trunkmonk
2 days ago
way to go Neo, there were very large buys but it settled back down. 10 and 8 appear to be the top today for GSEs
NeoSunTzu
Re: F2Twins post# 833637
Monday, June 16, 2025 12:15:05 PM
Post#
833692
of 833717
@ F2 and JWood:
Thank you, F2, for your clarification of who you advocate for; however, whether intentionally, or unintentionally, the minute you slapped the âF2Truthâ name on that letter, the content of that letter, and then sending it to Bessent at Treasury under the âF2Truthâ name you ostensibly spoke in EVERYONEâs name who has been fighting against this theft for going on two decades now, which is why I so vehemently oppose(d) what you are advocating. Although, I DO understand that position, but again, it is the very capitulation that the ne'er-do-wells, in the name of government, have used throughout history to contiuously take more and more from rightful, lawful owners.
Again, here is the basis of my position, not necessarily aimed at you F2, but for all those who need the wider, non-capitulation picutre.
Fiderer and Rosner have stated all this as well as can be stated; it is financially ignorant to take the governmentâs narrative (more truthfully, the financial establishmentâs narrative, i.e. for the politicians and others who are too lazy or equally corrupt) as a basis for capitulation in further theft. Anyone who is too impatient now because you want your quick returns on your speculation you should sell. This is a fight WHICH WILL END during the Trump administration, I am confident of that, but for the good of the future should follow the Constitution, takings law, conservatorship and shareholder law, as closely as possible or much worse WILL continue to happen. While NOT rewarding the obvious corruption.
Anyone who does not understand the original intention of the conservatorship, through its actual execution, as being an operation to close the GSEs down, take the assets, and remake the secondary mortgage market in the name of the hidden financial establishment powers behind the politicians is, again, either an uncritical thinker, politically or economically ignorant, corrupt, or working in the name of the corruptors.
The 8-0 jury decision finally exposed the self-dealing arrangement for its defacto non de jure operation, and has put us on sound legal footing to continue fighting the narrative and the theft; furthermore, the obvious financial health and strength of the companies speaks for the growing investment from funds and institutional investors which further strengthens our position, support base, and potential legal takings cases. And make no mistake about it â execute those warrants and you ripen a takings case â obvious, pure, and simple. The so-named âF2Truthâ and capitulation is financially and economically undesirable, snubs its nose at shareholder and conservatorship practices and law, and should soon be legally indefensible.
Letâs recap: The original ostensible reason and function of the conservatorship was to shore up the GSEs and âreturnâ them to their role in supporting the secondary mortgage market. But hereâs what actually occurred:
⢠In fact, they were used as a pass through to assist the Fed and Treasury with bailing out the TBTF fail banks â their original capital was swiped, those continuing to make their home mortgages allowed the Treasury to act as if Treasury was making good on the agency MBS payments while GSE capital allowed Treasury to continue facilitating the $700 B they made available to the banking system â all of it was electronic entries but equivalent to massive âpaper printingâ which GSE cash flows from mortgages supported. TBTF MBS was the complete trash that needed support.
⢠The original agreement has gone through numerous amendments, each timed or designed to coincide with a new narrative to counteract either destroyed narratives or GSE profitability and viability â all in the name of keeping the GSEs in conservatorship until some event, political or economic, triggered a reason for receivership.
----------- The most egregious of which being the Net Worth Sweep and the paying of cash dividends â who in their honest, legal right mind forces cash dividends on companies in conservatorship â especially those who they narrate as being unviable?!
⢠$300 B taken from the GSEs represents almost $100 B more than a 10% return to the government on their line of credit â again electronic entry line of credit support â while the GSEs had to pay cash
⢠TBTF banks left the GSEâs with roughly $145 B in bad mortgage paper for which the government, under Obama, agreed to take much less in return for payments and support of âdemocraticâ organizations and institutions ⌠NONE of it was counted as repaying GSE line of credit, nor was it refunded to the GSEs
⢠The companies have retained $160 B in capital from NORMAL OPERATIONS of their businesses.
How does that reconcile with gifting the government 80% more?!!!
Finally, JWood, your entire post is complete nonsense, but I'll start with this:
I totally agree with F2. In fact, I think the reason this administration has NOT released the GSEs is precisely because of what is happening on this board.
Numerous shareholders have expressed the "all or nothing" approach. Either we get it all, and government gets nothing, or we sue. Extensively. And the threat of lawsuits is freezing the government, because lawsuits will drag out this situation for years to come, far beyond the length of Trump's term. And, in the meantime, will freeze the GSEs assets so that neither the government nor shareholders get anything until the lawsuits are resolved.
This borders on the numerical, financial, or analytical equivalent of functional illiteracy to state that anyone who fights against the government getting 80% more of companies with realistic market values in the hundreds of billions, if not over a trillion dollars, for less than $100k is taking an âall or nothingâ approach. Your comment almost doesnât deserve a reply other than to point out its ignorance of the facts and circumstances. The above recounting, which is not even a full comprehensive accounting, surely represents the actions of a less than honest and forthright actor that deserves no further exaction.
They should either sell the warrants back to the companies or void them â this will obviate any need for litigation â for those who see this a solution impediment. Then, given all that has transpired, again, recounted above, come clean with all the financial remunderations rightly due TO THE COMPANIES, and ONLY then find an elegant solution with the current senior preferred shares to possibly share in a much more shareholder and conservatorship responsible way the profitability of the companies which under our law mainly belongs with shareholders.
navycmdr
3 days ago
$Booom - Trump has a plan to remake the housing-finance system. Itâs baffling to many lawmakers and experts.
The question of what to do with Fannie and Freddie, the two dominant mortgage financiers, has bedeviled policymakers for decades.
By Katy O'Donnell - 06/15/2025
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/15/trump-housing-fannie-freddie-mortgage-treasury-00403780
GOP lawmakers and the mortgage industry are raising questions about the Trump administrationâs plans to maintain government control over much of the nationâs housing finance system, defying expectations that it would back off.
President Donald Trump surprised the industry late last month by pledging to take public Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled companies that stand behind half the $16 trillion residential mortgage market â while preserving an implicit federal guarantee for their solvency. His top housing regulator, Bill Pulte, who oversees the companies, added to the confusion by saying the administration is exploring ways to sell shares while keeping the companies under government authority.
The insistence on preserving significant sway over the two mortgage giants, which were seized by the Bush administration during the financial crisis and placed in conservatorship, is setting up a potential rift with Republicans â and possibly even some administration aides who have long worked to reduce the governmentâs footprint in the housing market.
âI want to get them out of conservatorship,â said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), chair of the Senate Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie. âBut I want to be very careful about how we do it, because we need the secondary market, and we need it to work,â he added, referring to the market where mortgage loans are purchased and sold to investors.
Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said âwe need to continue to investigate recapitalization and releasingâ the companies from government control.
The question of what to do with Fannie and Freddie has bedeviled policymakers for decades, with Republicans wanting the government to take its hands off housing finance and Democrats fearing that privatizing the firms would destabilize the market and push up mortgage rates.
At stake is a potential windfall of hundreds of billions of dollars for an administration that is staring at massive fiscal deficits. The government holds a roughly $340 billion liquidation preference for the two companies, by one estimate â meaning the money would go to the Treasury Department before anyone else in the event of a sale.
Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will meet with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins on June 17 to discuss the future of Fannie and Freddie, underscoring the importance of the issue.
Fannie and Freddie donât make loans themselves, but rather purchase them from mortgage companies and bundle them into securities to sell on the secondary market, freeing up the lenders to make more loans. That, plus the government guarantee, helps keep mortgage rates down, supporters say.
Trump was widely expected to support privatization, after his first administration worked to prepare the companies for their eventual release. But his latest comments look more like what former President Joe Biden would do, according to Jim Parrott, a nonresident fellow at the Urban Institute and a former economic adviser in the Obama White House.
âIn the Biden administration, you could imagine a version of this,â Parrott said. âThe fact that weâre hearing about it in this administration, I think, is catching folks by surprise.â
The FHFA responded in an email that it is âstudying how, if the President elects to take Fannie and Freddie public, it can be done in the safest and soundest manner which includes keeping them in conservatorship.â It added: âIn any scenario, we will ensure the [mortgage-backed securities] market is safe and sound and that there is no upward pressure on rates.â
White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said the administration âis committed to strengthening the Federal Housing Finance Agency to advance the Presidentâs mission of restoring the dream of homeownership for all Americans.â
Keeping Fannie and Freddie in conservatorship, according to one shareholder, amounts to attaching âtraining wheelsâ as the government figures out how to monetize its stake.
âI think Pulte has probably confused people more than anything with his message,â said Tim Pagliara, a shareholder and author of the book âAnother Big Lie: How the Government Stole Billions from the American Dream of Home Ownership and Got Caught!â
âSo the idea, for example, of allowing these entities to operate in conservatorship is a strategy that they probably talked about with the investment bankers on their primary concern, which is mortgage rates going up,â he added. âItâs like putting training wheels on a bike.â
The administrationâs pronouncements have perplexed housing finance analysts who are unsure of what a scheme to take the companies public while keeping them in conservatorship would look like â or whether there would be sufficient investor appetite to make it worthwhile. JPMorgan strategists wrote in a note that they were âflummoxedâ by the comments.
âItâs just hard to imagine why anybody would think there would be strong investor interest in that kind of model, unless the government were to convey they were going to run the [government-sponsored enterprises] in a way thatâs investor-friendly, and I think weâre a long way off from that,â Parrott said.
David Dworkin, president and CEO of the National Housing Conference, a stakeholdersâ group, agreed.
âThe most important element of a successful stock sale is a board that is truly independent and has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders,â he said. âUnder conservatorship, that is actually not even allowed. So, without an independent board with a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders, there is no value to the stock.â
Still, he said, âthere are far too many comments coming from major players, including the president of the United States, to avoid the conclusion that major action on conservatorship could be in the very near future.â
Another housing finance analyst, granted anonymity to frankly discuss the nascent plans, also expressed skepticism about the idea that investors would bite on purchasing shares in conservatorship, with the federal government still owning the vast majority of the asset.
âThe direction of that control can change at the next election,â the analyst said. âEach administration has already demonstrated they want to use Fannie and Freddie in different ways, so what are you investing in?â
For the most part, Republican lawmakers are keeping their powder dry as they wait for additional details about the administrationâs plans.
â[Senate Banking Committee] Chairman [Tim] Scott looks forward to hearing moreâ from Trump and Pulte on their plans for Fannie and Freddie, spokesperson Ben Watson said.
Asked if conservatorship should end, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie, said, âI donât know.â
âWeâre going to wait until the first quarter of 2026 to have that conversation,â said Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.), chair of the Financial Services housing subcommittee. âReleasing them from conservatorship, thatâs one thing, but most of the folks I talked to still want the federal government on the hook.â
The first Trump administration worked to build capital at the companies to prepare them for the end of conservatorship, an effort led by then-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and former Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Mark Calabria.
Calabria has returned for Trump 2.0, now in a position with the White House Office of Management and Budget. Two key Treasury officials â Jonathan McKernan and Luke Pettit â also hail from the school of thought that Fannie and Freddie should be released from conservatorship.
âThe Treasury Department has not really engaged on this yet â so it does not appear to me that the administration is very far into the analysis of options phase,â Parrott said. âUntil the Treasury Department really engages in any of this meaningfully, itâs hard to know where all this lands.â
Filed under: Mortgage Lending,
navycmdr
5 days ago
Fannie & Freddie may go public. If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are released from federal conservatorship via a public stock offering, the proceeds should be invested in housing for middle-class U.S. workers, a coalition of labor leaders and congressional lawmakers declared Thursday during a rally at the House Triangle on Capitol Hill.
Proceeds should benefit the middle class, lawmakers say
Labor leaders join a bipartisan group of U.S. reps at a Capitol Hill rally
Luke Baynes - June 12, 2025
If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are released from federal conservatorship via a public stock offering, the proceeds should be invested in housing for middle-class U.S. workers, a coalition of labor leaders and congressional lawmakers declared Thursday during a rally at the House Triangle on Capitol Hill.
The event, organized by the nonprofit group Housing for US, featured speeches from a bipartisan group of U.S. representatives from New York and Wisconsin. The lawmakers were united by a shared desire to see working-class families benefit from a federal windfall resulting from selling shares of Fannie and Freddie.
The government-sponsored mortgage giants have been under federal control since the 2008 financial crisis. President Donald Trump has floated the idea of releasing the companies from that status, saying in a May 21 social media post that they are âthrowing off a lot of CASH, and the time would seem to be rightâ to take them public again.
According to Housing for US, the projected federal proceeds from that process would be $250 billion. The nonprofit argues that those funds should be used to establish a program that makes affordable housing construction economically viable for developers. Housing for US projects that the program could yield 3.5 million housing units that would be earmarked for households earning between 80% and 165% of the median income in a designated geographic area.
âHousing is the No. 1 issue for union workers in red states and blue states alike,â Gary LaBarbera, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York, said at the event, according to a press release. âThe rent is too high, and so is the cost of homeownership. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to responsibly release Fannie and Freddie and invest the $250 billion the federal government will reap back into Americaâs forgotten middle class.â
Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., noted that homeownership is âout of reach for many hardworking Americans.â He said that reinvesting the federal proceeds from a Fannie and Freddie stock offering in a housing program would serve the dual function of addressing the countryâs affordable housing crisis and creating jobs.
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y. said that many middle-class workers âfind themselves in limbo because they donât make enough to afford [the] market rate but make too much to qualify for affordable housing.â
âThis is an opportunity to deliver critical assistance to hard-working Americans by giving them the ability to buy homes built with American labor,â Malliotakis said.
navycmdr
6 days ago
Taking Fannie and Freddie Public Is Trumpâs Dream.
It Might Be Just a Fantasy.
Investors, mortgage lenders, and the government
all see an angle. How it ends isnât clear.
President Donald Trump just fired the starting gun for
what could be the biggest public offering of all time.
In a pair of Truth Social posts in May, Trump said he
wanted to take public the mortgage giants Fannie Mae
By Joe Light - June 12, 2025, 1:30 am EDT
President Donald Trump just fired the starting gun for what could be the biggest public offering of all time.
In a pair of Truth Social posts in May, Trump said he wanted to take public the mortgage giants Fannie Mae
His unexpected intervention put a spotlight on the behind-the-scenes tussle over the companies.
Well over a decade since Fannie and Freddie faltered at the height of the financial crisis, they are
being eyed by investors and the government as a value-stuffed piggy bank that is ripe to be cracked open.
Mortgage investors and home buyers are stuck in the middle.
Whether the president makes it to the finish line is an open question, but the attempt will have wide
implications for investors, the federal budget deficit, and home buyers.
The companies are the hidden gears that keep the U.S. housing market turning. The companies
donât make mortgages themselves, but buy them from lenders, bundle them into mortgage bonds,
and guarantee repayment to investors in case of default. Through that process, they guarantee
nearly $7 trillion in mortgage-backed securities, or MBS, and provide liquidity to banks and other
mortgage lenders so they can keep making more loans. For decades their stocks were blue-chip
staples in investorsâ portfolios, but the companies failed in the 2008 financial crisis and entered
a so-called conservatorship controlled by the U.S. government.
If Trump is to be believed, that is about to change.
âI am working on TAKING THESE AMAZING COMPANIES PUBLIC,â wrote
Trump. âThese Agencies are now doing very well, and will help us to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!â
Strictly speaking the companies are already public. Before 2008, the companies
issued roughly $35 billion in preferred stock, and that stock as well as the common
shares continue to trade in the over-the-counter market.
The 2008 bailout eventually cost the Treasury about $190 billion. In return the government
received warrants to acquire nearly 80% of the companiesâ common shares as well as a
new class of âseniorâ preferred stock that would rank above all privately owned shares in
a restructuring. Those senior preferreds now have a liquidation preference of more than
$340 billion, representing the governmentâs claim to proceeds in a restructuring before
other investors get paid out. How the governmentâs stake is resolved will determine
whether certain investors win or lose their bets on the companies.
Hedge fund managers such as Bill Ackman and John Paulsonâboth major Trump
supportersâscooped up shares of Fannie and Freddie for pennies on the dollar after
2008. Since Trumpâs victory and the presidentâs statements, the shares have skyrocketed.
The market value of some classes of Fannie and Freddieâs preferred shares, favored by
many hedge funds, has more than doubled since the election. Fannie and Freddieâs
common shares, a slug of which is owned by Ackman, are up more than 500%.
Some investors have estimated that Fannie and Freddie could need to raise more than
$30 billion to have enough capital to stand on their own two feet, which would put the
offering ahead of Saudi Aramcoâs $29 billion capital raise in 2019, the largest of all time.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in interviews before the presidentâs posts said the
administration didnât plan to tackle Fannie and Freddie until after finishing Trumpâs
tax bill and tariff push. He said the administrationâs guiding principle would be that
whatever is done canât raise mortgage rates.
The Treasury Department pointed to those statements when asked for comment.
Among the least excited about a potential public offering are investors in Fannie
and Freddieâs trillions of dollars in MBS as well as the mortgage-industrial complex
of lenders, servicers, and real estate agents that depend on the steadiness of
Fannie and Freddie for a strong housing market.
Mortgage rates would likely rise if the government released Fannie and Freddie,
many analysts believe, though details are uncertain and will matter. Among them
are the level of capital the companies will be forced to hold in reserve. Depending
on that figure, Fannie and Freddie could have to raise their mortgage fees just to
earn a return on capital that is palatable to investors, which would likely raise rates.
âRemaining in conservatorship is a better outcome than a quick and poorly
conceived exit,â says Bob Broeksmit, who heads the Mortgage Bankers Association,
an industry trade group.
Any plan to return Fannie and Freddie to private hands will also need to address
whether and how the U.S. government will continue to backstop the companiesâ
MBS. The companies were originally chartered by Congress as quasi
governmental entities. Fannie and Freddie executives long insisted that they had
no government guarantee, but investors essentially ignored them, trading their
securities as if they had such a backstop. When the companies failed in the 2008
crisis, the government made that âimplicitâ backing official.
Now, some mortgage lenders and fund managers are worried about how investors
would treat the bonds if Fannie and Freddie left government control. Any doubt
about the governmentâs backing could cause mortgage rates to rise.
âI want to be clear, the U.S. Government will keep its implicit GUARANTEES, and
I will stay strong in my position on overseeing them as President,â Trump wrote
in a Truth Social post in May.
That latest message from the president leaves the path ahead unclear. It suggests
that despite his earlier pledge to take Fannie and Freddie public, he still intends
to retain control of them somehow. That prospect has worried some Fannie-Freddie
shareholders in recent days.
Fannie Mae Freddie Mac
There are indications that the presidentâs posts surprised some administration officials.
Treasury officials had told some mortgage investors in the days before the posts that
serious work wouldnât begin on a plan until after the presidentâs âone, big, beautiful billâ
passed Congress, according to a person familiar with the matter.
âAny actions under consideration will be carefully evaluated in a safe and sound manner
to deliver on the presidentâs historic agenda,â said White House spokesman Harrison
Fields in a statement.
Former private-equity executive Bill Pulte leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency,
or FHFA, and controls the conservatorship for Trump. In meetings he has expressed
an interest in listing Fannie and Freddie shares on the New York Stock Exchange,
where they havenât traded since 2010. That move would likely raise the price and liquidity
of shares and could make them eligible to be owned by more investors.
Otherwise, Pulte has said he is deferring to the president for what exactly should happen
with the companies, according to people familiar with the meetings.
In TV interviews since Trumpâs posts in May, Pulte has said he canât imagine Trump
relinquishing control of the companies and that the president could decide to sell shares
of the companies without them actually leaving government control.
âWe are studying how, if the president elects to take Fannie and Freddie public,
it can be done in the safest and soundest manner which includes keeping them in
conservatorship,â said an FHFA spokesperson in a statement. âIn any scenario, we
will ensure the MBS market is safe and sound and that there is no upward
pressure on rates.â
A plan could turn a Fannie and Freddie offering into less of a bonanza for private
shareholders and more of a government cash grab if Trump decides to hold on
to the companies but somehow monetize the governmentâs stake of warrants and
senior preferred shares. Sales of the shares could go to pay down the deficit or
even become the seed corn for a sovereign-wealth fund, which Trump has
expressed interest in creating.
âThe hard part is we donât even know what theyâre motivated to get. Is it revenue?
Is it a payout for shareholders?â says Michael Bright, who heads the Structured
Finance Association, a trade group that represents bond investors.
Still, some analysts think that Trump will eventually get a complete release done.
Analysts for policy research firm Capstone assign an 80% probability that Fannie
and Freddie are privatized under Trump. A potential next step, say the analysts,
is an executive order from the White House that directs agencies to come up
with a release plan.
Key to Ackman and other shareholdersâ investment thesis is for the government
to essentially waive its $348 billion in preferred shares. That is called for given
the $301 billion in dividends that Fannie and Freddie have paid to the government
since being taken over, the shareholders argue. If the government doesnât waive
its preferred shares, its stakeâalong with that of the private preferred
shareholdersâcould be converted to common stock, heavily diluting private investors.
âShareholders donât have their hands out. The opposite is the case,â Ackman said
in an X post on June 3. âHundreds of billions of dollars of funds that belonged
to [Fannie and Freddie] were unilaterally taken by the government years ago,
and the companies never received credit for these payments.â
But it may be an uphill climb. The first Trump administration attempted to end
government control of Fannie and Freddie before being derailed by Covid-19.
In that process, the Treasury Department found that waiving the senior
preferred balance would be illegal, former FHFA director Mark Calabria wrote
in a 2023 book. It was instead considering converting the government stake
to common equity.
Calabria now works at the Office of Management and Budget. An OMB
spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Ackman and other investors have argued that if their shares are wiped out,
demand for the companiesâ new shares would evaporate.
âUltimately the government has to clarify what Treasury is going to do with
its senior preferred stake. Thatâs the billion-dollar question in all this,â says
Capstone analyst Spencer Van Every.
Also unanswered is whether the companies will pay a fee to the government
for their backstop, whether the government will retain a stake in the
companies, and even whether Trump will give up control.
For nearly 17 years, the countriesâ largest MBS investors, hedge funds,
mortgage lenders, and the government have jockeyed over how to resolve
the last outstanding bailout from the 2008 crisis and in so doing determine
the future of $7 trillion in mortgage bonds and hundreds of billions of dollarsâ
worth of stock. Thereâs no telling where the companies end up,
but the fight is on.
News
Market Data
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
Ask ADVFN Intelligence (AI)
2latefortears
1 day ago
