Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Guido2]

Going to send attached to politicians and media. Would appreciate likes and reposts.

@elonmusk @BillAckman @GaryHindes @Carl_C_Icahn

My Senator @SenAlexPadilla did NOTHING about @FHFA 's fraudulent "temporary" conservatorship of @FannieMae & @FreddieMac and the $301 billion swindle of their equity.

He now laments restrictions on rogue government agencies!!! https://t.co/xNgjj0f5kQ

— Guido da Costa Pereira (@GuidoPerei) July 1, 2024

[Viking61]

You need to buy heavily on this dip!!!!!!😄

[stink stack]

Once the Lemmings digest today's SCOTUS ruling the buying FRENZY will begin..... ;)
BOOM
CHOO,Choo

[FOFreddie]

Hi Donot - what do you think about the idea of placing the GSE equity owned by the UST and use it as the first loss piece of a $ 3 trillion housing investment entity. UST invest $ 300 billion and private investors invest $ 2.7 trillion. Work with local jurisdictions to build new housing units for 20 years to build and resale housing units to cover the $ 3 trillion investment plus interest expenses. Something like this was proposed to the Obama Admin in the 2012/13 time period I believe?

[jcromeenes]

Since that ruling was overturned I really haven't seen any discussion of how that might impact the GSEs. Normally a decision like that fires up the board, articles are written, etc. Seems it's been awful quiet since. Sort of shocking actually.

[skeptic7]

A ruling long overdue for sure, but in the case of the GSE's it will have little to no long term effect on the plight (and thereby the price) of the GSE's.

[Guido2]

The glitches could turn to reality. I have good-till-cancelled orders for a thousand shares at $100, $200, $300, $400 & $500.

[Patswil]

Chevron baby

[jcromeenes]

Next time you see that, I authorize you to sell my shares for that price. 😀

[jcromeenes]

I get that but we have lost out numerous times on homes when someone said they would simply write a check(cash) while we had a pre-approved loan - still cash to them. I'm not a realtor and don't know the WHY but we, and numerous other folks I Know, have lost out countless times on homes we have bid on when someone comes with their cash offer - not uncommonly lower than our bid. There is something more attractive to the sellers when it comes to the cash offer. Less likely for fall out of escrow? I don't know. Just the way it is.

[heanza]

Oh, I tried, I tried.

[RickNagra]

Oh wow. You should have cashed out.

[heanza]

Anybody else see a glitch on Schwab? For 2 mins FNMA was $187.77 and I was worth $5.6M. Back to work now :(

[Donotunderstand]

????

buy them for cash

as a car salesman told my DAD in 1964 (I was there at 13) -----when my dad said "" I can pay in cash !!" ----- at the end it is all cash money (yes today the dealership might like avoiding the 3%)

investors use cash --- but so does everyone who uses a WIRE at closing - it is 100% cash to the seller

And the investors CASH is not 100% equity capital (they would be crazy to waste capital that way) --- it is cash as raised by them (investors) from bonds and who knows - maybe even F and F

[Donotunderstand]

We all know DJT released FNMA last time (and he won the election)

email me - I have 3 bridges I need to sell

[RickNagra]

Closing price $1.57 today.

[Patswil]

I told them 2 weeks ago

[jcromeenes]

approximately 35%
In some states, the share of homes being purchased by investors is through the roof. California ranked the highest at approximately 35%.May 17, 2024

Home buyers struggle to become owners, with investors now ...

Moneywise
https://moneywise.com › Real Estate

[jcromeenes]

approximately 35%
In some states, the share of homes being purchased by investors is through the roof. California ranked the highest at approximately 35%.May 17, 2024

Home buyers struggle to become owners, with investors now ...

Moneywise
https://moneywise.com › Real Estate

[Donotunderstand]

So ---- do these corporations - investors - use F and F --- (i.e. use banks that then sell paper to F and F) ?

Could be very interesting !!! A new role for F and F - in anti concentration monopolistic behavior

hhmm

Or so these "players" issue debt based on the TOTAL value of their corporation (lower by far interest rates when backed in the AGGREGATE like this --- mini F and F minus the G Fee and admin of F and F )

They would clearly leverage - not use 100% capital --- but if their DEBT (to leverage) is issued by THEM directly to investors - that adds a wrinkle as intervention then is also intervention to benefit the monopolies of F and F ?

[Donotunderstand]

Did not watch the video -- and overall the article uses subjective words but seems middle of the road ?

Data here - in this article is higher (I do not know the bias if any of the source)

Does seem that the "problem" ;is concentrated in a half dozen states - including CA

https://todayshomeowner.com/blog/guides/are-big-companies-buying-up-single-family-homes/

[Donotunderstand]

reply from Explorer search -

Percentage of houses owned by corporations:

Large corporations made up around 3% of American home sales in 2021(1).

Institutional operators own around 0.73% of the total U.S. single-family housing stock(2)

Large institutions own roughly 5% of the 14 million single-family rentals nationally(3.)

The above numbers and percentage ratios are more in line with my understanding of the impact - on average. If it far worse in one state - someone should sue.

[Donotunderstand]

If the ownership is 35% --- and if that owner (the monopoly) behaves in ways that violate our Anti Trust Laws (Sherman - Clayton - FTC) it would be non competitive behavior and a court case against them would prevail

I did not know the level of corporate ownership had hit 35% anywhere

Yet - nothing is in my control - and again - if the concentration results in violations of the competition requirements of US law (which has varied back and forth for 80 or more years) --- they should be sued by a "hurt party" (a renter) or the FTC

[RickNagra]

I wonder if the same situation applies to Calamari.

The SEC filing also included a section that read: “Check the appropriate box to designate whether you are a cat.” There was an “x” next to a response that read: “I am not a cat.” This line was included in Gill’s statement in a series of congressional hearings about 2021's GameStop trading mania.

[RickNagra]

We need Roaring Kitty to help us out one of these days. Everything he touches turns to gold.

Chewy shares rally 20% after SEC filing reveals Keith Gill has 6.6% stake https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/01/chewy-shares-rally-20percent-after-sec-filing-reveals-roaring-kitty-keith-gill-has-6point6percent-stake.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard

[JOoa0ky]

Never have I ever seen a man so enamored by another who wasn't a love interest.

[TightCoil]

Good Reason To Hold For The Gold

[Wise Man]

All the FHFA directors could have been fired on the spot at any time "for cause", because of the multiple statutory violations, beginning with the issuance of $1B SPS for free on day one, that reduced the core capital in the same amount, both a capital distribution restricted (like today's) and a breach of the conservator's Rehab power.


Then, allowing dividend payments that deplete capital or even prompted the losses and the need to tap the UST for Equity funds (SPS) in numerous occasions, during a Conservatorship established for Critically Undercapitalized enterprises.
SPS LP "increased", instead of SPS "issued/purchased" in order to evade the December 31, 2009 deadline on purchases in the authority of UST.
Etc.

Unless there is a Separate Account plan using the exceptions to the Restriction and the Incidental Power of the conservator, better known as the Zing! power, "any action", and, in truth, they were assessments sent to UST through a separate account, 1989 FHLBanks-style.

This conspiracy went wrong since FnF pay dividends on SPS, not interests, and thus, as dividends are restricted, the entire assessment was applied toward the exceptions to the restriction in order to legalize it. Fist, repayment of SPS, then the Recap habilitated by DeMarco (The fixed-it man) in the July 20, 2011 Final Rule (exactly the date of Time Limitation as Acting Director -FVRA-, which shows intentionality to make this follown-on plan enforceable) CFR 1237.12, and not like the FHLBanks that had to pay first a $300 million annuity in interests on RefCorp bonds (10% interest rate with a 0.299% spread over Treasuries at the time -GAO report-), the rest is what repays the principal of the bond, unless what they did instead, was to use the excess amount to pay the 40-year interest-only installments sooner, when the law states that it should have been applied towards the payment of the principal sooner. Oops!


"Completion of the RefCorp obligation", the FHFA solemny announced in 2011 (Source). "The FHLBanks fulfilled their obligation to pay interests."
The $30B principal, max. legal amount tapped by Sandra Thompson at the FDIC at the time, with DeMarco at the auditor GAO, was still outstading, until $SVB came along.

The cumulative dividend rate on SPS has been estimated at a weighted-average 1.8% rate, with a 0.5% spread over Treasuries in each quarterly investment in SPS and taking into consideration the partial quarterly repayments, complying with the original terms in the UST backup of FnF in the Charter Act.
Although it's netted out with the interests that the UST owes to FnF on the $152B cash refund due.


Both schemes are so similar, that the NWS dividend was enacted when the 10% dividend prompted the losses mentioned before, in order to capture the

any FHLBank with a net loss for a quarter is not required to pay the REFCORP assessment for that quarter

, in this excerpt taken from a FHLB's Earnings report at the time explaining the entire scheme:


BOTTOM LINE
They were assessments sent to Treasury under the guise of capital distributions, 1989 FHLB-style. But the 10% rate back then, can't be a rate during 2008-2010.
There is no "contract" or "dividend obligation".

[Wise Man]

Bill Ackman is exposed. The thread below explains the factors that determine the current stock valuation, and for the different share classes.

Remember that Ackman is in the epicenter of the Fanniegate conspiracy, when he refers to the current NWS 2.0 as "FnF continue to build capital through Retained Earnings", a big lie based on the Financial Statement fraud in FnF. Adjusted for the gifted SPS LP and its offset, absent from the Balance Sheets, the RE just built (CET1), is wiped out or, I should say, held in escrow (image shown in one of the tweets below) in order to comply with the "Recap FnF" in the exceptions 1, 2, 3, 4 to the Restriction on Capital Distributions (SPS LP increased for free as compensation to UST in the absence of dividends, appears as #1 in the statutory definition of capital distribution), seen in the CFR 1237.12, the "(c) the supplemental" of the one by statute U.S. Code 4614(e).
Something repeated by Sandra Thompson in her recent testimony to the Senate.
ST changed it in the FHFA 2023 Report to Congress released a few days ago, for "FnF continue to build Net Worth through Retained Earnings", because she thought that "capital", that refers to "Capital Reserve", can't be said if it's an invalid Capital metric in FnF (ERCF). Still a lie. FnF build NW, but it's SPS, not Retained Earnings account which is the only item necessary for the "Rehabilitate FnF" required by Justice Alito and one of the boxes in the Fed's Jerome Powell's 3-box checklist that he pointed out for the pending proposed Capital Rule for the banks:
1- Capital ratios.
2- Enough liquidity.
3- A plan to take the losses that you are going to take in the future. That would be Retained Earnings account (Balance Sheet = Picture of a company at a determined date) that absorbs the future losses that will come from the Income Statement -Net Income during a period-, currently adjusted $-216B in FnF, but $252B under the Separate Account plan (after the Treasury Stock -stock buybacks- is retired).

He also implied that the Supreme Court said that FHFA has absolute discretion in its actions. The hedge funds' playground. Another lie. More if he is interpreting an Incidental Power to come to that conclusion.

Here is shown a thread comprised of 4 tweets, debunking another gaffe in his GSE slides: "The common stocks of FnF are permanent options". Later he portrays himself as an options trader expert on Twitter. He is capable of paying for a SA article to push his flawed stance.

No one in his right mind says that a security converts to a different security.
The underlying security in a Preferred is a fixed-income security(an obligation to be more precise).
But the specifications of the same fixed-income security have changed. Now 0-coupon (div suspended) pic.twitter.com/yiTpUiq4Kd

— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) June 30, 2024

On the other hand, the driver for JPS,is:
-The $402B Core Capital shortfall mentioned before,plus 25% of Prescribed C.Buffer marks the day of div resumption👇and par value valuation.
Hence,17yrs more, at 6% discount rate= $9 in $FNMAS.
Every yr,17yrs(Sweep)→$4.5@TheJusticeDept pic.twitter.com/bDFVns9whh

— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) June 30, 2024

I'm not surprised to see that one of the recruiters for the Bitcoin scam (an unbacked token trading on Stock Exchanges), was also chosen for the Fanniegate scandal.

[jcromeenes]

Doesn't matter if supply goes up as investors buy them for cash.

[TightCoil]

In that case,..
Load up
Suit Up
Strap yourselves in...

or stand away from the Launch Pad

[HappyAlways]

In between now and November election, it is happy hour to all Fannie and Freddie investors. We all know that DJT will release Fannie and Freddie. Let’s wait for this to happen.

[HappyAlways]

Charge people 50% extra buying second property, like Singapore. Rent is eventually decided by demand. If supply increases, rent will go down.

[HappyAlways]

Do some meditation ?

[juicyjuice10002]

Put your money where your mouth is.

[Barron4664]

Can’t do it. I’m too lost wandering in the woods. Twice now this weekend I am misremembering things. First Trump is firing Mell Watt. And now Im remembering the dissent opinion of Collins and turning that into there being a non-severability clause when in fact Congress did not include either a severability clause or a non-severability clause. Thank you for correcting me. Barron should refrain from thinking on FNMA for a while. Brain is getting stale.

[FOFreddie]

.@realDonaldTrump is going to win in a landslide. The country should rally around Trump and help him succeed.

Trump didn’t expect to win the first time he was elected. As a result, he was totally unprepared. The lack of preparation, the Russia investigation and the ensuing…

— Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) June 28, 2024

[jog49]

I was reiterating what you said. Sorry if it was above your pay grade.

[clarencebeaks21]

Interesting. Can you cite the location of this clause in HERA?

What Section? Or more simplistically what page number out of the 261 PDF pages?

https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

TIA

[The Man With No Name]

He just repeats whatever Barron says.

[The Man With No Name]

Yeah and then you have a parrot named Rodney repeated the exact same falsehood over and over. Both of you aren't doing a service here.

[jcromeenes]

Wall Street puts $$ in the politicians pockets. That's the only politics that matter to them.

[jcromeenes]

But what if hedge funds own over 50% of single family homes and charge exorbitant rates? Is that not an issue? They buy entire developments then dictate the rent, others simply follow. It is a true monopoly at this point. In CA, 35% of all single family homes are owned by investors. With this level they DO dictate rents. It's gone to far in my opinion. Let them buy apartments but leave single family homes owner occupied or put a very reasonable cap of say 3-5 home ownership in the state.

[Boat Shoes From Yahoo]

Warriors!
No political post? This stock been “politically” controlled for the past 16+++++++ years! The company was taken over by “political” ………well, i won’t say it.

[Donotunderstand]

We can agree - that at least this group of 9 - do whatever and whenever they want

precedent - who cares
speed needed --- oh cool your jets

if it was done a certain way in 1880 - then good enough for 2024

[Barron4664]

The reason I think the SCOTUS was wrong was because HERA as written in plain as day language by Congress includes a non sever-ability clause at the beginning of law. SCOTUS did the very thing Congress instructed not to be done. Sever a clause from HERA and leave the rest in direct contradiction to the written words Congress included in the law. All of HERA should have been found Unconstitutional. But the Supremes do whatever they want.

[Donotunderstand]

below - two sentences that each are said in a way to be meaningless and indeed contradictory

but - more importantly ---- the author writes about a 2% hit - and poof their goes positive value

but - the author - never discusses the various stress tests !!! I forget their parameters - but do they not test a default rate or such that is 2% > then normal and how F and F do. F and F have passed all such tests ----- so I assume the author is flat out wrong !!! that F and F are so close to the edge ?????????

here are the two sentences that sort of refute each other - shame on the author (creating available lift out quotes that they do not believe tell the full story)

Historically, Trump is far more likely to end FNMA's conservatorship than the Biden administration.

--- There are no guarantees that Trump will successfully end the conservatorship, having not done so in his last term. Further, FNMA's fundamental risks would not necessarily decline in this scenario.

[Donotunderstand]

while FHFA has never fought to free F and F

I suggest for larger consideration they do not matter

no POTUS no Secretary of Treasury no Court has tried to END the conservatorship

it is not like FHFA is the main problem --- IMO IMO - they have the least power of all the players on the board for 15 years

[Donotunderstand]

I think the decision was later

And the thoughts - copied below are just that copied

But first ----- who would have revisited the dumb ass killer SCOTUS decision ?

If so many here - hating the conservatorship love courts stepping in ---- why did SCOTUS not do any of the below ---- (This SCOTUS decides when to correctly deal with the case/facts/question before it - narrow scope(correctly) and when they want to expand to a broader approach --- as they see fit - so they could have done it !!!! and why anyone has faith in this SCOTUS blows my mind)

copied and not done by SCOTUS
They should have nullified all the decisions done up to that point by unconstitutional single directors and sent HERA back to the drawing board at Congress etc. etc. etc.

[Barron4664]

Hey thanks for looking out. Im pretty sure I typed up my thought backwards. Error is all on me. I truly am lost sometimes. Was trying to say that Trump had to wait to appoint Catman because of the unconstitutional clause in HERA. Catman should have been in the job on day 1 of the Trump Administration awaiting Senate approval. But Trump had to wait for Mels term to end. I think I have the chronology correct now. But if I screwed that up again. Please correct it for the board.