USPAP Practice Questions (2026) — Free Sample Questions with Answers

Answer: D

The appraiser may change the client name to Hartwell, since the assignment results are unchanged.: Changing the client name on a completed report misrepresents who engaged the appraiser; it is a new assignment.

The appraiser may add Hartwell as an intended user if Fenwick consents in writing.: Intended users are identified at the time of the assignment; Fenwick's consent permits release, not a retroactive intended user.

The appraiser may give Hartwell the original report, which makes Hartwell an intended user.: Even with authorized release, receiving a copy does not make Hartwell an intended user.

Serving Hartwell as the client is a new assignment; the report cannot simply be readdressed.: Correct. DEFINITIONS — Client and Intended User: both are identified at the time of the assignment. Replacing the client is a new assignment with its own requirements, including the prior-services disclosure.

The client and intended users are fixed when the assignment is set up; serving a new lender as client means a new assignment, not a readdressed report.

Answer: B

A valuation service that is not an appraisal, because no specific amount was stated: A specific amount is not required; a relationship to a benchmark is still an opinion of value.

An appraisal, since value may be stated as a relationship to a benchmark: Correct. DEFINITIONS — Appraisal: an opinion of value may be stated as a single amount, a range, or a relationship (such as "not less than") to a previous value or a numerical benchmark.

An appraisal review, because he evaluated a figure that someone else proposed: Appraisal review concerns the quality of another appraiser's work; a loan amount is not that.

A consulting answer outside USPAP, because the answer was not numerically expressed: It is numerically expressed — as a relationship to the loan amount.

An appraisal is an opinion of value, and it can be expressed as a specific amount, a range, or a relationship to a benchmark such as a loan amount or assessed value.

Answer: B

She may include the statement if she supports it with market data showing slower sales.: This reflects the deleted "supported conclusions" idea; support does not make reliance on a protected characteristic lawful.

She must not include it, since doing so would contribute to violating antidiscrimination laws.: Correct. ETHICS RULE, Nondiscrimination section — an appraiser must not act in a way that violates or contributes to a violation of antidiscrimination laws or regulations.

She may include it if she labels it an extraordinary assumption and discloses its source.: Labeling it does not change the reliance on a protected characteristic.

She may report the lender's view if she attributes it to him and does not adopt it herself.: Repeating a national-origin explanation in her report, even attributed to the loan officer, still contributes to a violation of antidiscrimination laws.

The 2024 Nondiscrimination section bars acting in a way that violates or contributes to a violation of antidiscrimination laws; "supported" reliance on a protected characteristic is not a defense.

Answer: D

Accept and disclose the prior appraisal, because the ETHICS RULE overrides the earlier agreement.: Disclosing would breach her agreement and the client's confidence; the way out is to decline.

Accept without disclosing it, because the earlier agreement prevents disclosure.: The disclosure is mandatory; she cannot accept and stay silent.

Accept and disclose only "a prior relationship," without saying it was an appraisal.: A vague statement does not disclose the service, and it may still breach the agreement.

Decline the new assignment, since she cannot both keep the agreement and disclose.: Correct. ETHICS RULE, Conduct section — if an appraiser has agreed not to disclose a prior service, the appraiser must decline later assignments on that property that fall within the three-year period.

When a confidentiality agreement prevents the required prior-services disclosure, the appraiser must decline the new assignment.

Answer: A

She must allow Jonah appropriate access and retrieval so he can submit the workfile to the agency.: Correct. RECORD KEEPING RULE — an appraiser with custody must allow other appraisers with workfile obligations appropriate access and retrieval, including for submission to state appraiser regulatory agencies; the ETHICS RULE permits disclosure to those agencies.

She must refuse, because sharing assignment results with anyone but the client breaches confidentiality.: Disclosure to a state agency, and access by an appraiser with workfile obligations, are both allowed.

She must first obtain the client's permission before giving Jonah access.: Client permission is not required for this purpose.

She may give Jonah only the report, not the rest of the workfile.: The agency asked for the workfile, and Jonah is entitled to appropriate access to it.

A workfile custodian must give co-signing appraisers access so they can meet obligations such as a state agency request; confidentiality does not block it.

Answer: C

There is no issue, because the client may set the scope of work for its own use.: The client can influence scope, but the appraiser must still produce credible results.

The only issue is competency, which she can cure by disclosing her inexperience in advance.: Disclosure alone does not cure competency, and the scope limit remains a problem.

Both apply: she must address competency, and omitting the income approach likely defeats credibility.: Correct. COMPETENCY RULE and SCOPE OF WORK RULE — she needs or must acquire competency for this property type, and a client limit that omits the approach market participants rely on would likely make results not credible for the intended use.

The only issue is scope of work, because an apartment building is close to her experience.: Income-producing property calls for knowledge she has not shown she has.

A new property type can raise competency and scope of work issues at the same time; a client cannot limit the scope below what credible results require.

Answer: A

Use an extraordinary assumption about the interior, if credible results remain possible: Correct. SCOPE OF WORK RULE: when relevant information is unavailable because of an assignment condition, the appraiser may proceed with an extraordinary assumption if credible results can still be developed; otherwise withdraw or change the conditions.

Use a hypothetical condition that the interior is in average condition for the area: A hypothetical condition is contrary to known fact; here the condition is unknown, which calls for an extraordinary assumption.

Finish from the exterior and leave the interior unaddressed, as access was refused: Ignoring a relevant characteristic, without an assumption or disclosure, would not produce credible, properly disclosed results.

Withdraw, because results cannot be credible whenever relevant data is unavailable: Unavailable data does not automatically defeat credibility; withdrawal is needed only if an extraordinary assumption cannot support credible results and the conditions cannot be changed.

If assignment conditions block relevant information, the appraiser withdraws unless the conditions can be changed to gather it or an extraordinary assumption still allows credible results.

Answer: A

As a hypothetical condition, since the site is known to be contaminated on the effective date: Correct. SCOPE OF WORK RULE — problem identification (assignment conditions); DEFINITIONS: a condition contrary to what is known to exist on the effective date, but assumed for analysis, is a hypothetical condition, and it must be disclosed with its possible effect on the results.

As an extraordinary assumption, since the final cleanup cost and timing are still uncertain: The contamination itself is known, not uncertain; assuming it away is contrary to known fact, so it is a hypothetical condition.

As an ordinary limiting condition that requires no special disclosure in the report: Assuming away a known adverse condition must be disclosed as a hypothetical condition, along with its possible effect on the results.

As a jurisdictional exception, because environmental law governs how the site is cleaned up: Environmental law does not preclude compliance with any part of USPAP here, so the Jurisdictional Exception Rule does not apply.

Valuing a property as if free of a condition known to exist on a current effective date (such as confirmed contamination) is a hypothetical condition, which must be disclosed with its possible effect on the results.

Answer: C

The whole STANDARD that contains the requirement is void for the assignment.: Only the precluded requirement is void, not the Standard containing it.

All of USPAP is void for the assignment, because the statute governs the appraisal.: The rule voids only the precluded part; the rest of USPAP still applies.

Only the precluded part of USPAP is void; every other requirement still applies.: Correct. JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE — if law or regulation precludes compliance with part of USPAP, only that part becomes void for the assignment.

USPAP still applies in full, but she may note her disagreement with the statute.: The precluded part does become void; she must comply with the law.

A jurisdictional exception is narrow: only the specific part of USPAP that law or regulation precludes is void for that assignment.

Answer: D

Nothing, because only prior appraisals of the subject must be disclosed: The disclosure covers services as an appraiser or in any other capacity.

Nothing, because the management work ended before the assignment began: Ended services still count if they fell within the 3-year period before the agreement to perform the assignment.

That she had a prior interest in the property, in place of a services statement: The interest statement and the prior services statement are separate; management work is a service, not an interest.

That she performed a prior service on the property within the past 3 years: Correct. SR 2-3 and the ETHICS RULE: the certification must disclose any services regarding the subject performed, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, within the 3 years before agreeing to the assignment.

Prior services disclosure covers any service regarding the subject, in any capacity, within the 3 years before the agreement to perform the assignment.

Answer: B

Issue the Restricted Appraisal Report, naming the participating lenders by type: Identification by type is allowed in an Appraisal Report, not in a Restricted Appraisal Report.

Issue an Appraisal Report, because restricted-report users must be identified by name: Correct. SR 2-2(b): other intended users of a Restricted Appraisal Report must be identified by name; unnamed future participants call for an Appraisal Report.

Issue the Restricted Appraisal Report and list only Sterling Bank as a user: The bank has told the appraiser that others will rely on it; leaving them out would misidentify the intended users.

Issue the Restricted Appraisal Report with an extraordinary assumption about the users: An extraordinary assumption concerns facts about the assignment's subject, not a way around the naming rule.

A Restricted Appraisal Report may be used only when every intended user other than the client is named; unnamed users call for an Appraisal Report.

Answer: C

Only the sale 26 months ago, because a deed into a trust is not a sale: Under pre-2024 wording ("sales") this was arguable, but the 2024 USPAP added "and other transfers," so the trust deed is included.

All three, because every recorded transfer must be analyzed whatever its date: The look-back is 3 years before the effective date; the sale 41 months ago falls outside it.

The trust transfer and the 26-month sale, both within 3 years of the effective date: Correct. SR 1-5(b), as amended in the 2024 USPAP to cover sales and other transfers: the appraiser must analyze all sales and other transfers of the subject within 3 years before the effective date, when available in the normal course of business, so the trust deed counts.

Only the trust transfer, because the analysis reaches back just 12 months: Twelve months is not the USPAP period for real property; it is 3 years.

The 2024 USPAP widened SR 1-5(b) from sales to sales and other transfers: for real property market value, analyze current agreements of sale, options and listings and all sales and other transfers within 3 years before the effective date.

Answer: B

Edit the original report, since the client that ordered it owns the report: Owning a copy does not let anyone but its author change another appraiser's report and conclusions.

Decline to alter the report; her own value opinion can be offered within the review: Correct. STANDARD 3: a reviewer cannot change another appraiser's work; if the scope includes it, she may develop and report her own opinion of value in the review.

Edit the report and sign the original appraiser's certification as an added co-signer: Signing someone else's report to cover changes misstates who developed the opinions.

Get the original appraiser's permission, then make the changes herself: Only the original appraiser can revise that appraiser's report; permission does not shift authorship.

A reviewer cannot revise another appraiser's report; changes come from the original appraiser, and any different value from the reviewer comes as her own opinion within the review.

Answer: D

She must repeat every step of the original appraisal from the start: The reviewer is not required to replicate the steps completed by the original appraiser.

She may use all of the original analysis, adjustments included, since she is reviewing: Items not found credible, such as the unsupported adjustments, cannot simply be carried over.

She must adopt a hypothetical condition that the original adjustments are correct: Adjustments she has found unsupported cannot be assumed correct; they must be replaced.

She may extend credible data by extraordinary assumption and replace the adjustments: Correct. SR 3-3: items in the work under review that the reviewer finds credible can be extended to her opinion on the basis of an extraordinary assumption; items not credible must be replaced with conforming analysis.

A reviewer developing her own value opinion need not repeat the original work: credible items may be extended by extraordinary assumption, and items that are not credible must be replaced.

Answer: B

Only the employee sale, since gifts are not market transactions to consider: Since 2024, the requirement covers sales and other transfers, so a gift is not excluded on that basis.

Prior sales and other transfers of interests, the gift included, when relevant: Correct. STANDARD 9 (as amended in 2024): the appraiser analyzes past sales and other transfers of ownership interests in the business when relevant to credible results.

Only transfers within 3 years, applying the real property look-back period: The 3-year look-back is a real property rule; STANDARD 9 does not use it.

Neither, since prior transactions matter only in real property appraisals: Business appraisal has its own requirement to analyze prior transactions in the interests.

In business appraisal, prior sales and other transfers of ownership interests in the business are analyzed when relevant; the 3-year real property period does not apply.