From the AFR:
In May, amid concerns lending standards were slipping, APRA published landmark guidelines on how it expected banks to manage and monitor their mortgage risks.
But a new submission on behalf of the banking industry has hit back at the plan, saying it will add costs and invites a “tick the box” mentality among lenders. The Australian Bankers’ Association submission argues the regulator should stick to providing banks with top-level principles for lenders to implement as they see fit, rather than developing specific guidelines.
…In particular, the ABA took aim at proposals for tougher stress tests for borrowers, and changes to mortgage broker commissions.
It’s surely good news that the banks feel it necessary to challenge APRA’s macroprudential-lite mortgage guidelines. It may suggest some efficacy at the margin. Then again, it may not. The banks may just be pushing back against any and every regulatory impost as a matter of principle (or lack thereof).
The bottom line is there is no discernible effect in the mortgage market data at this stage (which also doesn’t mean it isn’t happening). But compared to the very clear shifts that transpired in New Zealand following their imposition of macroprudential proper, if there is an effect, it’s far more subtle and not strong enough.