What Michigan law actually says on the two most-faked points

On audits. The real provision is section 57, MCL 559.257(2)–(3), added in 2013. An association with annual revenues over $20,000 must have its books independently audited or reviewed by a certified public accountant each year — and the co-owners may opt out annually by affirmative vote. That is confirmed verbatim in LARA's own published Condominium Act FAQ.¹ A review is a materially lighter engagement than an audit, and the opt-out is routinely exercised. Nothing resembles a mandatory CPA audit.

On reserves. MCL 559.205 requires a reserve fund for major repairs and replacement of common elements and permits the administrator to set minimum standards by rule; the administrative rule ties a minimum to 10% of the association's current annual budget on a noncumulative basis. There is no 70%, no mandatory study, and no refresh cycle. House Bill 5784 would create one, and it has never had a hearing.

The only reserve percentage that binds Michigan associations in practice is the 15% Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac require from 4 January 2027 — and that is a mortgage-eligibility standard, not Michigan law. It is worth being precise about that distinction, because it is exactly the sort of real fact these pages garble into a fake statute.

Why Michigan is unusually exposed to this

Three reasons compound:

• Michigan has no HOA regulator. No agency publishes authoritative guidance, so a search for “Michigan condo law 2026” does not surface a government page at the top.
• Michigan's actual law has been static. Nothing changed in the Condominium Act for three years, which leaves a content vacuum that reads, to an automated content generator, like something that must be filled.
• The real changes came from unexpected places — a new standalone solar act, a marketable-title rewrite, an anti-SLAPP statute, and the secondary mortgage market. Those are harder to summarise than a fictional amendment to a section number.

How a board can check anything in one minute

1. Section numbers. If a claimed Condominium Act provision is outside MCL 559.101 to 559.276, it is not in the Act.
2. Read the history line. Every section on the Legislature's MCL site carries one — for example, the Homeowners' Energy Policy Act's reads “2024, Act 68, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025.” No history line for a claimed amendment, no amendment.
3. Check the Public Act list for the year. A claimed 2026 amendment has a public act number or it did not happen.
4. Distrust round numbers with no citation. “70% funded,” “30 days' notice,” “180 to 120 days” — specific, memorable and unsourced is the signature.

What it costs to get this wrong

A board that commissions an audit it does not need has wasted money. A board that adopts a fictional 30-day notice procedure has created a self-imposed standard an owner will hold it to. A board that budgets to a fictional 70% reserve target and defends the resulting assessment increase on that basis has misled its members, in writing.

And a board that relies on a fake foreclosure timeline may miss a real one.

What to watch next

Nothing official; no Michigan agency is policing this and none has the authority to. The practical defence is a citation habit. Every claim about Michigan association law should come with a section number, a public act number, or a docket number — and each of those is checkable in under a minute on the Legislature's or the courts' own site.