ATTOM reported 227,548 properties with foreclosure filings from January through June. The count includes default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions, and was 28% higher than in the first half of 2024. ATTOM said the figures show the foreclosure process gradually returning toward more typical patterns after several years of unusually low activity.

The number is not a count of unique borrowers who lost their homes. A foreclosure filing can be an early or intermediate step, and it does not automatically mean that a lender has repossessed the property.

Foreclosure starts and completed repossessions both increased

Foreclosure starts rose 18% in the first half of 2026 to 164,566 properties. Lenders completed the foreclosure process on 27,983 properties, a 33% increase from the first half of 2025.

Completed foreclosures, also called real-estate-owned or REO properties, were still 26% below the first-half 2020 level, according to ATTOM. That comparison is one reason the current data should not be described as a new foreclosure crisis or equated with the scale of the 2008 collapse.

ATTOM’s national report draws on records from more than 3,000 counties that account for more than 99% of the U.S. population. Its annual and midyear methodology counts the most recent foreclosure filing for a property during the reporting period when multiple filing types are present.

The foreclosure process is moving faster on average

Properties completing foreclosure in the second quarter of 2026 had been in the process for an average of 563 days. That was the lowest quarterly average since 2013, down 2% from the first quarter and 13% from the second quarter of 2025.

A shorter average timeline can move some cases more quickly from delinquency toward an auction or repossession. But state law remains a major factor. ATTOM reported average timelines ranging from 155 days in Texas to 3,491 days in Louisiana for properties foreclosed in the second quarter.

Individual outcomes also depend on the loan, the servicer, court involvement, the borrower’s circumstances and whether the borrower enters a loss-mitigation program.

Florida, South Carolina and Indiana had the highest state rates

Nationally, one in every 632 housing units had a foreclosure filing during the first half of 2026, an ATTOM rate of 0.16%.

Florida had the highest state rate, at 0.27% of housing units, followed by South Carolina at 0.26% and Indiana at 0.25%. Delaware also recorded a 0.25% rate, while Illinois was at 0.23%.

These are statewide rates in ATTOM’s dataset, not a prediction of every homeowner’s risk. Local housing conditions, state foreclosure procedures, insurance and property-tax costs, employment trends and loan type can all affect whether a borrower falls behind and how a case proceeds.

Federal prevention programs are still active

Separate federal data shows that many borrowers are receiving help before foreclosure is completed. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac completed 58,317 foreclosure-prevention actions in the first quarter of 2026, including 58,004 home-retention actions, the Federal Housing Finance Agency reported.

FHFA said the Enterprises’ serious-delinquency rate was 0.59% at the end of the quarter. In that report, serious delinquency means a loan that is 90 or more days delinquent or in the foreclosure process. FHFA also reported comparison rates of 6.10% for FHA loans, 2.61% for VA loans and 2.03% for the overall mortgage industry.

Those figures should not be combined directly with ATTOM’s foreclosure counts. FHFA’s figures cover Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Enterprise portfolios and use a different measure, while ATTOM’s broader property-level dataset includes multiple stages of foreclosure activity.

FHA borrowers have separate loss-mitigation options

HUD says FHA servicers can use several home-retention options for borrowers facing financial hardship, including repayment plans, forbearance, partial claims, loan modifications and payment supplements. Borrowers must provide current information, and a trial payment plan may be required before approval.

HUD also lists home-disposition options, including a pre-foreclosure sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, for eligible borrowers who cannot continue paying even with home-retention assistance. Eligibility depends on the loan, the hardship and the borrower’s current financial information; no specific option is guaranteed.

What borrowers should do if payments are at risk

Borrowers who expect trouble should contact their mortgage servicer as soon as possible, rather than waiting until several payments have been missed. A filing can occur before a home is repossessed, but a shorter average timeline may leave less time to review repayment, modification, forbearance or other options.

HUD-approved housing counselors provide free foreclosure-prevention counseling. Borrowers should use official contact information and be wary of companies that demand upfront fees or promise approval for a particular program.

The next indicators to watch are whether foreclosure starts continue rising, whether completed foreclosures accelerate in the second half of 2026 and how serious delinquencies change across different loan portfolios. For now, the data shows a rising but historically moderate level of mortgage distress—a normalization of activity, not evidence of a new 2008-style collapse.

Sources

• ATTOM Mid-Year 2026 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report
• FHFA Foreclosure Prevention and Refinance Report, First Quarter 2026
• HUD FHA's Loss Mitigation Program
• HousingWire report on the 2026 midyear foreclosure data

The City Clerk’s official election page lists the Real Estate Transfer Tax Foreclosure Amendment Measure among the materials for Oakland’s November municipal election. The City Council adopted Resolution 91228 C.M.S. as amended on July 7, sending the proposal to voters. It has not been approved by voters and is not yet in effect.

What the measure would change

Oakland’s current transfer-tax ordinance generally exempts transfers made through foreclosure proceedings or in lieu of foreclosure. The proposed measure would eliminate that general exception, while retaining specified exceptions for qualifying transactions.

The adopted language preserves exceptions for transfers of commercial property that are converted to interim shelter, single-room-occupancy housing, affordable housing, permanent supportive housing or a health-care facility, subject to the measure’s conditions. It also preserves exceptions for transfers to qualifying community banking organizations and for transfers to a natural person or family trust involving residential property with four units or fewer.

The measure would also allow the City Council, by ordinance, to establish additional foreclosure-related exceptions or amend or remove the listed exceptions. For covered transfers that do not qualify for an exception, the measure specifies how the taxable value would be determined, including the fair-market value of the interest or property conveyed.

Revenue is only a projection

The City Council’s July resolution included an estimate of approximately $4 million to $13 million annually under Oakland’s existing transfer-tax rates, beginning January 1, 2027, if voters approve the measure.

The current measure document also includes an impartial financial analysis from the City Auditor. That analysis estimates first-year revenue of $10.4 million to $13.8 million, based on a sample of commercial foreclosures in 2024, 2025 and the first half of 2026. It estimates first-year implementation costs of $592,900 to $651,100 and warns that actual annual revenue will depend on future market conditions.

The measure describes the revenue as general-purpose funding that the city could use for any municipal purpose. It would not automatically dedicate the money to homelessness services. The council agenda included a separate advisory question about possible homelessness-related uses, but that question should not be treated as a confirmed ballot item based solely on the July agenda.

Who could be affected

If voters approve the measure, more foreclosure-related transfers could become subject to Oakland’s existing real-property transfer-tax rates. The practical effects would depend on the type of property, the transaction structure, whether an exception applies and how the city administers the rule.

The City Auditor’s analysis says implementation would require additional city staffing and would involve collection costs. The measure document also states that the taxable value for a non-exempt foreclosure-related transfer would generally be based on the fair-market value of the conveyed interest or property, without excluding certain liens or encumbrances remaining at the time of transfer.

Ballot status

Oakland’s Elections page currently identifies the next city election as Tuesday, November 3, 2026, and links to the foreclosure-amendment measure document. The document’s title is “Real Property Transfer Tax Amendment Measure,” but its measure letter or number remains blank in the posted PDF, and the City Attorney’s legal analysis says the final ballot question is to be inserted or finalized as required.

For Oakland voters, the immediate takeaway is that the City Council has placed a foreclosure-transfer-tax proposal into the November election process. The proposal could create a new source of city revenue if approved, but the revenue is only an estimate and the tax change will not take effect unless a majority of voters voting on the measure approves it.

Sources

• Oakland City Council July 7, 2026 final meeting minutes
• City of Oakland Elections page
• San Francisco Chronicle report on Oakland’s foreclosure-tax proposal