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.
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.
And you trust these snakes? Good luck with that. The LP was a lot lower when Cat Man was pretending to run the show. Again, Someone better hurry up file a lawsuit before we run out of time.
The Charter Act is the Law!
familymang, Please read what you wrote.
Quote: “ Today UST's Fannie LP is $185b, JPS LP is $19b.
- Fannie is worth approx $175b today (17.5b net income x 10 P/E).” End of Quote
Treasury’s Liquidation Preference calculated value that you gave is more valuable RIGHT NOW than your calculated value of the entire business! Both JPS and Common are wiped out!
Rodney5
Re: Rodney5 post# 753488
Sunday, 04/23/2023 9:01:48 PM
Barron Quote: “They are only true if the illegal actions of Treasury and its subservient FHFA are not eventually overturned.”
Kthomp19 Quote: “Overturned by whom? I don't see how any existing lawsuit can have that result, and anyone wanting to file a new lawsuit had better hurry the hell up.”
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171706295
WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME
In my opinion Barron has the best approach, The Charter Act! Challenging the illegal contract SPSPA. somebody better hurry up and file before we run out of time!
The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is not a law: The SPSPA is an illegal contract: The Charter Act is the Law.
SUBSECTION (g) TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES; CONDITIONS.— EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED. Page 16
Under this subsection the FHFA / Treasury would have to prove, 'What was the Emergency'...
(And this will open the door for the plaintiffs to bring out the forced write down of the deferred tax assets, treasury's charge of an illegal commitment fee, violated the law by not adding the liabilities onto the national debt, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation, 5th amendment, 14th amendment, etc...)
There was no 'Emergency.'
FHFA freely admitted the companies were adequately capitalized, evidence the companies exceeded capital requirements absolutely no need for emergency funding.
SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL RESULTS
Minimum Capital
Fannie Mae’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $37.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $32.6 billion. Fannie Mae’s core capital of $47.0 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed capital requirement by $9.4 billion.
Freddie Mac’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $34.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $28.7 billion. Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.
Link:https://www.fhfa.gov/mobile/Pages/public-affairs-detail.aspx?PageName=FHFA-Announces-Suspension-of-Capital-Classifications-During-Conservatorship-and-Discloses-Minimum-and-RiskBased-Cap.aspx
https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
“Isn’t bad? Oh my, what percent of the outstanding common stock do you calculate the JPS will receive? The LP continues to grow and the longer the Treasury holds out the less and less we all receive both common and JPS.
“ No one can force the JPS to convert”
That’s a bold statement when the Treasury has done exactly whatever they have wanted to do. And no one has put a stop to it!
If your statement holds true seems the Treasury will not convert the SPS to common placing their self behind the JPS in the capital stack?
The Treasury procrastinating with the LP continuing to grow SPS and JPS forced converting to common shares together, this will wipe us all out. No one is safe and the market continues to confirm this with the price quote of both JPS and Common.
Quote: “ Mnuchin at Treasury didn't want to convert SPS to common equity because it would put UST behind Jr. Preferred shareholders in the capital stack. In other words, he would have converted the SPS to "normal" preferred shares that were "more senior" to the existing Jr. Preferreds (or there would have been forced conversion of Jr. Preferred to common equity).” End of Quote
Do not be deceived about the order of the capital stack. There is a very likely possibility the JPS will be wiped out.
The Treasury can choose to procrastinate to the point everyone gets wiped out. It’s been 15 years. And the LP continues to grow.
The JPS Shareholders are not protected with a kind of special immunity based on the order of the capital stack.
From the Yahoo
Quote: “
ValueGuy
10h ago
Neutral
Just finished reading Mark Calabria's book "Shelter from the Storm". There were only a couple of chapters that addressed the conservatorships, but there are some insights: (1) Calabria favored a SPS cramdown to clear the capital stack. In other words, exercising all warrants and converting all SPS to common equity; (2) He also would have preferred putting the GSE's into receivership rather than conservatorship, but acknowledges this is not really an option anymore; (2) Mnuchin at Treasury didn't want to convert SPS to common equity because it would put UST behind Jr. Preferred shareholders in the capital stack. In other words, he would have converted the SPS to "normal" preferred shares that were "more senior" to the existing Jr. Preferreds (or there would have been forced conversion of Jr. Preferred to common equity).
These were the scenarios being considered by the government. Under no circumstances would SPS be considered "paid in full" thanks to the SCOTUS ruling. These kinds of legal plans don't really change between administrations. If that was the plan from UST, it is still the plan from UST. I would be getting ready for an eventual cramdown of some kind. The only thing that could prohibit this would be if government ownership went above 79.9% and the debt had to go on the balance sheet - if (and its a big "if") this was politically undoable, then the cramdown to common might be avoided.” End of Quote
Quote: “ The judge in the jury trial that you mention said FnF COULD NOT pay down the SPS liquidation preference.” End of Quote
Quote: “ did NOT allow such voluntary paydown.” End of Quote
Quote: “ WRONG” End of Quote
kthomp, you are right and I am wrong. It is so sad the Plaintiffs are facing such a biased judge.
In the up coming 2nd round I suggest stressing to the Jury the money collected by the Treasury in excess of the 10% apply it to the pay down of the Senior Preferred Stock. No where has a Judge ruled that paying down the SPS is not allowed. I am not arguing the NWS is illegal or legal.
It’s written in the contract Optional Pay Down of Liquidation Preference.
The Third Amendment cannot be used to wipe out the 10 and 12 percent dividend rates in the initial stock certificates. IT DOES NOT MATTER if the Third Amendment Net Worth Sweep is declared legal or illegal, THE DAMAGES ARE the extra payments to Treasury must be treated first as though they were a return of capital that calls for a dollar-for-dollar redemption of the senior preferred, thereby reducing the Treasury’s liquidation preference. Once all those shares are redeemed, the remainder of the money paid over to Treasury should be treated as excess payments that must be repaid in full to Fannie and Freddie with interest.
Thompson testimony, would this be considered perjury?
Mr. Howard Quote: "In response to the criticism of FHFA’s recent changes in loan-level price adjustments (LLPAs), however, she did continue to claim “it simply is not true” that these changes cause borrowers with stronger credit to subsidize borrowers with weaker credit, when in fact it IS true. If she’s digging in on this, it doesn’t portend flexibility on other, more nuanced, policy issues." End of Quote
Comments Section May 24: https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2023/01/04/a-political-problem/#comments
That sounds wonderful, but how do you know this kindly explain.
Who is David Stevens and do you have a link?
Quote " The GSEs in conservatorship being forced to do all of these affordable housing initiatives is becoming detrimental to the opposition's businesses bottom line.
Now the situation is such that keeping FnF in conservatorship is MORE harmful to them than having them privatized. It is THIS reason that David Stevens has changed his tune." End of Quote.
What is laughable is the fact she said, "Protect the Taxpayer". Get us out of prison will free the taxpayer. "Need $300 billion,15 years and counting."
I agree Guido, educate members of Congress on the details of this corruption. Start with Senator Tim Scott. He understands the insane move Sandra pushed for penalizing good people with good credit. What’s your thoughts on Senator Scott? Friend or Foe?
Maybe, we can arrange a meeting with all the Senators in Congress. We could send the absolute best educated Shareholders from this board with a detailed letter explaining to the Senators in person the corruption of both the FHFA / Treasury.
Ask if we can read the details of the mistreatment of the Shareholders on the Senate Floor.
Thanks Barron
Wish I could be of more help.
Neither do I have private messaging and certainly I am not a lawyer.
That's interesting the issues around Oaths of Office.
The Firms that hired these lawyers should demand their money back!
They are hung up on the Third Amendment going nowhere.
"No one to my knowledge has challenged Treasury on the Charter Act."
Barron
Barron, you mentioned 2019 letter agreement.
The last letter agreement was January 14, 2021. Did the time clock start in 2019 or 2021?
Thanks
Quote: "I have 6 years from the material change to the LP as agreed in 2019 to challenge the commitment in district court under the little tucker act. There doesnt seem to be a reason not to also challenge the original PSPA agreement just for the sake of arguing based on the supreme 9-0 ruling. Just a couple extra paragraphs, doesnt matter, as The Justice Departments policy on statute of limitations is valid since under their policy, the 2019 letter agreement creates a new injury. No one to my knowledge has challenged Treasury on the Charter Act yet, hoping for some traction there." End of Quote
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Executed-Letter-Agreement-for-Fannie-Mae.pdf
He may have insider information about our path out?
FOFreddie, you mentioned “Consent Decree” it’s illegal according the Charter Act. The problem with the lawsuits, focused on the Third Amendment only. The below no one that I know has proven Barron wrong.
Barron asked, to anyone...
“This leads to the question, who authorized the appropriation of taxpayer debt to provide the 200 billion commitment? Certainly not Congress. Please someone show where Treasury was authorized by a law to make a 200 billion commitment available in exchange for One Million Shares (1,000,000) with an initial liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Shares of senior equity in FNMA? It's all illegal and unconstitutional.”
Navy, what does mean? Warren ready to take his position in the companies, will it help end this prison sentence?
Did the FHFA reverse course on this insane move by reason of Senator Tim Scott? We need to educate the Senator on the depth of this corruption, maybe he can get us out of this prison.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171868116
central bank digital currency (CBDC)
Quote: "Additionally, because a CBDC would be digital and programmable, rules could be imposed that limit spending on approved activities. So, if the federal government or Federal Reserve were to determine that Americans are buying too much gasoline, for example, it could stop people from using CBDCs at gas stations with a few clicks on a computer.
Perhaps most disturbing of all, however, is that under most of the CBDC designs discussed by the Biden administration and Federal Reserve, nearly all forms of ownership of CBDC money would also be strictly limited. Only large institutions such as banks, the federal government, and/or the Federal Reserve would actually have ownership of CBDCs. Everyone else would be prevented from having absolute control over their digital money."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/biden-administration-is-quietly-planning-for-a-future-where-you-don-t-own-money/ar-AA1aiOXO?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=349e497104bc48d48bf422924a3d3138&ei=23
And all at the same time the LP continues to grow! The larger it grows in time the less likely the JPS order of the capital Stack matters. WIPE OUT
Write about the real enemy, the Treasury Department!
Barron Quote: “They are only true if the illegal actions of Treasury and its subservient FHFA are not eventually overturned.”
Kthomp19 Quote: “Overturned by whom? I don't see how any existing lawsuit can have that result, and anyone wanting to file a new lawsuit had better hurry the hell up.”
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171706295
WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME
In my opinion Barron has the best approach, The Charter Act! Challenging the illegal contract SPSPA. somebody better hurry up and file before we run out of time!
The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is not a law: The SPSPA is an illegal contract: The Charter Act is the Law.
SUBSECTION (g) TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES; CONDITIONS.— EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED. Page 16
Under this subsection the FHFA / Treasury would have to prove, 'What was the Emergency'...
(And this will open the door for the plaintiffs to bring out the forced write down of the deferred tax assets, treasury's charge of an illegal commitment fee, violated the law by not adding the liabilities onto the national debt, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation, 5th amendment, 14th amendment, etc...)
There was no 'Emergency.'
FHFA freely admitted the companies were adequately capitalized, evidence the companies exceeded capital requirements absolutely no need for emergency funding.
SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL RESULTS
Minimum Capital
Fannie Mae’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $37.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $32.6 billion. Fannie Mae’s core capital of $47.0 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed capital requirement by $9.4 billion.
Freddie Mac’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $34.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $28.7 billion. Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.
Link:https://www.fhfa.gov/mobile/Pages/public-affairs-detail.aspx?PageName=FHFA-Announces-Suspension-of-Capital-Classifications-During-Conservatorship-and-Discloses-Minimum-and-RiskBased-Cap.aspx
https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
Quote:” calabria had plans in place -- all the leg work has been done, just need to update the numbers, fannie mae could do an equity offering in ~90 days if treasury was serious about it.”
Key words “had plans”…
Do not be deceived about the order of the capital stack. There is a very likely possibility the JPS will be wiped out.
Again,
The Treasury can choose to procrastinate to the point everyone gets wiped out. It’s been 15 years.
The JPS Shareholders are not protected with a kind of special immunity based on the order of the capital stack. Do not be deceived.
Our Friend Chessmaster stated, “ Profitable companies are not liquidated, and put in bankruptcy. FNMA is highly profitable.”
Profitable companies are not put into conservatorship either??
I read on this board, “JPS Shareholders may take a haircut, (not full par value)” …. Ha
The Senior Preferred Liquidation Preference at $290 billion and GROWING, both JPS Shareholders as well as the Common, both will be wiped out? We're running out of time... The longer the Snakes at the FHFA / Treasury can push this out into time the more claims on monies can be stolen!
All monies go to the Treasury. This will wipe out both common and the JPS??
Risk Factors Summary
GSE and Conservatorship Risk
Quote: "Our business activities are significantly affected by the senior preferred stock purchase agreement. Our regulator is authorized or required to place us into receivership under specified conditions, which would result in our liquidation. Amounts recovered by our receiver may not be sufficient to pay claims outstanding against us, repay the liquidation preference of our preferred stock or to provide any proceeds to common shareholders." End of Quote Page 33
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/media/46276/display
"In the event the assets legally available for distribution to stockholders are insufficient to pay the liquidation preference of all Preferred Stock in full, the assets available for distribution will be divided among all holders of Preferred Stock on a pro rata basis, based on the value of the liquidation preference of each series of Preferred Stock." Page 5
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000031052220000121/descriptionofsecuritie.htm
In my opinion Barron has the best approach, The Charter Act! Challenging the illegal contract SPSPA. It was also stated on this board, “somebody better hurry up and file before we run out of time!”
The JPS Shareholders are not protected with a kind of special immunity based on the order of the capital stack. Do not be deceived.
Our Friend Chessmaster stated, “ Profitable companies are not liquidated, and put in bankruptcy. FNMA is highly profitable.”
Profitable companies are not put into conservatorship either??
I read on this board, “JPS Shareholders may take a haircut, (not full par value)” …. Ha
The Senior Preferred Liquidation Preference at $290 billion and GROWING, both JPS Shareholders as well as the Common, both will be wiped out? We're running out of time... The longer the Snakes at the FHFA / Treasury can push this out into time the more claims on monies can be stolen!
All monies go to the Treasury. This will wipe out both common and the JPS??
Risk Factors Summary
GSE and Conservatorship Risk
Quote: "Our business activities are significantly affected by the senior preferred stock purchase agreement. Our regulator is authorized or required to place us into receivership under specified conditions, which would result in our liquidation. Amounts recovered by our receiver may not be sufficient to pay claims outstanding against us, repay the liquidation preference of our preferred stock or to provide any proceeds to common shareholders." End of Quote Page 33
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/media/46276/display
"In the event the assets legally available for distribution to stockholders are insufficient to pay the liquidation preference of all Preferred Stock in full, the assets available for distribution will be divided among all holders of Preferred Stock on a pro rata basis, based on the value of the liquidation preference of each series of Preferred Stock." Page 5
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000031052220000121/descriptionofsecuritie.htm
In my opinion Barron has the best approach, The Charter Act! Challenging the illegal contract SPSPA. It was also stated on this board, “somebody better hurry up and file before we run out of time!”
Okay, I understand.
This is what I am reading in the 10K...
I have a question: "required to place us into receivership under specified conditions."
What are the specific conditions? If the LP continues to grow, seems to me the company will be unable to pay off the LP under specified conditions at any time into the future? Unless the LP is cancelled the company will never have enough money to pay. Both common and JPS wiped out?
Risk Factors Summary
GSE and Conservatorship Risk
Quote: "Our business activities are significantly affected by the senior preferred stock purchase agreement. Our regulator is authorized or required to place us into receivership under specified conditions, which would result in our liquidation. Amounts recovered by our receiver may not be sufficient to pay claims outstanding against us, repay the liquidation preference of our preferred stock or to provide any proceeds to common shareholders." End of Quote Page 33
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/media/46276/display
The Senior Preferred Liquidation Preference at $290 billion and GROWING, both JPS Shareholders as well as the Common, both will be wiped out? We're running out of time...
On the link provided, seems to me if the liquidation preference of the SPS keeps growing and the SPS is not cancelled, the legally available assets for distribution will not be enough to distribute to stockholders both JPS and common. All monies go to the Treasury. This will wipe out both common and the JPS?
"In the event the assets legally available for distribution to stockholders are insufficient to pay the liquidation preference of all Preferred Stock in full, the assets available for distribution will be divided among all holders of Preferred Stock on a pro rata basis, based on the value of the liquidation preference of each series of Preferred Stock." Page 5
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000031052220000121/descriptionofsecuritie.htm
Chessmaster, I have a question?
On the link you provided, seems to me if the liquidation preference of the SPS keeps growing and the SPS is not cancelled, the legally available assets for distribution will not be enough to distribute to stockholders both JPS and common. All monies go to the Treasury. This will wipe out both common and the JPS?
"In the event the assets legally available for distribution to stockholders are insufficient to pay the liquidation preference of all Preferred Stock in full, the assets available for distribution will be divided among all holders of Preferred Stock on a pro rata basis, based on the value of the liquidation preference of each series of Preferred Stock." Page 5
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000031052220000121/descriptionofsecuritie.htm
Thank you Barron
I wouldn't call $2.25 billion a backstop on a 6 trillion business.
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.
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
Quote: “Former Wells Fargo Chairman and CEO Dick Kovacevich says the federal government's bank bailout during the depths of the financial crisis was an unmitigated disaster and laid much of the blame for the financial crisis on ineffective regulators.
The decision by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve in October 2008 to make banks take TARP money even if they didn't want it or need it was one of the worst economic decisions in the history of the United States, Kovacevich.” End of Quote.
Quote: “Kovacevich said some might ask, Why didn't I just say no and not accept the TARP money? As my comments were heading in that direction in the meeting, Hank Paulson turned to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke sitting next to him and said, Your primary regulator is sitting right here. If you refuse to accept these funds, he will declare you capital deficient Monday morning. Kovacevich recalled, Is this America? I ask myself.” End of Quote.
Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2012/06/wells-fargo-dick-kovacevich-occupy-tarp.html
The term ‘quasi government agency’...
Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE), the misconception of the meaning of the charter relating to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
GSE’s Government Charter
Think about the charter like this, the ‘Charter’ is a license provided to a private shareholder owned corporation, ( government contractor ), providing liquidity in the secondary mortgage market. Another example: The Federal Reserve is a privately shareholder owned corporation, a contractor for the U.S. Government.
The government charter is none other than a government license given to Fannie and Freddie to operate the businesses in the secondary market, that’s it! The government had no equity ownership in the GSEs before the conservatorship. The government does regulate the GSEs with rules whereby Fannie and Freddie can operate in the secondary market. Just as the city, I operate my personal business, the city has no ownership in the business, but charges a yearly license fee to operate with rules and regulations whereby my business can operate. Nothing more nothing less...
The United States Taxpayer was under no obligation to back the GSEs. The Taxpayers became obligated at the point in time of conservatorship.
One more..,
Quote: “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for it they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” End of Quote
Henry Ford Founder the Ford Motor Company
1963 US Treasury Notes Issues $4.3 Billion in Interest Free, Debt Free Treasury Notes - First Time since Lincoln in 1862 that a President Issues Debt Free “Greenback” Treasury Notes -
1963 President Kennedy United States President 1961 – 1963
On June 4th 1963, President Kennedy signed a presidential document, called Executive Order 11110. It gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” Five months after Kennedy's assassination all Series 1958 “Silver Certificates” were removed from circulation.
Quantitative easing (QE)
The power to create deposits.
Quote: “Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.” End of Quote
Sir Josiah Stamp President of the Bank of England in the 1920's
Robert, I wrote this back in 2018.
Regards
QUANTITATIVE EASING FACILITATING THEFT
The large scale purchase of Treasury Securities, Agency Mortgage-Backed Securities and Agency Debt by the Federal Reserve, commonly known as quantitative easing (QE), is one of the most dramatic events in history of the United States. At the start of late November of 2008, the Federal Reserve started buying Mortgage-Backed Securities and continuing these purchases to 29 October 2014 and at the end of this bond-buying program the Federal Reserve had purchased an astounding $4.5 Trillion from banks in newly created U.S. Dollars at the expense of the United States Taxpayer.
PRIMARY DEALERS WHO RECEIVED THE FRESHLY CREATED CASH FROM THE FED.
Primary dealers recognized by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; In the first half of February, 2, 2011, there were 18 primary dealers, including;
BNP Paribas Securities Corp (BNP Paribas), Bank of America Securities LLC (BOA), Barclays Capital Inc (Barclays Capital), Cantor Fitzgerald & Co (Cantor Fitzgerald), Citigroup Global Markets Inc (Citigroup), Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC (Credit Suisse), Daiwa Securities America Inc (Daiwa), Deutsche Bank Securities Inc (Deutsche Bank), Goldman Sachs & Co (Goldman Sachs), HSBC Securities USA Inc (HSBC), Jefferies & Company, Inc (Jefferies), J. P. Morgan Securities Inc (J. P. Morgan), Mizuho Securities USA Inc (Mizuho), Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (Morgan Stanley), Nomura Securities International, Inc (Nomura), RBC Capital Markets Corporation (RBC), RBS Securities Inc (RBS), and UBS Securities LLC (UBS).
Quantitative easing is counterfeiting it's theft and if private citizen's did it they would go to prison. Ignorant politicians consistently spend more money then they can raise and they borrow and worse create money with central banks. Doing that as a private citizen is a criminal offense. Financial regulations have become a shield to protect crooked bankers while politicians and central banks spend money they do not have by simply creating it.
They're stealing our money. Degrading our money is what the Federal Reserve does by degrading their debt but it degrades our savings. Massive money creation effectively produces inflation impoverishing those in society who should be helped. It's theft from the taxpayer and until central bankers and politicians are sent to prison for this theft it will continue.
Quote: “Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” End of Quote: James A. Garfield President of the United States 1881.
I think the free market would take care of it self. And instead of the United States Taxpayers left holding the bag, Wall Street firms would be holding the bag. Quantitative easing (QE) Is a fancy term used by the Central Bank to steal from the Taxpayers. After 2008 over 4 Trillion dollars was added to the national debt for the bailout of banker buddies. That’s what I think.
Best Regards
From our friend Donotunderstand.
Quote: “an implicit guarantee is worth the paper it is not written on.” End of Quote
Quote: “Then it went private with no statement on guarantee but with its legacy (Guarantee) and huge monster size - people assumed it was guaranteed. The so called Implicit guarantee.
Note - as a broker-advisor - when I sold FNMA paper to clients it was required that I note that it did not have a guarantee from the GOV or even an executive branch guarantee (which is less than Treasury) . It did have a super private sector rating agency rating !!” End of Quote
Let me be more specific: Under the terms of the Charter Act the Treasury was given a limit of $2.25 billion, to purchase obligations (page 14 charter act).
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
Authority of Treasury to Purchase Obligations
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.
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.
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf
Fannie Mae securities received no actual explicit or implicit government guarantee, (other than $2.25 billion), after 1968 up to the point in time of the signing of the conservatorship.
"The U.S. Government does not guarantee, directly or indirectly, our securities or other obligations." ... (Implicit is not worth the paper it WAS NOT WRITTEN ON).
The United States was not obligated after 1968 to back any debt of Fannie Mae. The United States Taxpayers became obligated when the government took over the two companies.
Originally, Fannie Mae had an explicit guarantee from the United States government; if the entity got into financial trouble the government promised to bail it out. This changed in 1968. Fannie Mae became a private stockholder owned company. Fannie Mae securities received no actual explicit or implicit government guarantee. This is clearly stated in the securities themselves, and in many public communications issued by Fannie Mae.
Quote: “Although we are a corporation chartered by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Government does not guarantee, directly or indirectly, our securities or other obligations. We are a stockholder-owned corporation, and our business is self-sustaining and funded exclusively with private capital. Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and traded under the symbol “FNM.” Our debt securities are actively traded in the over-the-counter market.” End of Quote.
Information from: Fannie Mae form 10K Dec 31, 2007
part I, page 1, item 1.
https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/ir/pdf/quarterly-annual-results/2007/form10k_022708.pdf
I have no idea why this posted two times...