The property tax authority in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has determined that Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook has not violated any rules regarding tax breaks applied to her home, which she declared as her primary residence. This conclusion, stemming from a review of Cook’s property records requested by Reuters, could bolster her defense against ongoing efforts by the Trump administration to remove her from the Federal Reserve board.
City Assessor Jerry Markey stated that Ann Arbor has “no reason to believe” Cook has breached property tax regulations. Although Cook has reportedly lived in different locations at times, city records indicate she sought authorization to rent her Michigan home on a short-term basis. Markey clarified that temporary absences from her home or short-term rentals would not disqualify her from receiving a property tax exemption. “Living elsewhere temporarily does not necessarily make an owner ineligible for a principal residence exemption,” he said.
This finding comes amidst accusations from the Trump administration, which has alleged that Cook engaged in mortgage fraud concerning her Ann Arbor home and another property she purchased in Atlanta. Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has taken a leading role in this campaign, making statements on social media and referring the allegations to the Department of Justice, which has initiated an investigation.
The central issue revolves around whether Cook misled lenders when securing mortgages for these homes, specifically claiming her Ann Arbor residence as a primary home. Declaring a property as a primary residence often allows homeowners to secure better mortgage interest rates and receive property tax discounts.
As legal proceedings unfold, an appeals court was anticipated to rule on whether Cook can maintain her position during litigations regarding Trump’s attempts to dismiss her. Regardless of the ruling, an appeal to the Supreme Court is expected, complicating Cook’s role at the Federal Reserve, particularly in light of an important two-day meeting approaching.
Recent reports indicated that, according to documentation for her Atlanta mortgage, Cook informed her lender that the property would serve as a “vacation home,” as opposed to a primary residence. Pulte commented on these revelations, suggesting that her use of the term “vacation home” could reflect intent to deceive, further fueling the accusations against her.
The full scope of Cook’s disclosures to her lenders remains uncertain, especially concerning potential changes to the characterization of her Atlanta property before the mortgage was finalized. Officials in Georgia have confirmed that she never designated that home as a primary residence for tax purposes.
Cook has consistently denied any misconduct, with her legal team asserting that the moves to remove her stem from selectively interpreted social media commentary from the FHFA director that lacks validity under scrutiny.
Local property records demonstrate that Cook acquired permission from city officials to rent her Michigan home on a short-term basis in late 2022 and again in mid-2024. Additionally, in April 2025, she applied to change the home’s status to a long-term rental. By July, city officials noted that she had engaged a rental management firm for her property.
As of now, Markey indicated that Cook has until the end of the year to renounce the tax exemption on her Ann Arbor home. Legal and real estate experts suggest that the property tax records from both Michigan and Georgia, combined with her prior disclosure regarding her Atlanta property, could serve as critical elements in her defense. To secure a conviction for mortgage fraud—a charge rarely pursued in the U.S.—prosecutors would need to demonstrate that Cook engaged in deceitful behavior aimed at defrauding her lenders.
Former federal prosecutor Paul Pelletier remarked that there must be significant financial losses to the lender for the Justice Department to pursue such cases. He expressed doubt over the likelihood of the accusations against Cook leading to prosecution, highlighting that the rates on her two mortgages did not reflect any discounts compared to prevailing market rates at the time she secured them.
