bear costs of connecting legacy systems beyond what grants cover, and that might lose some control over their own processes. The Appraisal Subcommittee, which would take on a new technology and operations burden with a start-up cost that user fees must recover.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that appraisers working in several states now deal with many separate state systems, forms and fee payments, and that one portal would reduce paperwork and delays in getting credentialed. They contend the bill respects state authority, because states keep the power to decide on applications. They also point to the revenue-neutral fee limit and the permission to use an existing platform as safeguards against federal cost growth.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that a centralized federal system would hold sensitive personal data, including fingerprints and criminal history, and would create a single target for data breaches. They contend that building new technology could run over budget, and that the fee and grant details are left to the Appraisal Subcommittee without firm limits. They also argue that states might still face integration costs and a loss of control over their own licensing processes despite the bill's states' rights language.
Constitutional context
Congress's authority rests on the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause, since appraisals support federally related mortgage transactions. Because states keep the final say on licensing and participation is tied to state law, anti-commandeering concerns under Printz v. United States (1997) and Murphy v. NCAA (2018) appear limited. The user fees must be revenue neutral, which keeps them in the nature of cost recovery.
Checks and balances
The bill gives the Appraisal Subcommittee, a federal financial regulatory body, new operational and fee-setting responsibilities, and gives the Attorney General a duty to share criminal records; checks include the advisory committee, state retention of licensing decisions, the revenue-neutral fee limit, and congressional oversight.
Historical precedent
The Appraisal Subcommittee already operates the National Registry of appraisers and AMCs under Title XI of FIRREA, and this bill would expand that role into application and renewal processing.