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.
NO SHAREHOLDER OR JPS HOLDER SHALL POST COMMENTS ON THE FHFA's WEB SITE, WITH REGARD TO ITS REQUEST OF INPUT IN THE PROPOSED CAPITAL RULE.
We, and the Judicial System, don't recognize the FHFA as a Constitutional agency. All a sham.
BAANG! CALABRIA PERSONALLY INVOLVED IN THE #FANNIEGATE CONSPIRACY OF SEIZURE AND SUBSEQUENT EXTORTION OF RESOURCES OUT OF FnF.
Calabria was senior staffer for Senator Shelby and, in that position, he helped to craft HERA. Therefore, he's personally liable for everything abnormal in the law, like:
-The duplication of the section of the UST backstop in the Charter (Yes, now there are two): AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS
- Establish a 4.2bp fee on FnF's mortgages to fund two Affordable Housing funds managed by the UST and HUD. It's barred in the Charter's Fee Limitation.
But this is most outrageous if it's possible:
-HERA inserted in the FHEFSSA the subsection Restriction On Capital Distributions (like dividends) when FnF are undercapitalized with the exception: purchase stocks that reduce the financial obligations, that is, the Preferred Stocks, the key for the period of undercapitalization during Conservatorship, but it was inserted at the end of the SECTION: CAPITAL CLASSIFICATIONS. In the FDI Act that mirrors HERA, it appears as a stand-alone section. It was meant to make this key provision to go unnoticed, corroborated when the FHFA suspended the Capital Classifications in 2008, in an attempt to conceal this section and what is inside altogether.
THE FHFA IS RIPE FOR DISSOLUTION.
He wants the Govt to talk to him. About the $125 billion he said it's "a potential amount" and that "the Govt doesn't want to have to pay $125 billion".
Also he pointed out that he has "emails where Freddie Mac says they calculated the commitment fee worth $400 million". These are the themes put up for a negotiation because they don't care about FnF, as they don't benefit from a refund. And what do the JPS holders desperately want? A swap JPS for Commons, as outlined by the conspirator Pagliara and others.
Advocate David Thompson? Berkowitz's lawyer that wanted to negotiate with the Govt using the shareholders as a means of payments and get a swap Preferreds for Commons. The Govt gets the warrant or SPS for Commons.
A JPS holder isn't a shareholder and can't negotiate. They have a simple contract with FnF.
"The Govt has to come to me", he said shamelessly in the conference call with the other conspirator Pagliara.
A charlatan.
THE SHAREHOLDERS DENOUNCE CALABRIA's 8% RISK-BASED CAPITAL REQUIREMENT FOR NEW MORTGAGES
A loan starts with 100% LTV, the next day the odds are that it's 101%.
FnF's average credit score is 754. Then, the rule says 99% risk weight x 8% x UPB. That is, on average, an 8% Total Capital set aside for the new mortgages.
This is tailored for Moelis' follow-on stock offerings.
The common stocks at trading at PER=0.2x. Besides, your data is fake.
2012-2019 Reserve release (Benefit for credit losses) Annual data,$ in billion $FNMA 1/9/4/1/2/2/3/4
Also take into account other factors that have lowered their Net Income, like the Derivative Losses due to the interest rates decline, and won't ever be seen again.
With regard to the 10bp TCCA, the FHFA has no say here. The law TCCA makes clear that FnF shall transfer the fee for 10 years, therefore, after that period, FnF keep the g-fee. Also it's barred in the Charter's fee limitation, so the odds are that the Treasury will be compelled to reimburse all the payments received so far.
Multiple felonies committed during Conservatorship pertaining to Securities Fraud:
-SPS that increase the Liquidation Value instead of issuing new SPS.
-Accounting fraud with the SPS issued for free reducing the Net Income. It isn't an expense for the shareholders and it can't appear on the Income Statement.
Don't tell me that the Govt can't announce that the SPS were held at $0 par-value in 2013 with the dividend payments or redeemed, primarily because that's exactly what is set forth in HERA, otherwise the dividends are restricted during Conservatorship.
THE SHAREHOLDERS CALL FOR OTHER INSTITUTION TO REPROPOSE THE CAPITAL RULE
The FHFA's reproposal of the Capital rule isn't a political document or it doesn't treat FnF as banks for similar exposures, as the conspirators now repeat, because the banks have different formulaic (flat 50% risk weight). The problem comes when the FHFA compares FnF with the U.S. banks and U.S. bank holding companies in the outcome of the Capital requirements and, most importantly, the TOP 10 technical flaws in the report:
1- The figures of risk weight.
2- The use of a 15% floor in the risk weight.
3- Establish a minimum common equity CET1.
4- The Leverage capital is higher than the Risk-Based Capital requirement which renders the later void, as complying with the first, complies with the latter (Then, the 424 pages in the report are a waste of time)
5- A 0% payout until the Total Capital is 25% of the Capital Surplus.
6- Only 1 year to meet the Capital requirements in the absence of Conservatorship.
7- Usage of CRT when FnF are insurers.
8- The reserve for CECL or Allowance isn't recorded as TIER2 Capital.
9- $99 billion of Capital Surplus (buffer) or 73% of $135 billion, is excessive.
10- Calabria raised the Operational Risk from 8bp in Watt's rule, to 15bp.
BAANG2!FLAWED RISK WEIGHTS APPLIED IN THE GRILL TO CALCULATE THE RISK-BASED CAPITAL REQUIREMENT
Explained here.
The FHFA got it wrong with every metric of the Capital rule.
It can only be explained with a FHFA turned into a criminal organization that is here to serve the mob.
BAANG1!THE LEVERAGE CAPITAL IS HIGHER THAN THE RISK-BASED CAPITAL REQUIREMENT.
The Leverage Capital, which is the old Minimum Capital, is Core Capital > $152 billion.
The Risk-Based Capital is Total Capital (Core Capital + TIER2 Capital) > $135 billion.
Then, the Leverage Capital renders the R-B Capital void, because the first makes the latter become $152 billion as well, as it includes the minimum Core Capital in the formula.
424 pages of the report talking about the R-B Capital, is a waste of paper and time, as the Leverage Capital annuls the R-B Capital.
Calabria lied in an official document that will be pubished in the Federal Register in less than one month, so this is a big deal and a reason to fire him "for cause".
He claimed that the risk weight floor of 15%, had an impact of 0.5% of the single-family UPB, that is $25 billion, on the capital requirement, and I've proven that, although the floor might have had an impact, the bulk is due to having increased the minimum rate on the risk-weighted assets from 6% to 8%, something that he conceals in the report.
The fact is that he increased from 6% to 8% the minimum rate of the risk-weighted assets secretly and for no reason. He just justified the $25 billion increase in the Capital needs of the single-family UPB, pointed out that it was due to the floor in the risk weight (so, a lie) and it was imposed because it was very low compared to "Basel and the U.S. Banking framework" and due the rhetoric to "boost the safe and sound operations", that can be used as alibi for many conspiracies. He can force FnF to buy 3-layer toilet paper for their safe and sound operations as well!
He didn't mention that the bulk was due to the increase of the rate from 6% to 8%.
He lied in an official document and he must resign.
***BOMBSHELL*** It's been unveiled on #Fanniegate that one change by Calabria of the rule proposed by Watt, wasn't specified in the document and in order to increase their Capital needs when he saw that the outcome was a low Capital requirement. Calabria increased the minimum rate of the risk-weighted assets, from 6% to 8%. There's other controversial change with the same goal, this time mentioned in the document, and is the application of a risk weight floor of 15%.
I remind you that the Risk-Based Capital requirement is calculated by multiplying the Asset value x risk weight x 8%. These changes have prompted an increase of $25 billion in the Capital required (0.5% of the single-family Unpaid Principal Balance) compared with the amount applying Watt's rule on the same assets. Without those changes, the Adequately Capitalized threshold would have been $110 billion, not the current $135 billion. The shareholders and JPS holders request the resignation of Calabria, a Moelis' footman (sponsored by John Paulson and Blackstone)
More detail.
SPS converted into JPS? ROFL!!!!!!
Not even one word about the laws and regulations. The warrant was issued to protect the taxpayer. It should have been cancelled when the SPS were redeemed under HERA.
The shareholders are the company.How do you think the price of the stocks is calculated?
The shareholders have an economic claim on all the profits generated by the companies (line item: Net Income attributable to the common shareholders). This is why a direct claim or derivative claim, is the same for the shareholders, as the outcome of a direct claim is reflected in the stock price.
Money stolen from the enterprises is money stolen from the shareholders.
For the holders of JPS is other theme. The JPS price depends exclusively on the time period to resume the coupon payments.
FnF TO PAY DIVIDENDS AFTER MEETING THE $135B THRESHOLD (Risk-Based Capital) PLUS MORE THAN 25% OF THEIR CAPITAL SURPLUS (So, $169 billion)
If your learned that in the Table 8 of the FHFA's Capital Rule there are restrictions on the Payout, which is the percentage of earnings available for distribution to the Equity holders.
As I informed yesterday, if the UST refunds the $158 billion due, and the CECL reserve is deemed TIER2 Capital, FnF had $201 billion of Total Capital in the 1Q2020.
It means that not only FnF are Adequately Capitalized, but they can distribute 40% of the Net Income of the previous year, to the Equity holders. The JPS have preference in the distribution of dividends and they can catch a break after 7 years watching their dividend kept as Retained Earnings, under a Secret Plan of recapitalization of FnF under the guise of dividends to Treasury.
The common stocks don't care about the dividend. If it's kept by FnF is good for me, like the previous 7 years, as it's Core Capital and it's Retained Earnings is our money too.
Good news for the battered JPS.
BOMBSHELL! THE SHAREHOLDERS UNVEIL THEIR OWN ROADMAP.
Based on The Secret Plan which is a plan sent to judge Sweeney on April 20th in the form of a brief of Amicus Curiae. So, it's a big deal.
According to this plan that includes $158 billion owed by the Treasury and assumes that the $20 billion CECL reserve is deemed TIER2 Capital (currently it's not), FnF had $201 billion Total Capital as of end of the 1Q2020.
Two more years building up Capital with earnings retained, and FnF will meet the $235 billion threshold of Total Capital set by the FHFA to resume the dividend payments, when the JPS reach their par-value.
It'll fall short of the 10 years requested by the shareholders for their recapitalization (10 years were granted by Congress to the FHA) under the CFR1237.12, that started once the SPS were redeemed in 2013 for FMCC and 2014 for FNMA, under HERA's exception to the Restriction On Capital Distribution. That is, under The Secret Plan.
Under this plan, all the lawsuits are meritless. The plaintiffs will retire their lawsuits because they have a lot to hide, since all the plaintiffs have covered up the key provisions mentioned that are the grounds for this Secret Plan.
More detail.
NO. The FHFA's proposal DOESN'T indicate "anticipated" new preferred and new common shares.
It seems that you don't read #Fanniegate on Twitter.
What is only expected is a UST refund worth between $110 billion to $158 billion. Enough to become Adequately Capitalized and continue to build Capital for the Capital Surplus requirement of 73%.
Now it's a question to debate whether the FHFA is abusing on its power pointing out that, in the absence of Conservatorship, it gives only 1 year since the publication of the rule, to reach the full Capital amount.
Congress gave the FHA 10 years to meet its Capital requirement. It's obvious to think that we are in the same case. Assuming that FnF repaid the SPS in 2013/2014, 10 years into the plan of recapitalization ends up in 2023/2024.
The Risk-Based Capital requirement is $135 billion that marks the Adequately Capitalized threshold, compared to Watt's $181 billion. Excellent. The rest is a Capital Surplus called buffers (73%). This is the worst scenario for the JPS, because the par-value is reached only when fnf resume the dividend payments after fnf meet the Capital Surplus. The Core Capital is $101 billion combined.
THE CASE OF MORAL DAMAGES HAS BEEN OUTLINED ON #FANNIEGATE.
Due to the Conservator's breach of its Fiduciary Duty to the Equity holders and the enterprises.
Judge Sweeney got it wrong big time. From the concept of Fiduciary Duty, which is unrelated to the interests of the shareholders but related to ethics a relationship of trust, to the theme of tort claim (the second reason why the judge dismissed the claim), since she argued that tort claims lack jurisdiction in the Court of Federal Claims. A few months earlier, she said the opposite: "the Court of Federal Claims is not deprived of jurisdiction even if the complaint contains allegations that could support a tort claim". This reinforces the allegation of mental incapacity of the judge due to anxiety.
But this isn't even a tort claim (not contemplated in a law or regulation) because it can be made the case of being established under Common Law (custom and precedent on other rulings, like judge Willett's in the hearing en-banc from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, who claimed that under Common Law, a conservator is a fiduciary, protector, trustee, guardian, etc.)
The breach of the fiduciary duty is the reason why the stocks have been trading well below their fair-value all along. This has caused a damage to the Equity holders and someone has to pay for it. Full detail.
Wow! Not even one mention to the Law. Bravo!
My "recco" (sic) is to stay away from those that don't mention the Law in their comments.
Last Friday's ruling had two big mistakes:
1- A conservator has no fiduciary duty to the shareholders.
2- A conservator can act in the interests of the Government.
These two mistakes are a blessing to the shareholders, in the sense that it doesn't need a minimum knowledge in Finance to determine that we are dealing with a crooked judge.
The fiduciary duty doesn't need to be written in a law to apply it, because it's related to ethics and a relationship of trust of the conservator with the shareholders and the enterprises.
For the same reason that the rights and powers were transferred to the conservator to fulfil this duty, but in a conservatorship, they later are returned, something omitted in the law but it's a common practice.
POTUS is aware of this behavior and I expect an unilateral resolution in 6 days' time.
The countdown begins.
BREAKING. JUDGE SWEENEY DIAGNOSED WITH PSYCHOTIC OUTBREAK.
Allegations of mental incapacity have been outlined on #Fanniegate and it would warrant her removal from the Court of Federal Claims for deterioration of her mental condition.
In an attempt to discern Regulator/Conservator,when is the same person(FHFA's Dtr),she envisioned in her recent ruling, an episode where one coerces the other.
Her objective was to pave the way for the Conservator's Incidental Power: "act in the interest of the Agency" and claim it's the Govt. Everybody understands the disjointed roles of the FHFA's Dtor and isn't necessary to stage that one is coercing the other to make her point.
When acting as Conservator, he can't pursue Govt interests.
It's not the first time that we see an erratic behavior prompted by an state of anxiety for being involved in the greatest Govt conspiracy of all times:
-She directed the plaintiff Fisher to file a motion while in stay
-She had a hissy fit when talking about the Agreements:"death grip", "Hobson's choice", "like the Mob", etc.
Now it's the time for POTUS to step in. The Constitution vests on POTUS the role of "Take care that the Laws be faithfully executed". That is, an unilateral resolution by the White House, as established in the famous brief of Amicus Curiae filed on April 20th by a shareholder.
STORY DEVELOPING.
The WARRANT can't get exercised. It was issued under a Temporary Authorization Of Treasury To Purchase Obligations And Securities, set forth in HERA, that must comply with:
EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED, to:
.......(iii) protect the taxpayer.
Once the only exposure of the Treasury to FnF, the purchases of SPS, is terminated, the warrant must be cancelled, either the UST wants it or it doesn't, because the warrant no longer complies with the role it was authorized for.
The SPS were redeemed in 2013 and 2014, under HERA's exceptions to the restriction on Capital Distributions, by the way. So, the warrant should have been cancelled back then.
6-8 or 20 stock offerings. WE DON'T CARE.
At the price you want. WE DON'T CARE.
That's the purpose of the Preference Subscription Rights.
The shareholders are protected.
Anyway, we're expecting a $158 billion UST refund.
JPS holders aren't FnF shareholders. Sorry!
WHAT?If the shareholders get to buy first the stocks offered, THERE's NO DILUTION WHATSOEVER. Regardless that the stock offering is done at the price you want: $100ps, $50ps, $1ps, etc, because the shareholders are the ones that buy those stocks.
Dilution means dilution in the shareholders' participation on the earnings.
Or what is the same, dilution means dilution in the shareholders' participation on the ownership.
Having the opportunity to buy the stocks offered in order to maintain the current percentage of ownership, there's no dilution.
It's also called Preference Subscription Rights.
If you want to get diluted, you sell your rights on the market.
It's impossible to get diluted. The warrant won't get exercised and if there's stock offerings, the current shareholders get to buy the first stocks issued, set forth in the FDI Act that mirrors HERA, although HERA skipped this part. It can be challenged in Court if necessary.
Then, simply apply stock valuation to see where the money is.
You can't hold both commons and JPS. One is a pure Equity stock that represents the value of the enterprises and the other is a fixed-income security, like a bond.
The outlays are classified by function and the Treasury checks should appear on Income Security. Other COVID-related outlays should be recorded on Health. This account is called General Government and I've added Appropriations because that's the name of an account. What function is General Government? No one. I can only think of funds appropriated in April that was going to show an historic Deficit, pending the effective disbursement later.
A refund to FnF by the Treasury has no financial impact on the Junior Preferred Stocks. It's only the fact that FnF will become Adequately Capitalized sooner and thus, FnF resume the dividend payments on the JPS (and common stocks) and that's when the JPS recoup their par-value.
But the amount of the refund is only the shareholders' money, as a common stock represents an aliquot portion of the enterprises' value.
Therefore, you'd better hold common stocks if you bet on a refund.
Did you read the part where I said that the conservator's fiduciary duty is not about maximizing the shareholder value?
It's about ethics and relationship of trust with the shareholders and the enterprises.
Then, the dividend was IMPECCABLY SUSPENDED under the conservator's fiduciary duty, in order to build up capital in FnF.
Solvency is about capital levels and not only the ability to pay their financial obligations. Your take reminds me a judge that claimed that the solvency is achieved with the Treasury's funding commitment.
When I said that judge Sweeney said something, it's an actual quote that you can read here.
***BREAKING*** THE U.S.TREASURY READIES THE REFUND TO FnF.
Yesterday we saw in the Treasury's monthly statements that the General Government Appropriations account increased $144 billion in April to $153 billion Fiscal Year to date ($9 billion in comparable period, prior Fiscal Year)
Very few days left to switch all your Junior Preferred Stocks for Common Stocks. The real stock that reflects the value of the enterprises.
NEVER REMOVE THE CONSERVATOR's FIDUCIARY DUTY AGAIN.
I agree with you that there's confusion about the conservator's powers.
The conservator's duty is to fix their operations and restore their capital levels, not just the survival of the enterprises.
Even judge Sweeney said that the Agreements prevent the enterprises from becoming solvent, by taking all their profits away. So, she understands that solvency is about capital levels, as earnings is recorded as Core Capital.
Curiously enough, this power of the conservator is set forth in HERA:"Put FnF in a sound and solvent condition".
Also, Calabria has mentioned that Capital is the key for the soundness of FnF. Soundness is also achieved reducing their obligations SPS.
And with regard to the fiduciary duty of the conservator, under the traditional view of a conservator, which is also a trustee, protector, etc., no one is talking about maximizing the shareholder value, which is the role of the management and the BOD. We are talking about a fiduciary duty, that it's more related to ethics and a relationship of trust with the shareholders. That's why we transfer our rights and powers to the conservator, otherwise we would have transferred them to a jail mate that would have done a better job, because it couldn't have been done worse than with the FHFA.
Currently there's a clear breach of the conservator's fiduciary duty to the shareholders and the enterprises.
We finally know the reason why judge Sweeney is reluctant to lift the stay in all the cases. Today's analysis on #Fanniegate is explained that it could be due to the brief of Amicus Curiae filed by a FMCC shareholder on April 20th. Although it was filed in the Washington Federal and WAZEE cases, all of them form the Related Actions attached to Fairholme case. Thus, this brief is also relevant to all the cases as a whole. By keeping the cases in stay, judge Sweeney can argue that she isn't aware of any brief because the proceedings are in stay (stoppage of the case). But it turns out that directing the plaintiff Fisher last Friday to file a motion to certify her Dec 6th opinion while in stay, instead of lifting the stay to enable it, could be deemed a breach of the Court process and the judge can be expelled from the U.S. judiciary for corruption. STORY DEVELOPING
Claim that a Conservator has no fiduciary duty to the shareholders is an insult to our intelligence.
This is why the Equity holders' and FnF's powers and rights were transferred to the Conservator under HERA's succession provision: to use them on our and FnF's behalf.
You seem to assume that it's an authorization to do evil against the shareholders and the enterprises.
A conservator is a protector, trustee, etc.
Sweeney's ruling only serves the plaintiffs' interests in collusion with the judge. That's why the cases remain in stay while the focus shifts to the Court of Appeals. It means that either the Govt settles the lawsuits or the plaintiffs and the judge sequester the resolution of the cases until the judgement from the Court of Appeals in many years' time.
This has been denounced in #Fanniegate. Here.
Is this considered "active discussion" by Fisher and Guido?
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/fannie-and-freddie-preferreds/39CnvhakvMk
Once again, you are caught.
He didn't tell us how he is going to file a motion to certify for interlocutory appeal if the case is in stay.
Calling crazy the shareholders that are truly fighting for our rights, like Carlos that filed a superb brief of Amicus Curiae, tells us a lot about you.
The brief of Amicus Curiae outlines all the laws and regulations pertaining to FnF. It's the most important document seen so far and a case study for Harvard University.
CROOKED JUDGE SWEENEY IS BEING EXPOSED ON #FANNIEGATE.
It turns out that plaintiff Fisher didn't request to initiate another Interlocutory Appeal, but to become a party in Fairholme's appeal already in the Court of Appeals, since Fisher considers that their claims are the same as Fairholme's.
Yet, Sweeney granted them the possibility to file a motion to certify her December 6th opinion for interlocutory appeal, duplicating the one already filed by Fairholme and thus, place an undue burden on the Court of Appeals, even though the stay wasn't lifted, so they can't file the motion while the case is in stay.
Judge Sweeney is a puppet in the hands of the hedge-funds, that only seek to make noise on the market, giving the appearance that the plaintiffs have a strong case to negotiate a settlement and win, so that the low-profile retail investors remain invested in the illiquid Junior Preferred Stocks.
FnF are not a restructuring case because the resolution is written in the laws and regulations that many of the posters here don't mention. The SPSPA isn't a law, by the way.
The value of the enterprises is reflected in the common stocks. The JPS are a bond-like security.
Once again you state something untrue to make your point contending that the bailout of FnF and AIG are the same.
FnF aren't regulated neither by contracts nor by Treasury Plans, like the one unveiled on September 2019.
There's a Charter.
C-H-A-R-T-E-R.
B-A-N-A-N-A-S.