News 
Market Data 
Discover
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
No major sell-off this week, despite of the government's motion to overrule the verdict.
This motion could have been made 6 months ago, before all this work on interest and distribution.
So, I think all they try to do is delay the ultimate outcome in favor of the shareholders.
The charts have deteriorated a little bit, but not enough to say we moved in a downturn.
Hope we have a great next week.
Go FNF.
I think Lamberth sides with the shareholders. That said, how long til he announces his position? 30 days, 60 days, unlimited time frame?
Morningstar DBRS assigned AAA ratings w “stable” outlook
to Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac on Thursday.
The rating service noted that the ratings were directly linked to the “long-term
local currency issuer rating” the firm currently has assigned to the U.S....
Sales of existing homes declined by 4.3% on a monthly basis in March, according to the
National Association of Realtors. “Though rebounding from cyclical lows, home sales are
stuck because interest rates have not made any major moves,” said Lawrence Yun,
chief economist at NAR.
Interest rates on mortgages have increased in April, hitting an average of 7.10% this week,
according to Freddie Mac...
$Boooom ! - Freddie Mac wants a new role financing
Homeowners sitting on equity. One banking group isn’t happy.
if Banks don't like it - $IT'S a $GENIUS MOVE !! 
($Very $Smart $Move - $ALREADY SOLID $PRODUCING $LOANS)
Published: April 17, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. ET - By Joy Wiltermuth
The housing giant could make a $850 billion splash in the market for
second-lien mortgages under a new proposal
A Wall Street lobbying group thinks Freddie Mac’s proposal is mission creep and wants
second-lien mortgages to stay in the domain of private credit. GETTY
-8.97%
Housing giant Freddie Mac wants the green light to expand its already dominant footprint
in the estimated $44.8 trillion U.S. housing market. But not everyone is on board.
Federal regulators want feedback on Freddie’s new proposal to allow it to start buying up
second-lien mortgages, a popular product among cash-strapped U.S. homeowners looking
to tap the equity in their properties, especially after mortgage rates shot up in the wake
of the pandemic.
Read: Homeowners scrambling for cash breathe new life into second-lien mortgage market
The aim is for Freddie to start buying fixed-rate second liens potentially by this summer, giving
borrowers a way to tap an estimated $32 trillion of equity built up in U.S. homes in recent years.
If approved, it would open the door for more borrowers to extract cash from their homes, without
having to refinance at current 30-year fixed mortgage rates of about 7.2%.
But a major financial-industry lobbying group said Wednesday that the second-lien market should
remain in the hands of private credit, not a partially government-backed entity.
“In the current market, closed-end second mortgages have been, and continue to be, successfully
originated and funded by private capital,” said Michael Bright, chief executive of the Structured
Finance Association, in a statement. “It is quite unclear what role the government-sponsored
enterprises have in funding these mortgage products, or how that fits into Freddie Mac’s overall
government-chartered mission objective.”
Freddie Mac FMCC, -5.38%, Fannie Mae FNMA, -8.97% and other government-sponsored
housing agencies already have a roughly $9.1 trillion stake in the estimated $13 trillion
U.S. residential-mortgage market.
While they don’t make loans, they buy up 30-year fixed-rate mortgages that conform to higher
lending standards put in place after the late-2000s subprime-mortgage crisis.
These lower-risk loans often end up bundled into bond deals with government guarantees that
primarily are owned by the Federal Reserve and banks, among other investors. Because of
these guarantees, investors consider the bonds to be a Treasury surrogate.
A hitch to Freddie’s proposal would be that it only buys second liens on homes where it already
financed the first mortgage.
Importantly, the proposal aims to limit how much homeowners can borrow in total against their
homes. Freddie said it plans to keep a borrower’s loan-to-value ratio at less than 80% when
looking at both first and second-lien mortgages on a home, keeping an equity cushion in place
in times of stress.
Servicing of the loans also would be overseen by Freddie, which means homeowners could
have access to payment pauses implemented by the government — such as the ones rolled
out during the COVID-19 pandemic, or in cases where homes are hit by hurricanes or other
natural disasters.
The SFA — which represents bond investors, issuers and Wall Street banks — called the
proposal “an unnecessary government encroachment into a sector that has been operating
successfully without government involvement.”
But Freddie’s charter, in place for decades, already indicates that it is authorized to purchase,
service, sell and deal in subordinate second liens.
BofA Global researchers estimated Wednesday that Freddie could end up owning around
$850 billion in second liens, given the huge swath of first-lien mortgages it already financed
at rates below 4%, and based on a combined loan-to-value ratio of 75%.
Fannie Mae, which hasn’t announced a similar program, could see volume of $1 trillion in
second liens when looking at the same parameters.
For context, the BofA Global researchers expect Wall Street to package up to a total of
about $11 billion in home-equity lines of credit and second liens into bond deals this year,
up from only $4.5 billion in 2023.
The U.S. housing market has been largely frozen since the Federal Reserve began
raising interest rates in 2022 to fight high inflation, a battle it continues to wage to this day.
The plotters react to the Legal definition "MAY" posted yesterday in the comment I'm replying to, and they tumbled the stock prices.
This word is very important because the FHFA's Wall Street law firm, bases all the defense on this word, stating that it's "permissive, rather than mandatory".
It's clear that it means to have permission to do something. An authority. A power.
But it doesn't mean that it can be excused from complying. That is, it's imperative once the capital has been generated, in order to (may) put FnF in a sound and solvent condition (FHFA-C's Power). That is, to restore regulatory capital levels, and since day one.
$426B of core capital is held in escrow, including the $125B corresponding to the offset attached to the $125B SPS LP increased for free (another capital distribution restricted)
"May" in the FHFA-C's Power is also interrelated to the FHFA-C's Incidental Power, about activities in the best interests of the FHFA, and it can be used this comment by Freddie Mac as explanatory note. It can be included the expenses to build the CSP, etc.
All the legal proceedings have been built around this, and it has ended up with the fiction of implied contract (the dividend was impeccably suspended, as per the Restriction on Capital Distributions) and false damages (one-day share price drop) in the Lamberth court, which, by the way, the motion for JMOL was fraudulently filed as a backdoor appeal, to show strength, and the real appeal will be filed when due, because it wasn't related to the evidence argued during the trial and a jury issue, required in a motion for JMOL, but this private sector law firm brought up again the issue of whether a claim travels with the shares. Judge Lamberth already said that it's correct, but now, it comes the appeal many years later, so it's reduced to those that can demonstrate that they held stocks on the day of the 3rd amendment. Basically, only Berkowitz and other plaintiffs get damages with money taken from FnF (back dividends), another capital distribution restricted by the way.
Judge Lamberth knew that the FHFA couldn't file 55 pages in a motion for JMOL Rule 50 (b), if the one Rule 50 (a) was an oral motion. This is why he didn't respond to the question whether it can file 55 pages and let the FHFA file a shadow appeal.
Evidence that everything has been rigged by the parties and the judge, since day one. Create expectations is always their modus operandi to act freely and draw more people into their cause, but seeking a different outcome.
The FHFA Directors and their Wall Street law firm will receive always the same response:
NO!
$1TRILLION SUIT LOOMS@FHFA says "may" is permissive rather than obligatory https://t.co/1RroDt7vgr
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) June 4, 2017
NO! https://t.co/G8pNhEgzIs#Fanniegate
|
Followers
|
2301
|
Posters
|
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
53
|
Posts (Total)
|
792343
|
|
Created
|
07/14/08
|
Type
|
Free
|
| Moderators not one red cent ~NORC~ stockprofitter Ace Trader Patswil jeddiemack FOFreddie | |||
