New Tariffs, Higher Costs — Who Really Pays the Price?

A Conversation With Jay Thies and Pete Carroll

As the U.S. waits for the final decision on the fresh tariffs imposed on Canadian, Mexican, and Chinese imports, the housing industry is bracing for the impact of this policy decision. With material costs already a growing concern, these new trade policies could send ripples through supply chains, development timelines, and affordability.

Tariffs on steel, lumber, concrete and other key building materials have the potential to drive up construction costs, exacerbating an already tight housing market. Builders and developers may need to rethink sourcing strategies, while policymakers weigh the broader economic consequences of trade restrictions on inflation and consumer spending.

From rising home prices to shifting supply chains, host Maiclaire Bolton Smith sits down with industry experts Pete Carroll CoreLogic’s, EVP of Public Policy and Industry Relations, and Jay Thies CoreLogic’s Vice President of Pricing Analysis and Delivery to explore the immediate and long-term effects of these tariffs. Tune into this episode of Core Conversations to listen to the break down on what thse tariffs could mean for homebuilders, affordability, and the future of the housing market.

In This Episode:

Up Next

What Will a Second Trump Presidency Mean for U.S. Housing?

Jay Thies:

So when you do that math and you make some assumptions, which we have to do, we look at somewhere in the low single digits in terms of cost of construction increase, which will result around a $20,000 change in the cost of a house from a reconstruction standpoint. Right now it’s around 400,000 ish to reconstruct a new house. So if you add around 5% to that, it’s another $20,000 of gloss roughly.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Welcome back to Core Conversations: A CoreLogic Podcast where we tour the property market to investigate how economics, climate resilience, governmental policy, and technology affect everyday life. I am your host Maiclaire Bolton Smith, and I’m just as curious as you are about everything that happens in our industry. Tariffs have been a talking point for President Trump since he began his campaign on February 4th. Those tariffs took effect, but they were then put on hold for 30 days after negotiations with Canada and Mexico took place. While this may change at the time of this recording, they are still on hold still. If these tariffs on Canada and Mexico and China are enforced, nearly every industry will feel repercussions in the property market. It could mean single digit increases on prices above what we typically see. This will not only affect the cost of building, but it’ll affect affordability. So to discuss how these tariffs will affect the property market, we have Pete Carroll CoreLogic’s, EVP of Public Policy and Industry Relations, and Jay Thies CoreLogic’s Vice President of Pricing Analysis and Delivery. Here with us today. Pete and Jay, welcome back to Core Conversations.

Pete Carroll:

Great to be here, Maiclaire. Yeah, thanks for having us.

Erika Stanley:

Before we get too far into this episode, I wanted to remind our listeners that we want to help you keep pace with the property market. To make it easy, we curate the latest insight and analysis for you on our social media where you can find us using the handle @CoreLogic on Facebook and LinkedIn or @CoreLogic, Inc on X and Instagram. But now let’s get back to Maiclaire, Pete, and Jay.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Okay. Well, you both have been here before and each of you has a really unique perspective here. So I like the combination of the two of you that we’re going to get into this because it’s definitely a hot topic right now. So, okay, let’s just start today, Pete, let’s start with you. Can you just start by giving us an explanation of what are these tariffs, what was proposed, what was the original proposal, and where is the Trump administration with these tariffs today?

Pete Carroll:

Of course, and first, thanks again, may Claire for having me on. I always enjoy being here. Let’s start with the what. On February 1st, 2025, president Trump announced tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. These took effect on February 4th, imposing 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports, and 10% on Chinese imports. Though Canadian energy including oil, natural gas and electricity are subject to a lower 10% tariff. With that said, on February 3rd, the day before they went into effect, the us, Canada and Mexico agreed to a 30 day pause on these tariffs. In exchange, Canada and Mexico committed to deploying 10,000 troops each to their US borders, to combat illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking among other concessions. Now, whether the pause becomes permanent depends on how these commitments play out in the coming weeks. So that kind of leads to now the why. Right?

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So

Pete Carroll:

Tariffs were a hallmark of President Trump’s first term, so it’s no surprise he’s using them again. But beyond trade fairness, he clearly seems to see them as a negotiating tool to address broader policy issues. So in the case of candidate Mexico, they’ve already spurred stronger border security efforts, and with China, they’re tackling trade imbalances, but also encouraging key industries to return to the us. So said, all things are never equal. While these tariffs may yield benefits, their full costs and consequences are only beginning to unfold.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

I undoubtedly, I can only imagine, and really this is just the beginning from so many different perspectives as well.

Erika Stanley:

The long threatened tariffs took effect on February 4th, but they were quickly put on hold for 30 days. This episode was recorded on February 7th when the tariffs were on hold. While this may change, this episode was produced using the latest knowledge available at the time of the recording.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

I guess, Jay, from your perspective, obviously these are going to affect many industries, but one that many people are really concerned with is the property market and how this is going to impact things. So can you just talk about where we need to really keep our eye on things?

Jay Thies:

Sure. Very broadly, a large majority of the construction materials that compose any property, whether it’s commercial or residential, are sourced domestically. But there are parts and pieces that are partially sourced internationally, whether it’s from Mexico or Canada or even a little bit from China. So some of those things might include lumber. That’s the big one everyone likes to talk about with the lumber shipments coming in from Canada, although that’s much smaller portion of the total lumber output or usage in the United States over the past couple of years. But there’s other things like steel and cement, which are going to affect the commercial construction industries a little bit heavier than they would on the residential side. So Port Logic’s really monitoring all those different aspects, but those are the main drivers.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So Jay, I guess just to follow up on that, do we have any preliminary estimates on how these tariffs could affect costs in both the short term and then longer term?

Jay Thies:

Yeah, absolutely. Even though there’s a 25% or a 10%, depending on what tariff is being applied, it doesn’t necessarily mean the cost of construction is going to go up 25% because again, you have to look at the distribution of how much material is sourced domestically versus sourced internationally. So when you do that math and you make some assumptions, which we have to do, we look at somewhere in the low single digits in terms of cost of construction increase, which will result around a $20,000 change in the cost of a house. From a reconstruction standpoint, right now it’s around 400,000 ish to reconstruct a new house. So if you add around 5% to that, that’s another $20,000 of cost

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Roughly. So it’s not trivial, but it could be impactful, especially on living in certain parts of the country too. Housing costs are a lot greater than others, and the average reconstruction cost in California, for example, could be upwards of a million dollars in some areas. So it could add up more significantly in different areas.

Jay Thies:

Absolutely. It’ll unfortunately have more of a impact on a smaller square footage type home than a larger square footage type home when you look at the parts and components that are required to build that structure.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. What about longer term? Anything that we need to be thinking about?

Jay Thies:

It really depends on what happens with this. Do these tiers actually, number one happen? If they do stay in place, what generally will happen is that the market is going to need to adapt. So we’ve got a lot of these construction materials already produced in the United States.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So

Jay Thies:

The options are we increase production to match the demand domestically. What does that do to prices? Hopefully eventually between supply and demand kind of balancing itself out, we reach a price equilibrium point and it goes up a little bit, but then levels off and doesn’t increase. Other option is we continue to have a mix of imported materials at a little bit of a higher cost, and the domestic market isn’t able to capture an increase in production, and then we’re dealing with continuing to import, but at a little bit higher price. So either way, costs are going to get passed along the supply chain, but in terms of long-term, it will probably even out, and depending on what material does over time, it may flatten or even come down.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Okay. So not all doom and gloom as everybody, the instant reaction is that it is going to just progressively get worse and worse over time, but really yet to be seen, but may not all be a negative story?

Jay Thies:

Correct. From our viewpoint, just given the domestic manufacturing capability we already have, it’s not like an industry where we have nothing and we can’t and we need to struggle to build that capacity up. We do have quite a bit of infrastructure already existing, so that’s the benefit here.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Okay. Okay. Well, good to know, Pete. If we look on his first day in office, the president issued an executive order to provide emergency relief to the housing market, really working to lower the cost of housing and increase housing supply, which we know this affordability crisis in this country has just been at a whole new level in the recent years. So however, the whole adding an additional tax burden to home building materials, isn’t that going to make affordability more difficult?

Pete Carroll:

So again, I would say all things equal. Yes, that’s true. Right. May Claire, just to kind of frame this, we estimate the total under supply of housing in the US spanning single and multifamily homes, whether it’s for home ownership or rental stands at about 4.4 million units. But we’re particularly worried about the gap in supply for single family starter homes, which is the gateway to home ownership for renters

And contributes to a virtuous cycle of household formation for younger adults, and that stimulates economic growth. Right? So we estimate the undersupply of single family starter homes to be roughly 1.6 million units where roughly 1.3 million of those units need to be produced at price points that are attainable by lower income and moderate income families. So these are families earning anywhere from roughly half of what a typical family in their city earns to up to 120% of what the typical family earns this segment is, particularly the segment of housing is particularly concerning because the economics are just upside down, right? It’s very hard for builders to construct these homes at attainable price points and still make a reasonable profit. So even marginal increases in the cost of material, materials, labor and equipment, it just makes it that much more difficult to build these homes profitably. But with that said, as we know, and as you’ve referenced, nothing’s ever one dimensional or simple. It is important to acknowledge that the president’s executive order suggests a number of interventions his administration may take

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

That

Pete Carroll:

Could ease other cost pressures that could potentially offset construction cost increases.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So

Pete Carroll:

A number of examples include releasing federally owned land for housing. There’s over 245 million acres of land owned by the Bureau of Land Management. Even a fraction of that land being made available could significantly reduce the cost of land, which is a major cost driver for single family starter homes,

Zoning and building code reform. So there are a number of ways the federal government encourage state and local governments to change their regulations in certain ways, which the National Association of Home Builders estimates accounts for up to 25% of construction costs. Examples of this would include what’s called missing middle zoning policies. This is where instead of, if you think of live in a neighborhood where you only have single family detached one unit homes allowing other types of homes like town homes or duplexes that just increase the number of units per structure, but in a kind of light way without, as opposed to putting in large multifamily apartment buildings, for example. This is a way that home builders can build more profitably and increase the yield of units that are available in the market without overloading municipal infrastructure. So that’s an important tactic and many others as well, ranging from building codes to development fees, tax incentives that could make projects pencil out better, and then bringing liquidity to the acquisition development and construction sector. It’s very hard for builders, particularly in the single family starter home segment to get financing for these types of homes because

They’re very idiosyncratic. They’re tantamount to small commercial, very, very small balanced commercial loans. So there’s really no mechanism of liquidity that would bring kind of scale economy to that type of financing. So a point being many, many things that could be done that could offset these increases. They remain theoretical for now. But I’d say the good news is that the executive order requires the National Economic Council to respond with a plan in 30 days, which I believe is February 19th, followed by monthly progress report updates thereafter. And in my view, that’s a strong signal that President Trump’s taking the issue very seriously, and we’re certainly going to know a lot more about what he’s planning in less than two weeks.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So definitely still a lot to be seen and things to consider here. So I guess, Jay, from your perspective, Pete talked about a 1 million single family home starter home under supply. You talked a little bit about reconstruction costs, but what are we looking at if we’re looking at to build 100 new of these entry level single family homes, what does it cost to build a home like that today? And what do we think will happen with the tariffs? And I guess the second part of that too is when we talk of tariffs, we’re talking about the materials. How does labor play into this as well?

Jay Thies:

Yeah, great question. So the average reconstruction cost or new construction cost for a house in the US today is around $422,000. So obviously you can do it a little bit cheaper, but that is kind of the nuts and bolts of the house minus the land, right? Because you got to look at the land cost. So in some places it might be a little bit cheaper. Some places it’s in the northeast here, it’s hard to find anything under about 500, 600,000. But in terms of the overall cost, as I mentioned earlier, 17 to $22,000 of extra costs is kind of what the tariffs are projected to add to that 4 22. So you’re pushing now four 50 ish in terms of an average house. An average house in the US is around 1800 square feet, give or take, depending on the area, and again, minus the land values, et cetera.

The labor component of this is kind of an interesting discussion because this is all material discussions around tariffs. How does it affect the labor market? It really does not affect the labor market. There are two things that while they are related to one another, do operate in different ways based on supply and demand in an area. So it’s more about market dynamics within micro economies of how fast a region’s growing, what access they have to labor supply, whether it’s technical labor, skilled labor, or non-skilled labor. There’s more of a discussion to be had around what the immigration policy may or may not do for unskilled labor. But in terms of terrorists specifically, we’re not looking at any major or notable impact to the labor market as a result of the tariffs.

Erika Stanley:

It’s that time again, CoreLogic just dropped new numbers about what’s happening in the housing market. Here’s what you need to know. The average value of a property inside the boundaries of the Los Angeles fires is $2.5 million, which is far more than the average American home within the boundaries of the Palisades. Fire Homes had a median value of $3.3 million that’s higher than even homes within the boundaries of the Eaton Fire, where homes had a median value of $1.2 million. Not only are the homes affected by the Palisades fire, far more valuable than most, but only 40% of them have a mortgage. Meanwhile, 63% of homes that were in the path of the Eaton Fire have mortgages. That means those affected by the Eaton fire are more likely to face financial hardship. Still, the average loan to value ratio for homes in both of these areas is 30, which is below the national average of 42. Find out more about the real cost of the LA wildfires at the link in the show notes. And that’s the sip. See you next time.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

You talked a lot about Jay, I’m going to kind of go into this in two different directions here because we do have a lot of domestic materials already that are, not everything is imported, but Canadian lumber is a big one that a lot of people know of and talk about, but aren’t there already tariffs on Canadian lumber, and how is this proposed actual change that

Jay Thies:

There are? So there’s currently around a 14% existing tariff on Canadian lumber imports, and that figure has been fluctuating over the years. There’s been a long running trade dispute between the Canada and US regarding lumber, and that’s been going on for decades. So it’s gone anywhere from not being zero up to 20 something percent and everywhere in

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Between.

Jay Thies:

So this is on top of that existing tariff. So if you,

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So 14 plus 25?

Jay Thies:

Exactly. So almost 40% total. But again, we have seen depression in the material prices for lumber over the past couple years. We saw a huge spike kind of running up through post covid, and we’ve seen that slowly inch its way back down for various reasons. There’s been increased production in the southeast us, so we’re producing more lumber domestically. And then secondly, Canada has been reducing the cost, and there’s been some other factors. For example, Canada had a couple years ago issues with lumber because there was some disease going through some of the lumber areas that’s kind of passed. So the supplies back up. So dealing with all those different things, but absolutely it’s going to represent a decent bump above what already is.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Okay. Okay. No, that is very impactful. I guess, do we have the capacity to build 100% domestically and not he need any imported lumber at all, or is there just not enough supply domestically to think if we were thinking of this in particular, the 1000001.1 million under supply homes that Pete referred to?

Jay Thies:

Yeah, that’s a great question. So at the current pace that we are building, which is not fast enough, essentially the answer is likely yes. Again, because there’s been increased production in Southeast, and that’s been a focus for some time now, you’ve seen that percentage of import versus export softwood lumber increased from a US share over the past several years.

It’s one of the things that definitely can be increased over time. However, there’s lumber mills that need to spin up. There’s production that needs to spin up, which is existing, but that capacity needs to get ramped up, and those are things that can’t happen overnight. So to ramp up a lumber mill, for example, is a several month process at minimum. And then you need to get the supply chain supporting that lumber mill ramp up to begin to distribute that throughout the us. And obviously there’s logistics change with shipping, lumber, the rail and everything else, but it could be done, but it would take a little bit of time.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Jay, it brings, the question comes to mind. If you look around the world, homes aren’t always built of lumber. They’re built of other things as well too. Now, I know because of natural disasters and building codes in this country, there’s a reason we build with lumber, but is there the possibility of safely and to code building with something other than lumber in this country?

Jay Thies:

Absolutely. So there’s existing mason restructures structures that are built right now. There’s existing alternative material structures that are built right now, whether it’s from steel, obviously steel’s a great building product. We build all the commercial buildings out of that, but it’s an expense issue, right?

So even with the potential for tariffs on lumber, the cost of building with steel is considerably higher. The cost of a building with concrete and commercial masonry units is far higher than building with wood because not only do you need to account for seismic and everything else, there’s insulation qualities you need to worry about. The speed at which buildings are able to be put up varies quite a bit when you look at concrete versus wood structures can go up very, very quickly. And also the skill that’s required from the tradesmen that are doing the work in order to erect those structures.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. No, I think that’s really helpful. I think it’s just something that people might be thinking of. Well, why don’t we just build with something else? But that’s not necessarily a cheaper option.

Jay Thies:

Exactly. It’s all about cost.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Yeah. And that’s where everything revolves around the affordability. And Pete, that makes me want to come back to you. You and I in particular have talked a lot about this affordability crisis in the country, and Jay mentioned earlier that long-term costs will potentially more or less track with inflation. Do you think though, that these tariffs will have any other longer term impacts on housing affordability that we might not be thinking about here?

Pete Carroll:

Well, so it actually changed, triggered a thought, which is that one building code related issue I come across frequently is that there are new forms of materials that could strike a balance between providing lower costs while still being energy efficient and durable and aesthetically pleasing. But the process of trying to get these kind of new innovations and materials, like one example I like to use as a form of vinyl siding, a vinyl siding composite. I’ve seen that it’s virtually indistinguishable from wood if you’re looking at it just from even close up. But that’s not included in most building codes. And to me, that’s just a practical example of how we need to be finding innovative materials that can drive down costs and not increase cost and effect affordability negatively. And that to me is going to be an important imperative. But really what I think matters most for housing affordability in the long term is a comprehensive and decisive strategy that aligns federal, state and local policies like much of which I reflected in the earlier policies I discussed. The worst thing the government can do for housing affordability is seed uncertainty, whether it’s tariffs or subsidies or whatever else. If builders are facing a market environment where public policies result in the cost of construction, state and local regulations, tax incentive subsidies, other measures, whipsawing back and forth with each political cycle, that’s not going to instill confidence in home builders and the other critical companies in the housing supply chain, right? So

Lack of competence will unsurprisingly result in muted development activity going forward and perpetuation of the crisis in supply and affordability that we find ourselves in now.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Sure. Yeah. The other thing that really comes to light is we’ve talked a lot about new construction and the demand from new construction, but we are still really just reeling from the aftermath of these fires that impacted Los Angeles. And I cannot help but think about the restoration community here and restoration developers are, that’s a different timeline than new construction and labor to build new homes. I guess when we look at Jay, probably this is for you. When we look at restoration professionals, what could these tariffs mean, especially when we are looking at rebuilding some pretty significant parts of a very major community with thousands of homes lost in the Los Angeles fires?

Jay Thies:

Yeah, absolutely. It’s kind of interesting. You do need to take the two somewhat separately because what’s happened in Los Angeles is very representative of what happens in other places in the United States. It just happens to be in a very affluent area. So whether it’s Florida going through hurricanes or North Carolina, or even back several years ago with the polar vortex freezes that affected Texas, we had these widespread areas of

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Damage.

Jay Thies:

But the nice thing about the United States is we have a huge diverse supply chain. So the supply chain’s able to come in and while there’s several thousand, in fact, tens of thousands of houses impacted in the greater Los Angeles area from the fires, that’s a relatively small portion of the overall building stock in the United States. So we’ve got a very robust supply chain that can essentially come in, deliver all the supplies that are needed. It’s also a very vibrant economy, obviously in Southern California. So the pool of resources in terms of skilled and unskilled labor is already present. There’s no issues in terms of access as opposed to somewhere like Laina last year where you have an island where you’ve got to bring in not only materials from an outside source, but you’ve also got a very restricted pool of labor in that particular area. So California does have some advantages in terms of being able to rebuild, build due to the access that they have there. However, that doesn’t mean there’s not going to be challenges. We’re definitely seeing some pressure already in terms of labor costs and what we call soft costs. So soft costs are those costs around a construction project. So things like permitting, things like overhead costs that are associated with doing business in an area, those things are going to have some pressure put on them in those areas, and that’s very typical of any disaster area.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So

Jay Thies:

You’ll see some of those costs escalate temporarily and then again, over time, smooth out as the market is able to absorb the change. It also depends on how quickly that area rebuilds if it proceeds, like most disaster areas do, it’s a slow and arduous process, but that’s actually a good thing in terms of reconstruction because it allows the market to be able to spread out that impact and rebuild. If you try to do it all at once, that puts a lot of supply demand pressure on an area. That’s what actually causes prices to spike.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Interesting. Okay. Well, that’s an interesting perspective to keep in mind. I guess that takes me to, as both of I like to end these podcasts with, if you had a crystal ball and you look into your crystal ball, I guess Pete first with you, we’ve heard a lot about tariffs from the current administration through the election cycle, and now that we’re just starting this new administration, is there anything else we might want to expect in terms of tariffs that may be impactful to the property industry throughout the next four years? And I guess along with that too, how do we think overall affordability will fare

Pete Carroll:

Well, again, I think it is all about all about certainty, uncertainty. I mean, certainty is good for markets, uncertainty is bad for markets, and new tariffs have a cost, even if it’s merely a broadly inflationary effect that could increase costs across the board and have a negatively affect affordability. I personally worry about the uncertainty factor broadly, that comes with the strategy of using tariffs as a negotiating tool for broader policy objectives. Time will tell if the benefits of negotiating leverage from tariffs as a negotiating tool outweighs the cost of the uncertainty it brings to markets. But generally, it’s hard to see tariffs as anything but a negative for affordability.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Sure. And I think that that’s probably the perspective that most people have as well too, even if they don’t have your policy background, that is the fear that most people have is that there’s only a negative impact. I guess Jay, last word for you. You’ve talked a little bit already about long-term impacts that we might think from these tariffs, but what does your crystal ball say of things we might need to just even keep an eye on?

Jay Thies:

Yeah, so again, I think long-term, as with the construction industry has been over the past several decades, it’s a very slow and steady increase with this industry. So these costs will be passed on and soaked into the supply chain and we’ll see steady increases and then leveling off. Now, what I worry about a little bit is if they’re expanded to other countries. So for example, countries that are producing more of the appliances and the fixtures and faucets and finishes that go into a home, a lot of that stuff, for example, is produced out of Southeast Asia. So we looked at that in terms of determining if that was going to hit construction costs, and we found that it wasn’t, because some of that stuff has shifted a lot, for example, to Vietnam. So there’s a lot of cabinetry and vanities and faucets and stuff being produced out of Vietnam or India.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

So

Jay Thies:

If those tariffs were to expand to some of those other countries, we could start seeing the interior fit and finish components of a structure rise because that’s where those are being sourced from now and produced.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

Well, we will all keep our eyes on this, and I know the two of you will have a lot to say as we continue as well, and we will definitely be continuing this conversation. So Jay and Pete, thank you so much for joining me today on Core Conversations: A CoreLogic Podcast.

Pete Carroll:

Thanks Maiclaire.

Jay Thies:

Thanks Maiclaire.

Maiclaire Bolton Smith:

And thank you for listening. I hope you’ve enjoyed our latest episode. Please remember to leave us a review and let us know your thoughts and subscribe wherever you get your podcast to be notified when new episodes are released. And thanks to the team for helping bring this podcast to life producer Jesse Devons, editor and sound engineer Ro Roman, our facts guru, Erica Stanley and social media duo, Sarah Buck and Makayla Brooks. Tune in next time for another core conversation.

Erika Stanley:

You still there? Well, thanks for sticking around. Are you curious to know a little bit more about who came onto the show today? Jay Thies has 23 years of financial services experience, including 18 years of claims background, mostly focused on the handling and corporate strategy around property claims. Jay joined CoreLogic in 2023 to lead the pricing analysis and delivery department that is responsible for the research analysis and publishing of construction pricing data that is used to power CoreLogic claims, underwriting and government solutions.

Pete Carroll is the Executive Vice President of Public Policy and Industry Relations at CoreLogic. In this role, Carroll directly oversees industry and public sector engagement programs, drives enterprise strategic initiatives for CoreLogic and expands opportunities for the company’s thought leadership insights, brand awareness and solutions expertise within Washington DC and across the federal housing agencies and other stakeholders.

©2025 CoreLogic, Inc. All rights reserved. The CoreLogic content and information in this blog post may not be reproduced or used in any form without express accreditation to CoreLogic as the source of the content. While all of the content and information in this blog post is believed to be accurate, the content and information is provided “as is” with no guarantee, representation, or warranty, express or implied, of any kind including but not limited to as to the merchantability, non-infringement of intellectual property rights, completeness, accuracy, applicability, or fitness, in connection with the content or information or the products referenced and assumes no responsibility or liability whatsoever for the content or information or the products referenced or any reliance thereon. CoreLogic® and the CoreLogic logo are the trademarks of CoreLogic, Inc. or its affiliates or subsidiaries.  Other trade names or trademarks referenced are the property of their respective owners