The suggestion to merge both companies together selling them in the open market in an IPO that’s all fine and good if the Treasury pays the Shareholders fair market value for the Common and Preferred equity ownership; Anything less is stealing.

Mr. Bryndon Fisher gave us the calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference no need of a third-party RE-IPO.

The companies are fully capitalized by the payment of the liquidation preference the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

THE TREASURY HAS COLLECTED ENOUGH.

NOW WE HAVE 8-0 JURY verdict.

Link to the calculation.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE CALCULATED VALUE PAY THE SHAREHOLDERS FOR THE EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESSES:

The Value calculation should start with the number $436.1 billion. This is the Intrinsic Value of both companies businesses including the JPS, the estimated value of Fannie and Freddie.

$402.9 billion earnings power plus $33.2 billion JPS = $436.1 billion.

Fannie Mae
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$263 Billion Intrinsic Value

Freddie Mac
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$139.9 Billion Intrinsic Value

Fannie Mae JPS $19.1 billion par value
Freddie Mac JPS $14.1 billion par value

The amount of $402.9 billion is the calculated Intrinsic Value of the Earnings Power of both businesses combined using a Price to Earnings Ratio of 14.

Mr. European, you have been preaching a cram-down promoting theft that my own government would steal my investment.

Yes, nothing wrong with examining all the likely outcomes, I have done it myself right here on this board. But I do not promote theft.

"I have been waiting since May 2008 and truthfully would be happy with just seeing my FNMAT trade PAR again"...

Yes, at the expense of my equity!

FOFreddie, I understand it has been a long time.

"The full soul loatheth an honeycomb; but to the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet."

FOFreddie, I appreciate all you have contributed to our cause with the information you have brought to this board.

What gives anyone the right to give away our companies? I do not hold Preferred Shares, what gives you the right to give away my common stock equity? It is not yours it belongs to me. It's stealing if what you suggest takes place.

What does 15 years of conservatorship do according to the Fed?

DELAY: "raises the risk that the conservatorships are ended by returning Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to private status with only minor changes to their charters"

Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Staff Reports

Quote: "The path forward for reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac does not look promising. As time passes since September 2008, the perceived urgency for reform seems to recede. Delay prolongs the uncertainty over the government’s future role in residential mortgage finance, which in turn is a deterrent to private capital re-entering the market, and makes the government’s role appear more difficult to replace. Delay also raises the likelihood that deeper reform will be judged as too difficult to accomplish, and raises the risk that the conservatorships are ended by returning Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to private status with only minor changes to their charters. That is, the key recommendation of the U.S. Treasury and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2011) white paper – that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be wound down – would in fact not come to pass. This would be a colossal missed opportunity to put U.S. residential mortgage finance on a more stable long-term footing." End of Quote

Page 30 Link: https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/staff_reports/sr719.pdf

Robert, appreciate your dedication keeping up with the Lamberth trial watching in person and keeping the board up to date during that time. Do you have the link to the transcripts of the trial? if so, will you kindly post the link? Thanks.

LOST VALUE!

The amount of settlement is not relevant the facts are the small amount is laughable!

The significance the FHFA Breach of Contract Bad faith and Unfair Dealings actions of the government in litigation that took place in Judge Lamberth's Court. It took 8 random DC Jurors only 10 hours of deliberations to see right through the Government's false narratives.

We have lost both companies to the Treasury!

The Net Worth Sweep was by design sweeping all the net worth to shut the companies down, to wind down the companies to zero, -0- dollars. To never allow the companies ever again to be returned to the shareholders. The shareholders have lost both companies to the Treasury with this sweep of the net worth of Fannie and Freddie.

What is the Value of this Loss?

Quoted share price and value or two very different calculations.

The share price as of today's trading has absolutely nothing to do with the VALUE of Fannie and Freddie. The share price the day before or the day after the net worth sweep has absolutely nothing to do with the VALUE of the companies. Value is a calculation of Property, Plant and Equipment and most important EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS.


The lost value calculation should start with the number $436.1 billion. This is the Intrinsic Value of both companies businesses including the JPS, the estimated value of Fannie and Freddie.

$402.9 billion earnings power plus $33.2 billion JPS = $436.1 billion.

Fannie Mae
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$263 Billion Intrinsic Value

Freddie Mac
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$139.9 Billion Intrinsic Value

Fannie Mae JPS $19.1 billion par value
Freddie Mac JPS $14.1 billion par value

The amount of $402.9 billion is the calculated Intrinsic Value of the Earnings Power of both businesses combined using a Price to Earnings Ratio of 14.

Guess your ihub jail sentence is not eligible for pm.

§ 1229.13 Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart: NUMBER 3

Capital distribution means—

(1) Any dividend or other distribution in cash or in kind made with respect to any shares of, or other ownership interest in, an Enterprise, except a dividend consisting only of shares of the Enterprise;

(2) Any payment made by an Enterprise to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire any of its shares or other ownership interests, including any extension of credit made to finance an acquisition by the Enterprise of such shares or other ownership interests, except to the extent the Enterprise makes a payment to repurchase its shares for the purpose of fulfilling an obligation of the Enterprise under an employee stock ownership plan that is qualified under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) or any substantially equivalent plan as determined by the Director of FHFA in writing in advance; and

(3) Any payment of any claim, whether or not reduced to judgment, liquidated or unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured or unmatured, disputed or undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured, arising from rescission of a purchase or sale of an equity security of an Enterprise or for damages arising from the purchase, sale, or retention of such a security.

Link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/1229.13

jrydaf, I DID NOT SAY "FnF are magically immune from lawsuits because they aren’t allowed to pay dividends?"

READ IT REAL SLOW!

Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee; no authorization given to the FHFA to make a capital distribution while undercapitalized. It’s all illegal and unconstitutional. WHILE UNDERCAPITALIZED

READ THE LINK; Wise Man explains it.

Wise Man
Re: FFFacts post# 782216
Wednesday, January 17, 2024 2:19:04 AM

Payment of Securities Litigation judgments IS a capital distribution.
It's the 3rd time that I have to reply to debunk your same lie.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173639980

A NEGATIVE NOTE,

The Shareholders are required to pay to the Shareholders, pay their own self a fine. That’s laughable!

Never in the history of America.

I maybe wrong about why Lamberth’s delaying but I’m definitely not wrong a distribution of capital is not allowed by the Charter Act nor HERA while the companies are not capitalized. So, break the law again??

Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee; no authorization given to the FHFA to make a capital distribution while undercapitalized. It’s all illegal and unconstitutional.

(2) The Corporation may not make any capital distribution that would decrease the total capital of the Corporation (as such term is defined in section 1303 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992) to an amount less than the risk-based capital level for the Corporation established under section 1361 of such Act or that would decrease the core capital of the Corporation (as such term is defined in section 1303 of such Act) to an amount less than the minimum capital level for the Corporation established under section 1362 of such Act, without prior written approval of the distribution by the Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Page 12

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT

https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized.

I personally think the amount of the settlement is not relevant the significance the fact it’s a capital distribution. Lamberth knows the settlement will be a distribution of capital that's not allowed by the Charter Act nor HERA.

I know the companies have expensed the damages, but the companies are not the Judge here, Lamberth’s the one in charge.

Our friend JOoa0ky seems to think damages is not distribution of capital. It's your typical run of the mill expense, no different from paying the salaries of FHFA.

I’m not a Lawyer, but it seems to me if the FHFA distributes money a capital distribution has taken place; Totally different than expending money to pay salaries to run the bureaucrats agency.

Another Theory, Lamberth knows the settlement will be a distribution of capital that's not allowed by the Charter Act nor HERA.

Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee; no authorization given to the FHFA to make a capital distribution while undercapitalized. It’s all illegal and unconstitutional.

(2) The Corporation may not make any capital distribution that would decrease the total capital of the Corporation (as such term is defined in section 1303 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992) to an amount less than the risk-based capital level for the Corporation established under section 1361 of such Act or that would decrease the core capital of the Corporation (as such term is defined in section 1303 of such Act) to an amount less than the minimum capital level for the Corporation established under section 1362 of such Act, without prior written approval of the distribution by the Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Page 12

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT

https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized.

skeptic, you ask for a legitimate explanation. I have a theory. Freddie Mac common shares are in the count for the distribution of the settlement money. I wonder how many counterfeit shares are possibly outstanding and the powers that be don't know how to handle it without exposure.

The Emergency Order

On July 15th 2008, The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued an
emergency order to enhance investor protections against "naked" short selling in the
securities of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and primary dealers at commercial and
investment banks.

The graph below of Freddie Mac demonstrates how the announcement of the
emergency rule had a dramatic impact upon securities lending activity – an impact
that all the SEC 19 shares underwent to a greater or lesser extent.

Link: https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-20-08/s72008-566.pdf

"Non-Redeemable Preferred Stock", ??
DaJester, what law passed by Congress are you referring too?

Read it real slow, this has been posted on this board multiple times.

It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.

Quote: “Page 2732

EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.

NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...

WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.

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

In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!

The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock, apply the law written in the HERA legislation passed by Congress.

Link to the Calculation:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

The liquidation preference has be paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

The Charter

The Treasury was authorized by Congress a limit of $2.25 billion to purchase obligations. The $2.25 billion was the explicit obligation. Page 14

NOTE: to purchase obligations NOT A $200 billion line of credit attached to the Senior Preferred Stock.

The amount was increased by Congress in the Charter Act that was amended by HERA to purchase obligations but only under emergency conditions, no emergency existed. Page 16

The amount today $200 billion as of December 24, 2009, expired on December 31, 2009: and no more. The $200 billion commitment was forced on the GSEs by the FHFA / Treasury by the illegal contract the SPSPA. The GSEs never needed a capital infusion, both Fannie and Freddie were adequately capitalized.

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS BY TREASURY; CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

The Secretary of the Treasury shall not at any time purchase any obligations under this subsection if such purchase would increase the aggregate principal amount of the Secretary’s, then outstanding holdings of such obligations under this subsection to an amount greater than $2,250,000,000. Page 14

Charter
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

With the passage of HERA Legislation: (purchase obligations increased with an expiration date of December 31, 2009).

SEC. 1117. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY SECRETARY OF TREASURY.

The HERA legislation granted temporary authority to the Treasury to purchase obligations of the Enterprise, above the limits written in the Charter, (Charter limitation of 2.25 billion) up to the point in time of ‘‘(4) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The authority under this subsection (g), with the exception of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection, shall expire December 31, 2009.

HERA Section 1117

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

The Senior Preferred Stock, with a variable liquidation preference outlined in the SPSPA and its amendments and share certificates is a new product for the purposes of the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 as amended by HERA.

Congress directed the Director of FHFA to apply the Administrative Procedures Act to the new products sold to Treasury. The FHFA did not follow the administrative procedures congress required in the plain language of the safety and soundness act.

The Director of FHFA as regulator violated the safety and soundness act and the administrative procedures act by not following the statutory duty to approve new products issued by the GSEs to Treasury for the purpose of stabilizing the secondary mortgage market.

The law required the publication in the federal register of the SPS with their variable rate liquidation preference tied to the commitment. It requires a public comment period, and a rule making process to make the SPS legal. It is the same law that required the capital rule. And the same law that required FHFA a year ago issue the new products law for MBS products. They have ignored this requirement for 15 years.

Director Lockhart Regulator, and Director Lockhart Conservator. Holding both positions as Regulator and Conservator; Conservator Lockhart is required by law to file notice to himself as Regulator.

The Safety and Soundness Act required Director Lockhart as regulator not conservator to approve a new product issued by Director Lockhart acting as conservator FHFA-C (SPS with variable liquidation Preference) to Treasury under the terms of the SPSPA for the purpose of carrying out the secondary mortgage market. He was required as regulator to file notice in the federal register, seek public comment and issue federal regulations for the new product we call the Senior Preferred shares sold to Treasury.

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

Page 2689
SEC. 1321. PRIOR APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR PRODUCTS.

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

Why is Lamberth delaying? Could it be the settlement with the shareholders will reveal if “phantom shares” exist, counterfeit shares?

What happens when the shareholders find out their shares possibly do not exist?

Failure to deliver is critical when discussing naked short selling. When naked short selling occurs, an individual agrees to sell a stock that neither they nor their associated broker possess, and the individual has no way to substantiate their access to such shares. The average individual is incapable of doing this kind of trade. However, an individual working as a proprietary trader for a trading firm and risking their own capital may be able. Though it would be considered illegal to do so, some such individuals or institutions may believe the company they short will go out of business, and thus in a naked short sale they may be able to make a profit with no accountability.

Subsequently, the pending failure to deliver creates what are called "phantom shares" in the marketplace, which may dilute the price of the underlying stock. In other words, the buyer on the other side of such trades may own shares, on paper, which do not actually exist.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/failuretodeliver.asp

If you are up to the task contact the Transfer Agent get us a head count. We as shareholders have a legal right to know.

Several years ago I attempted to obtain the list of common and preferred stock holders of record by contacting the transfer agent at Computershare Trust. Fannie Mae governed by the Security and Exchange Commission is required to report this information to the shareholders. I was given the run around and did not press the issue.

Not sure if the address is up to date.

Computershare Trust Company, N.A., address P.O. Box 505005 Louisville, KY 40233-5005.

Holders
As of February 1, 2023, we had approximately 8,000 registered holders of record of our common stock.

10K Page 59

https://www.fanniemae.com/media/46276/display

The Administrative Procedure Act

I asked the question, “ Did DeMarco violate the law by implementing the Net Worth Sweep without public disclosure?”

Barron4664
08/08/23 10:58 AM
#761755 RE: Rodney5 #761719
No. The APA does not apply to the actions of the conservator. Courts already threw that out. The APA applied to the actions of the Regulator (Dir Lockhart) with the creation of the Senior Preferred Shares with a variable Liquidation Preference. This was a new product that the GSEs sold to Treasury for the purpose of stabilizing the secondary mortgage market. This product required publication in the federal register, public notice and rule making, either prior to signing the SPSPA or after a temporary approval for emergency purposes.

This is the root of all the GSE problems and the only avenue for an appropriate legal strategy to reverse the injuries in my opinion.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=172540457

Trying to find the video of Buffet stating how crazy the amount of employees the FHFA requires. Anyone have the link?

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY Salaries Highest salary at FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY in year 2022 was $272,449. Number of employees at FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY in year 2022 was 801. Average annual salary was $176,113 and median salary was $185,217. FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY average salary is 276 percent higher than USA average and median salary is 326 percent higher than USA median.

https://govsalaries.com/salaries/FD/federal-housing-finance-agency#

I’m Glen Bradford.
Quote: “Disclaimer: Nothing here is investment advice. I am ———-. Please do not take me seriously or anything I say seriously, seriously. You have been warned that I am financially illiterate and incompetent and so reading further or trying to suggest these words have real world practical application is at your own risk. Do your own research and due diligence.” End of Quote

Link: https://www.glenbradford.com/about-2/

This guy has it right !

Michael Hall
@MichaelHal54147
·
FHFA is a 4th branch of gov't that needs to be downsized and controlled by Congress. The GSE's should not be paying the bills of the FHFA, and they should not be getting their profits taken from Treasury. Return Fannie and Freddie back to public companies again. End the CON!!
5:23 PM · Jan 11, 2024

Naw, you don’t say?

What kind off statement is that you made in reference to my post??

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, more than anyone, were the engine we needed to get through the problem.” Former Treasury Secretary Paulson

Mr Howard, Quote:
Paulson overrode the strong objections of FHFA director Lockhart and agreed to allow Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce their surplus capital percentage with no firm commitment from either company to raise additional capital. This was significant on two levels—first as a clear example of Treasury’s dominance of FHFA, and second as a strong indication that Paulson at that early date already was thinking of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as instruments of the federal government. (Two years later, Paulson would tell the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, “[Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac], more than anyone, were the engine we needed to get through the problem.” [Emphasis added]) End of Quote


Link: : https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2015/01/

Hello Blow, you’re asking a person that freely admitted short selling the common stock of Fannie Mae. What do short sellers do?? They preach a cram-down forever doing away with the Common Shareholders. Wake up man!

You want proof?

Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173604551

Straight from the Treasury Secretary’s mouth and the Federal Reserve Board with no reservations plainly stating the companies would be used to help prop up the housing market.

Paulson said it best himself, when he told the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, “[Fannie and Freddie], more than anyone, were the engine we needed to get through the problem.” Treasury needed Fannie and Freddie to help keep the financial system afloat, and it simply took them, under pretense of a rescue. (nationalized)

The Federal Reserve’s program purchased MBS issued by the GSEs. Putting aside toxic or not the Treasury / Federal Reserve freely admitted the GSE's were used to help prop up the housing market.

It’s been argued the GSEs did not purchase toxic securities, (worded toxic or not), will not void the fact the GSEs were used to funnel purchases made by the companies to the fed.


Evidence
From Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
95th Annual Report 2008

Quote: "since the November 25 announcement of the Federal Reserve’s program to purchase MBS issued by the housing GSEs and Ginnie Mae, and they currently stand at 5 percent." End of Quote page 19

Link: https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/rptcongress/annual08/pdf/AR08.pdf


Quote: "It's a big event that the Federal Reserve is offering to buy up nearly 10% of the agency mortgage market," said Art Frank, a mortgage strategist with Deutsche Bank Tuesday morning, the Federal Reserve announced that it would buy up to $500 billion of mortgage bonds guaranteed by Fannie, Freddie and Ginnie Mae, providing the ultimate support to prop up the $4.8 trillion market of these securities. The central bank also will buy $100 billion of the mortgage finance companies' debt securities, including that of the Federal Home Loan Bank, through reverse auctions starting next week. So far, other initiatives to prop up the market including a plan to have both the government-sponsored enterprises buy nearly $200 billion of these bonds and the U.S. Treasury's unlimited purchase of these bonds have done little to stop the weakening of risk premiums on mortgage bonds. As a result, mortgage rates have remained at elevated levels with little relief to consumers." End of Quote

Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=33791597

Smoke and Mirrors

Quote: “ Of course it does. If the NWS is legal, a senior-to-common cramdown is super-duper-legal-plus because it actually helps the companies.” End of Quote

“A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.”

kthomp Quote: “Being "right" doesn't put a single dime in your pocket. That's why I like the phrase "righteous indignation is a poor investment thesis." End of Quote

I would rather stay poor.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173603978

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173603975

Short Sellers wants the Common Shareholders wiped out. Now we know.

kthomp19
Re: DaJester post# 777906
Friday, 12/22/2023 11:44:06 AM
For some more transparency, I closed both legs of this trade earlier this week. I sold FNMAO for $3.77 and covered the FNMA short at $0.724. That's about a 23% gain on FNMAO and a 2% loss on FNMA for an overall gain of roughly 20%. Not bad, even though FNMAO's bid is $4.19 right now so I could have done even better.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173486743

trunkmonk, this is my understanding,

The problem is not with the rulings of the courts. The problem is and always has been that the plaintiffs attorneys have only challenged the “Actions of the Conservator” such as the NWS or other provisions of SPSPA which is a contract.

THE ATTORNEYS DID NOT CHALLENGE THE CONSERVATORSHIP! THE ATTORNEYS ASKED THE COURTS TO RULE ON THE ILLEGAL CONTRACT, SPSPA: JUSTICE BREYER TOLD THEM HOW TO WIN!

UPMOST IMPORTANT: JUSTICE BREYER: Quote: “Thank you. I think in reading this you could, with trying to simplify as much as possible, do you -- the shareholders' claim as saying we bought into this corporation, it was supposed to be private as well as having a public side, and then the government nationalized it. That's what they did. If you look at their giving the net worth to Treasury, it's nationalizing the company. Now, whatever conservators do and receivers do, they don't nationalize companies. And when they nationalized this company, naturally they paid us nothing and our shares became worthless. And so what do you say?” End of Quote, page 12

The link may not work anymore, the above statement was made and recorded in the transcript.

Link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2020/19-422_3e04.pdf

The SCOTUS upholding the NWS does not change the fact the liquidation preference can be paid down, and the Senior Preferred Stock redeemed under the terms written in HERA. The SCOTUS stated the FHFA has the right to Sweep the Net Worth, the LAW DOES NOT ALLOW THE FHFA / TREASURY TO KEEP THE NET WORTH THAT HAS BEEN SWEPT.

Now if the Lawyers will apply the LAW written in HERA

The Treasury has confiscated over $301 billion from Fannie and Fredde!

It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.

Quote: “Page 2732

EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.

NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...

WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.

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

In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!

The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock.

Link to the calculation

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

The liquidation preference has been paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

Barron Quote: "This is why there is language in the agreement to be able to nullify and wind back the entire agreement if a court finds any part of the agreement to be illegal."

Page 14

6.12. Non-Severability. Each of the provisions of this Agreement is integrated with and integral to the whole and shall not be severable from the remainder of the Agreement. In the event that any provision of this Agreement, the Senior Preferred Stock or the Warrant is determined to be illegal or unenforceable, then Purchaser may, in its sole discretion, by written notice to Conservator and Seller, declare this Agreement null and void, whereupon all transfers hereunder (including the issuance of the Senior Preferred Stock and the Warrant and any funding of the Commitment) shall be rescinded and unwound and all obligations of the parties (other than to effectuate such rescission and unwind) shall immediately and automatically terminate.

https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Documents/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Agree/FNM/SPSPA-amends/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

I understand, was thinking the company had to retain $70 billion before a RE-IPO could take place under the 4th amendment.

Thanks, but you don't have to be a smart A$$ about it.

$195.2 billion - $73.7 billion = $121.5 billion

$121.5 billion Minus 70B is how much capital they're allowed to raise to pay off the Treasury = remaining $51.5 billion, is this the so-called haircut you keep referring to?

Is this what you are looking for,

https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Pages/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Purchase-Agreements.aspx

Question for the Board,

We all know the SPSPA is an illegal contract, and we all know that no court has ruled such. If the Treasury is allowed to get away with this theft my question is concerning the fourth amendment;

Number 4: Mandatory Pay Down of Liquidation Preference Upon Issuance of Capital Stock

This amount was set at $70 billion: the company has $73.7 billion now, is this the reason for the up tick in share price of the common stock and if so, seems to me the market is voting the common stock will survive the cram-down our JPS friends are pushing?

https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Documents/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Agree/FNM/SPSPA-amends/FNM-Fourth-Amended-Restated-Certificate-04-13-21.pdf

73.7 billion page 63

Total stockholders’ equity (See Note 1: Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement and Senior
Preferred Stock for information on the related dividend obligation and liquidation preference)

Note 1: page 69
The dividend provisions of the senior preferred stock permit us to retain increases in our net worth until our net worth exceeds the amount of adjusted total capital necessary for us to meet the capital requirements and buffers under the enterprise regulatory capital framework established by FHFA.

The aggregate liquidation preference of the senior preferred stock increased to $190.5 billion as of September 30, 2023 from $185.5 billion as of June 30, 2023, due to the $5.0 billion increase in our net worth in the second quarter of 2023.

The aggregate liquidation preference of the senior preferred stock will further increase to $195.2 billion as of December 31, 2023, due to the $4.7 billion increase in our net worth in the third quarter of 2023.

Page 63 https://www.fanniemae.com/media/49481/display

Mr. Bryndon Fisher gave us the calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference no need of a third-party RE-IPO.

The company is fully capitalized by the payment of the liquidation preference the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

THE TREASURY HAS COLLECTED ENOUGH.

NOW WE HAVE 8-0 JURY verdict.

Link to the calculation.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

It’s an illegal contract between two government agencies that answer to the executive branch. You’re blowing smoke using mirrors. The companies did not have a choice, their heads hit the floor! REMEMBER??

Before the take down of the companies Treasury Secretary Paulson was unaware that the FHFA Regulator had sent both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac letters saying the companies were safe and sound and exceeded their regulatory capital requirements. Paulson told FHFA Director Lockhart that he had to change his agency’s posture on the two companies, and FHFA did exactly that. FHFA sent each company an extremely harsh mid-year review letter, and two days later, Paulson, Lockhart and Fed chairman Bernanke met with the companies’ CEO's and directors to tell them they had no choice but to agree to conservatorship.

When Paulson met with the directors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to inform them of his intent to take over their companies, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation. Paulson since has admitted he took the companies over by threat.