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.
SCOTUS LIED STATING THAT THE NWS ENDED IN JANUARY 2021.
SCOTUS:"THE NWS ENDED IN JAN 2021"
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) June 28, 2021
They call it 4th amnt,when it's either 3rd Letter Agreemt or 6th PA amnt.
Based on @TheJusticeDept Solicitor Gnrl's lie in her letter to @Scotus(also @FHFA 2020 Report to Congress),contending that FnF now build up Capital.#Fanniegate @WhiteHouse https://t.co/gNDtr5SEwT pic.twitter.com/rCxadcA6k0
***BOOM***EXPLANATION OF THE INCIDENTAL POWER OF THE CONSERVATOR. Read it carefully because it's the reason utilized by the Supreme Court to claim that the conservators can take actions in the public interests, like a NWS. An aberration that could roil the financial markets in an economic slowdown and prompt bank runs, as HERA mirrors the banks' 1991 FDI Act, so they have an identical provision with their conservator, the FDIC. I turns out that the new FHFA Acting Director spent 23 years serving at the FDIC BOD and she won't buy it for sure. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1409034867438915584.html
Pagliara's website will focus on recap and release? I bet that Pagliara is shutting everything down and escaping to Cuba, after learning that the FBI has inititated an investigation.
The NWS still persists, Bradford. Instead of cash, the NW is swept in the form of SPS increased for free. So, the same NW as before.
It also is a sweep of the Core Capital. Earnings is Core Capital. Now, the SPS are increased for free (without FnF getting the cash) and that prompts a book entry in the accounts in the form of reduction of Core Capital (either Additional Paid-In Capital account or Retained Earnings), like occurred with the initial $1 billion SPS issued for free on day one of conservatorship.
FnF skip this book entry accounting, because they aren't recording these SPS on the balance sheet in the first place.
So, don't repeat on your Twitter account that the NWS was stopped in January 2021. By the way, the theme of SPS increased for free in the amount of the NW increase, began in September 2019.
Finally, an Acting Director has all the powers of a Director.
I've always bet that the resolution of #Fanniegate would come unilaterally by the Administration in coordination with the FHFA, not by the Courts that not only are clueless in Finance, but they are all bribed.
With the appointment of Sandra Thompson as FHFA Acting Director, with 23 years serving at the FDIC BOD and knowing that HERA mirrors the banks' 1991 FDI Act, the stars are aligned.
This could be the key of everything surrounding FnF.
Does #Calabria understand that Public Servant doesn't mean stealing from private corporations to serve the public interest? It means respect the Institution he represents & the laws it's subject to.He failed in both.@FHFA's Thompson's technical skillset will prove it.#Fanniegate https://t.co/36CMReEH3v
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) June 26, 2021
I told you.She brings a huge technical skillset in Finance.
BOMBSHELL! THE NEW FHFA ACTING DTR SPENT 23 YEARS SERVING AT THE FDIC BOD PRIOR JOINING THE FHFA IN 2013.
This means that there's been a "technical skillset" changer at the helm of the FHFA.
The link explains that HERA mirrors the FDI Act. So, the same provisions, like the Restriction on Capital Distributions and the conservator's Incidental Power that was the reason laid out by Justice Alito yesterday, to claim that funneling money to the Government is just fine.
The FHFA Acting Director knows.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1408048621556277253.html
The White House can overrule the Supreme Court, in the sense that the decisions over the conservatorships fall squarely within the FHFA's powers, and the White House and the UST have a say.
The opinion was illegal and contrary to the WH's stance about the role of the FHFA as conservator.
I expect the WH to resolve the Fanniegate scandal unilaterally.
***I EXPECT THE WHITE HOUSE TO OVERRULE THE FLAWED SCOTUS' OPINION*** https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1407721968493903873.html
Glen Bradford all day with Capital structure and restructuring. Dude, this is 12 years into a Conservatorship.
In order to know what the SEC says, you have to look it up in its rules, not in the document that you have posted that is only useful as a reference to look up the CUSIP numbers.
I see no reason why they don't have to file the 13F reports with the OTC stocks. I'm not going to read the rule because it's irrelevant for me. It must be a flawed document.
Anyway, that's the 13F report, but I'm more interested in the 13D report, BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP, where the investors have to disclose their beneficial ownership in a company, related not only to having Voting Right (absent in FnF stocks), but also the Investment Power, which is the power to dispose of a security.
For instance, FMCC says in its earnings reports that Pershing thinks it's exempt from filing 13D reports because FnF common stocks don't have the Voting Right nowadays. Pershing disregards that there is the other option that makes it compulsory.
By the way, it includes the warrants and the Treasury hasn't filed a 13D report.
13F is mandatory for OTC stocks. You mistake it for the obligation of a company to report financial results.
Ano, is clueless. Another jurist that misinterprets the laws.
After Collins, it is illegal to run FnF for the benefit of the taxpayer, as he states, AND BEFORE COLLINS. Duh!
He posts a screenshot with a remark made by Fannie Mae that is false. The conservator has to act in the best interests of FnF in order to comply with its power: put fnf in a sound and solvent condition.
Also its Incidental Power is "actions in the best intersts of FnF or the FHFA", as conservator. Never in the best interests of the Government.
That's all they have to say. So, the conference is over.
***SCOOP*** FnF CAN RECOVER $409 BILLION OF CORE CAPITAL. It would offset the current $399 billion Deficit of Core Capital over the Risk-Based Capital requirement that I already pointed out, and the outcome is $10 billion Capital Surplus, thus, FnF are declared Adequately Capitalized and the JPS resume the dividend payments.
Breakdown:
-FnF generated $397b of Core Capital during conservatorship that has been siphoned to UST, via:
Dividends: $191b draws from UST (SPS), $110b SPS overpayment
$25b TCCA fees
$7b Corporate Tax on settlements
$15b Federal Programs expenses
$49b recent SPS increased for free
-Other Core Capital to recover:
$6b in interests
$2b initial SPS issued for free
$4b cost of the Warrant paid by the shareholders, as it was also issued for free.
EXPLANATION OF THE #FANNIEGATE SCANDAL.
The breach of the statutory provisions, like the Restriction on Capital Distributions (for instance, the dividends to the Equity holders), is the heart of the matter, because it leads to the current disaster: THE LACK OF CORE CAPITAL IN FnF.
What has to meet the Capital requirements is the CORE CAPITAL of the enterprises.
Data as of end of March, 2021.
(*)Deficit of Core Capital over:
Minimum Capital requirement: $245 billion
Risk-Based Capital requirement: $399 billion; with buffers: $514 billion
(*)Deficit of Common Equity over:
3% of Total Assets for the release from Conservatorship: $431 billion (it's Adjusted Assets, which, surprisingly are 7%-9% higher than the Total Assets)
4.5% of risk-weighted assets: $461 billion.
What is the reason for these deficits? FnF have generated $301 billion of Core Capital (earnings) during conservatorship, but, instead of recording them as Core Capital (Retained Earnings), it has been transferred to the UST via dividends. So, we want that Core Capital back.
If either the SPS are simply deemed repaid, like any other obligation that is repaid with cash, or the refund is cash or a Tax Credit, it isn't recorded as Core Capital (Retained Earnings). What has to happen is that the SPS are cancelled so that FnF post a profit that must be tax-exempt income because FnF already paid the corporate tax when the dividends were sent to UST.
Refund? For the same reason, it can't be a simple wire transfer. We need the refund to be recorded as Core Capital and the plaintiffs' request of a Tax Credit isn't recorded as C.C. today (it might be C.C. in the future when FnF post more earnings thanks to the tax credit, but we want C.C. today)
And by the way, the refund is $163 billion ($110b SPS overpayments, etc), not the $29b requested by the corrupt plaintiffs that agree with the 10% dividend.
Never cheer up the conspirators that want to rip off the shareholders, like Pagliara, Glen Bradford, Rosner, Howard, the plaintiffs, etc, as their arguments lead to multiple stock offerings for the hedge funds they work for.
If you retweet a tweet with a comment, the author of the tweet cited gets a notification. Please, refrain from responding to my posts. It's like having a conversation with Cantinflas.
The plaintiff Liotta calls himself "hacker" on his Twitter profile, so I'm not insulting him with "hacker" as you claim.
Also, calling him a dummy plaintiff for the reasons outlined in the comment, isn't an insult either.
Finally, I told you that I retweeted his tweet with a comment, not that I replied to his comment.
I blocked you on Twitter for obvious reasons.
If you bothered to read the comment that you are replying to, you would have read that I mention that Liotta holds common stocks.
I also retweeted the tweet of Liotta that you have posted, but with a damaging comment for Liotta. Poor guy, the hacker was promised that he would become an American superstar. Lol
Too bad that you can't read my tweet because you have been blocked.
There's no such thing as "Scotus Law". It's all about the compliance with the statutory provisions as they are written. Your assertion that requesting a tiny amount of dollars is a good strategy, because later we would get more, is laughable and a shameful attempt to shield the plaintiffs from criticism for not demanding a restitution of the Core Capital in full ($301 billion), primarily because that's why there is a RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS in the law (Retained Earnings is Core Capital)
Glen Bradford has spent 12 years lying to investors under the orders of Berkowitz, who happens to have his office very close to his apartment.
Now I post an exhaustive relation of statutory provisions and he insults me.
The retail investor will strike back.
The NWS is legal because HERA authorizes unlimited yield SPS. Other theme is that the Capital distributions are restricted unless it's applied toward repaying the obligations SPS.
And other theme is that, prior HERA, there was another provision with low cost UST backstop that is the one that will prevail at the end.
Fell free to read the law.
THE NWS IS LEGAL. The only caveat is that it must be applied towards the reduction of the SPS (HERA's Restriction on Capital Distributions, exception B) and, later on, towards their recapitalization, 12 CFR 1237.12 (1).
The story of a Taking or Nationalization is a lie.
THEIR STATUS IS CONSERVATORSHIP
Robert repeats the Govt's lie contending that the loan cannot be paid back. No one cares what the Govt says. The Rule of Law prevails and the law says that Capital distributions (like dividends) are restricted unless it's applied towards the repayment of the obligations SPS.
PERIOD!
Pagliara's secretary?
Cantinflas, it's challenged daily on Twitter.
The warrants are an issue since 2008, because under SEC rules the UST beneficially owns a 79.9% stake in FnF regardless of being exercised and that's why FnF report earnings on a diluted basis.
You are referring to the Portuguese, who works for Pagliara and other plaintiffs that are negotiating with the Govt using the warrant to trade, seeking a settlement that includes a swap JPS for Common Stocks.
Once the warrant is exercised, the litigation would be resolved at the time that the UST had sold its shares on the market to its cronies 10 years before. This is why the corrupt plaintiffs don't challenge the warrant.
The Conservator is constitutional, the Regulator is not.
According to the Scotus-appointed amicus, the FHFA, as conservator, has limited powers, thus, the President can fire him for cause if the FHFA director violates his powers, which is what has happened.
The Regulator is unconstitutional because it has an additional duty inserted in HERA to "ensure that FnF's operations are consistent with the Public Interest". That's limitless powers and thus, unconstitutional.
@Guido, your understanding of the Secret Plan is wrong.
1) $300 billion for the Recapitalization?
2) I've never said that the Supreme Court "will direct the parties to the Secret Plan."
Two statements wrong out of two.
Don't dare to ever give me orders on when I have to explain the Secret Plan. It's explained daily in my comments and based on the law in force and Finance.
I never directed you to a blocked site. I post my Twitter account for everbody else and it isn't blocked. I have blocked you on Twitter, which is very different and I blocked you for obvious reasons.
This is the current situation including the effect of the SPS increased for free that the companies aren't recording on the balance sheets.
Other theme is the Secret Plan that leads to a $163 billion refund (SPS overpayment, TCCA fees, etc) and SPS increased for free cancelled. In that case, FnF would have $8 billion SURPLUS of Core Capital over the Risk-Based Capital requirement, that is, Adequately Capitalized.
This is important because it means that, in the case of a Taking today, the UST would have to pay full Fair Value of the stocks.
EVALUATION OF 12.5 YEARS IN CONSERVATORSHIP
(*)Deficit of Core Capital over:
Minimum Capital requirement: $245 billion
Risk-Based Capital requirement: $399 billion; with buffers: $514 billion
(*)Deficit of Common Equity over:
3% of assets for the release: $431 billion
4.5% of risk-weighted assets: $461 billion.
And the conservator's power is "put FnF in a sound and solvent condition".
For your mental health, I recommend you to bet on a Secret Plan of repayment of the SPS and recapitalization, according to Law, and that the new SPS increased for free are barred in the Charter's Fee Limitation, otherwise you will turn crazy, because these numbers are crazy.
The requirement for the release is CET1>3% of their Assets.
If you want to calculate the CET1, you have to subtract the JPS valued at par value ($33 billion) from the Core Capital (-$194 billion), so the CET1 is NEGATIVE -$227 billion.
Now you can calculate the requirement and the deficit of Capital.
@navycmdr, you've posted a wrong analysis, thus, you are misleading the investors.
The Capital requirements are met with the Core Capital or the Total Capital, and you've posted the Net Worth.
The Core Capital is published every quarter in the earnings reports. Look it up in the report as of end of 2020FY or the 1Q2021 in FMCC's SEC Filing.
FnF post a Core Capital of around NEGATIVE -$144 billion.
As negative Core Capital we have to add the offset when FnF increase the SPS for free. So, the real Core Capital is -$194 billion.
By the way, due to the offset mentioned, the Net Worth that you are pointing out, represents only the value of the SPS, no Retained Earnings anymore. So, all the NW is owned by the UST.
Also you have to take the Adjusted Assets, not the Assets.
Just read my comments to see all the in-depth analysis regarding FnF.
***BOMBSHELL*** NEW ANALYSIS POINTS OUT THAT THE PLAINTIFFS DON'T REQUIRE THAT THE CANCELLATION OF SOME SPS, BE DEEMED TAX-EXEMPT INCOME (CORE CAPITAL)
The fact is that in the lawsuit and in the oral arguments, they only request a refund of $29 billion as a tax credit and the SPS be deemed "repaid", like any other obligation that FnF pay down quarterly with their cash. Both have no effect on the Core Capital and thus, whether the plaintiffs win or not, the deficit of Core Capital over the Risk-Based Capital requirement would be the same as today: $399 billion and $514 billion if we include the "prescribed buffers".
The only difference with the current situation is that now there are $243 billion SPS outstanding, and with the lawsuit it'd be $50 billion because they only challenge the $191 billion SPS at the time of the lawsuit and they don't mention that the new SPS increased for free have to be deemed repaid as well.
For the capital requirements ($320 billion published in the last earnings reports; $205 billion without the buffers, because FNMA said $75 billion worth of buffers and FMCC didn't disclose it. I assumed $40 billion) what only matters is the Core Capital.
My prior analysis pointed out that the $191 SPS would be cancelled and thus, FnF post earnings and core capital. But this is not what the plaintiffs require.
This shows their attitude: they seek to deplete the Core Capital in order to increase the Capital needs, for the assault on FnF at rigged prices (secured deals)
I'M THE ONLY PROFESSIONAL IN FINANCE HERE AND THE ONLY ONE THAT POINTS OUT THE LAW AS IT'S WRITTEN.
For instance, Bradford has just written about "the hard work of the lawsuits to save some semblence(sic) of the rule of law."
The Law is unique and it must be upheld in its entirety, not some semblance.
This is why all the deranged illetarates insult me. I'm the only one with knowledge in Finance here.
The fact is that FnF have a NEGATIVE Core Capital as of March 2021 of -$194 billion. I've just included $50 billion more negative core capital to the one reported in their earnings reports, due to the SPS that are being increased for free every quarter and why I filed a SEC complaint because the companies aren't recording it on the balance sheet, neither this offset nor the SPS themselves.
The corrupt plaintffs don't challenge this fact, they agree with the 10% dividend and it would lead to multiple stock offerings because the Capital requirement published in the earnings reports is $320 billion and also a swap JPS for commons to comply with the CET1 ratio and the requirement for the release from conservatorship.
Help me to beat up all the deranged people that insult me. The plaintiffs are the mafia too and they've paid many people to praise them and harass me.
THEY REQUEST THE OVERPAYMENT ABOVE THE 10% DIVIDEND, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY AGREE WITH THE 10% DIVIDEND!!!!
That is, a refund worth $29 billion, but they request that it be recorded as a Tax Credit, which isn't CORE CAPITAL.
They don't request that the new SPS increased for free every quarter be cancelled, in the attorney's recent letter to Scotus.
You don't understand that the Capital requirements are met with the CORE CAPITAL. So, talk to me in Core Capital terms because the lack thereof would end up in multiple stock offerings to meet the Capital requirements.
I've written that FnF would need $155 billion of Capital if the plaintiffs win.
Add the conversion of JPS for Commons to meet the CET1 ratio and the requirement for the release from conservatorship.
The warrant, if it isn't challenged, it's exercised. It's pointless to claim that it will be challenged once it's exercised and the common stocks are circulating on the market. The damage would have been already done and you want to start another 12 years of litigation with the Government.
WE KNOW THE TRICK OF THE NEVER-ENDING LAWSUITS AGAINST THE GOVT. By the time there's a ruling, the UST would have finished off the sale of its stake on the market 10 years before.
I've posted an analysis that shows that FnF would end up with 58 billion common shares together.
IF THE PLAINTIFFS WIN, I WOULD BE DEPRIVED OF 97% OF MY WEALTH!!!!!!!
The fair value drops from $200 on average FnF, to $7ps and we would get there in 10 years' time, because there will be a roadmap of stock offerings the coming years.
If you don't understand concepts in Finance, like Core Capital, dilution, EPS, swap JPS for Commons to meet the CET1 ratio and the requirement for the release from conservatorship, etc, step aside.
The corrupt plaintiffs don't challenge what has deprived FnF of their core capital, like the 10% dividend or the SPS increased for free. Let alone the Warrant.
You mean the corrupt plaintiffs.
That plaintiff is an activist hacker sharing the attorney with Berkowitz. Nothing weird.... Lol