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.
He returned everyone's money as I recall after he realized everything was overpriced in the market.
He's a Warren Buffet disciple and so is Bruce Berkowitz and there's a lot to like and learn from Warren and his former long time partner, Charlie Munger (who lived to 99).
Warren says he's not done yet:
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/07/billionaire-bill-ackman-to-open-a-nyse-listed-fund-for-regular-investors.html
"The Adviser’s focus on deeply undervalued investments is due to its belief that a well-priced purchase is often one of the most important determinants of the success of an investment. In addition, the Adviser believes that the acquisition of a portfolio of investments, when acquired at a large discount to intrinsic value, provides a margin of safety that can mitigate the likelihood of an overall permanent loss of the Fund’s capital. The Adviser intends to make investments on behalf of the Fund in a manner consistent with the investment strategy it has historically employed. See “Investment Objective and Policies.”"
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2002660/000119312524026301/d623781dn2.htm
"Consistent with the Adviser’s core investment principles and business strategy, it expects to identify high-quality companies that have a number of the characteristics enumerated below. The Adviser will use these criteria and guidelines in evaluating investments, but may make investments in companies that do not meet all of these criteria.
•
Simple, predictable, and free-cash-flow-generative. The Adviser will generally seek to invest in companies with a proven track record of growth and free cash flow generation, and predictable future financial performance that it expects will generate strong, sustainable growth in cash flows over the long term.
•
Formidable barriers to entry. The Adviser will generally seek companies that have long-term sustainable competitive advantages, significant barriers to entry, or “wide moats” around their business, and low risks of disruption due to competition, innovation or new entrants.
•
Limited exposure to extrinsic factors. The Adviser will generally seek investments that are not materially affected by macroeconomic factors, commodity prices, regulatory risks, interest rate volatility and/or cyclical risk.
•
Strong balance sheet. The Adviser will generally seek investments in companies that are conservatively financed relative to their free-cash-flow generation.
•
Minimal capital markets dependency. The Adviser will generally seek investments in companies that are not highly reliant on the capital markets to operate and grow their businesses.
•
Large capitalization. The Adviser will generally seek investments in companies with large enterprise values and significant long-term growth potential.
•
Attractive valuation. The Adviser will generally seek investments in companies at an attractive valuation relative to its view of the company’s long-term intrinsic value.
•
Exceptional management and governance. The Adviser will generally seek investments in companies that have trustworthy, talented, experienced, and highly competent management teams.
The Adviser’s focus on deeply undervalued investments is due to its belief that a well-priced purchase is often one of the most important determinants of the success of an investment. In addition, the Adviser believes that the acquisition of a portfolio of investments, when acquired at a large discount to intrinsic value, provides a margin of safety that can mitigate the likelihood of an overall permanent loss of the Fund’s capital. The Adviser intends to make investments on behalf of the Fund in a manner consistent with the investment strategy it has historically employed."
"The price of preferred shares in Fannie Mae shot up to $4.57 a share in the wake of former President Trump’s victory in the Iowa caucuses."
https://www.insidemortgagefinance.com/articles/230137-anticipation-grows-for-end-of-gse-conservatorship?v=preview
The Financial Establishment (JP Morgan, Citi, et.al.) has been and continues to be the winner with the Status Quo and are still looking for the federal government to hand out federal government guarantees to them. Notice they never discuss the race to the bottom in both mortgage pricing and quality that would be inevitable.
https://www.housingpolicycouncil.org/
P.S. They've been buttering the bread of a guy named Edward J Demarco since shortly after he Nationalized the GSES on August 17, 2012.
Take a look at his salary, 2x to 3x what he was making as the head of FHFA.
The SWAMP in action!
https://www.housingpolicycouncil.org/keyissues
https://www.housingpolicycouncil.org/mission
HPC’s advocacy work is focused on fostering and facilitating a practical and purposeful evolution for our housing finance system.
Welcome to HPC
I am pleased to serve as the President of HPC, a policy and trade organization with a unique mission and membership. HPC’s members are leaders in housing finance, representing the primary market’s ecosystem of mortgage lenders and servicers; data, technology, and analytics firms; and mortgage, title and property insurers. Collectively, HPC member companies are the nucleus of the U.S. housing finance system, supporting the flow of capital from across the globe into the mortgage market to serve all Americans who are or aspire to become homeowners. I am proud to advocate on their behalf, because HPC member companies take very seriously their role in the marketplace and their responsibility to promote and support sustainable homeownership opportunities.
HPC’s advocacy work is focused on fostering and facilitating a practical and purposeful evolution for our housing finance system. HPC members engage in activities and promote policies that advance a mortgage marketplace that is economically sound, protects and promotes the interests of all consumers, and allows private companies to flourish under a set of regulatory rules that are fair and balanced.
HPC’s strategic plan covers a limited number of critical issues, including: restoring the private market to expand the level of private capital and introduce effective risk controls into the marketplace; modernizing the government agencies involved in housing finance, such as FHA, to expand each agency’s capacity to fulfill its mission and manage risk; reformulating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to remove the public-loss and private-gain model that added substantial risk to the housing finance system; developing a sustainable approach to expanding affordable housing opportunities that will reach historically underserved segments of our population; and cultivating a market environment that encourages and enables responsible innovation.
One of the most rewarding aspects of my position at HPC is that our member companies have pledged to commit their time and energy to improving and enhancing the housing finance ecosystem, regardless of their particular role in the marketplace. HPC members are committed to promoting the greater good - of the industry, the customers we serve, the national economy, and the US government that is both a partner and a regulator for the work we do.
On behalf of our staff and member companies, I welcome you to engage with us in this important and inspiring policy work.
Yours truly,
Ed DeMarco
Housing Policy Council
President
This whole fact pattern is so bizarre, never in US business history has there ever been anything like it!
First the government wants to destroy us in 2012, then they suddenly realize that Capital is Necessary for 2 monoline insurance companies.
But how does the drama end (if ever)?
Translation: "This administration has no plan and we'll keep the Status Quo."
Meanwhile we continue to build Retained Earnings:
Fannie Mae Mortgage Book of Biz (end of 4Q23) = $4.127T
Freddie Mac Mortgage Book of Biz (end of 4Q23) = $3.487T
Total Outstanding US Mortgage Debt (end of 4Q23) = $12.61T
https://www.newyorkfed.org/microeconomics/hhdc.html
GSE Market Share (end of 4Q23) = $7.64/$12.61 = 60.58%
Fannie Mae Net Worth end of 3Q23 = $73.7B
Freddie Mac Net Worth end of 3Q23 = $44.7B
$118.4B/$7.64T = 1.55%
"Government-Sponsored Enterprise (GSE)
A corporate entity with a federal charter
authorized by law, but which is a privately owned
financial institution. Examples include the
Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie
Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation (Freddie Mac)."
FSOC 2023 Annual Report
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1991
Tom Lawler helped build the Fannie Mae Mortgage Portfolio and I used to walk into his office all the time (88-93), he's a sharp guy:
https://calculatedrisk.substack.com/p/lawler-update-on-mortgage-rates-and
"As I’ve written about before, that wider spread reflects (1) significantly higher GSE guarantee fees, and (2) somewhat higher origination/servicing costs associated with regulatory changes that followed the financial/mortgage market crisis. (On the latter point, see Cost to Originate Study: How Digital Offerings Impact Loan Production Costs.)
The current primary/secondary spread is also impacted by MBS “price compression” – that is, a relatively narrow price spread between MBS at around par and the next higher MBS coupon – that is partly the result of the steeply inverted yield curve. Many lenders recoup origination costs by charging a higher interest rate and selling MBS at a premium, but in today’s market originators must “charge” about 40 bp more in rate for each one percent of MBS premium. In a more “normal” environment when the yield curve is upward sloping and interest rate volatility is “subdued,” that “tradeoff” has been more like 25-30 bp."
"Of course, most people don’t have access to Yield Book OAS. And even for folks have some historical data, the history since the financial crisis includes several extended period where excessive Fed intervention in the MBS market resulted in negative OAS. My “gut” is that an assumption of a long run average in the 35-40 bp range is probably reasonable."
Not alot of volume today on this one:
Previous Close 12,500.00
Open 10,200.00
Bid 0.00 x 0
Ask 0.00 x 0
Day's Range 10,200.00 - 10,200.00
52 Week Range 5,000.00 - 12,500.00
Volume 1
Avg. Volume 78
Market Cap 3.733B
Beta (5Y Monthly) 1.34
PE Ratio (TTM) 1,457,142.75
EPS (TTM) 0.01
https://finance.yahoo.com/quotes/fmcc,fnma,fmckj,fmcki,fmccm,fmcck,fmcct,fmcci,fmckk,fmccg,fmcch,fmccl,fmccn,fmcco,fmccp,fmccj,fregp,fmckp,fmccs,fmcko,fmckm,fmckn,fmckl,fnmap,fnmao,fnmfo,fnmam,fnmag,fnman,fnmal,fnmak,fnmah,fnmai,fnmaj,fnmas,fnmat,fnmfm,fnmfn/view/v1
Wait until you see the bill !
They've been raiding the till of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac whenever they feel like it and the CEO's are powerless.
Why would Uncle Suggy ever want to give up this gig?
Although, the previous US Treasury Secretary did say the following: "On September 5th Steven Mnuchin, the treasury secretary, published a long-awaited plan to reprivatise them. “We want to make sure they are not in conservatorship on a permanent basis,” he told the Senate on September 10th."
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/09/12/steven-mnuchin-begins-reforming-americas-giant-mortgage-guarantee-firms
IF you know who wins, what do you think the Share Price will be?
Uncle Suggy loves giving away money that doesn't belong to him, ESPECIALLY IF IT BUYS SOME VOTES! !
https://www.270towin.com/2024-presidential-election-polls/
Let's assume since 50% of a county's Median Income qualifies for the 3% gift from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, on 50,000 homes per year that's still about one third of a billion.
Since the GSE'S have been massively drained of Capital from 2012-2019 and now our 'dear leaders' have realized that Capital is Necessary, Why give away Capital when they are only at 1.25% - 1.50% and need to reach 4.24% - 4.50%?
Shouldn't the Federal Government pay for Housing Subsides or is it suppose to be paid for by 2 Corporations in Conservatorship?
Why limit it to $6k per targeted group, why not $25k?
Cost of 3% Subsidy on the Median US House is $12,531 on 50,000 homes is $0.6B/yr
Median US House Price Q423 is $417,700
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS
According to Demarco's Testimony, the August 17, 2012 Net Worth Sweep was an act of a Conservator.
The Jury didn't buy it.
The FHFA has a whole team of Blue Chip Lawyers and support staff from Arnold & Porter and it's a lot more than 3. Then Freddie Mac has a separate team of Lawyers and support staff from another Law Firm. And of course so does Fannie Mae.
Who do think is bankrolling all this?
Whose paying for this? I thought Freddie and Fannie needed Capital?
There's no limit in HERA as to the number of employees so long as it's 'reasonable'. CFPB has the same limitation under Dodd Frank.
https://dailycaller.com/2018/02/07/cfpb-headquarters-tour/
Sandra L Thompson said to the Senate Banking Committee when asked about the plan for exit from the Government Conservatorships, "We are waiting for Congress to decide the future of the GSES and the future of the US Housing Finance Market."
Just an excuse for the Status Quo and to allow the current administration to shell out benefits to their targeted political voter base.
https://money.usnews.com/loans/mortgages/articles/fannie-mae-unveils-2-500-homebuying-credit-do-you-qualify
Check out the story on how the Plaintiffs Lawyer was able to make Elon Musk make incriminating statements at the trial (todays WSJ): "At the pivotal moment in the case that cost Elon Musk his $55 billion Tesla pay package, the lawyer cross-examining him let him go on and on and on.
"He was trying to assert control over the courtroom. He was asked a yes or no question, and instead of answering the yes or no question he began a long answer," said Greg Varallo, the plaintiff's lawyer in the Delaware courtroom. "And I remember the ordinary move there is to interrupt him, demand a yes or no answer and ask the court to instruct him to answer the question."
"And I just had an intuition to leave him alone. The more he spoke the more irrelevant what was coming out of his mouth was," he said. "He was embarrassed."
In Varallo, Musk ran up against a massive plaintiff's lawyers operation. Varallo is head of Bernstein, Litowitz, Berger & Grossmann in Delaware, and, unusually for a plaintiff's attorney, he spent decades on the other side, representing big companies like Goldman Sachs and 21st Century Fox.
The bombshell decision , issued this past week in the Delaware Court of Chancery, came more than five years after a Tesla shareholder originally filed suit, asking the state's business-law court to cancel Musk's pay package at the electric-car maker. Musk argued it was OK because he didn't dictate terms of his plan.
The many lawyers on the case, from multiple firms, represented a single shareholder plaintiff, Richard Tornetta. Lawyers wouldn't say how they connected with Tornetta. Tornetta drummed in the mid-2000s in a heavy-metal band called Dawn of Correction, which described itself as "loud aggressive rock 'n' roll with a foundation of old metal roots." Lawyers were attracted to the case because of Musk's outsize pay package.
The day he was set to cross-examine Musk was Varallo's 36th wedding anniversary so he invited his wife to come watch. The courtroom in the trial, decided by a judge without a jury, was filled with lawyers and reporters, who also filled an overflow room. His wife found a seat in the jury box.
"She took notes, when we had a break in the cross she came over with her notes and made some really interesting points from her point of view," said Varallo, 64. She used a legal pad and advised what series of questions seemed to work best and how Musk reacted to a certain line of inquiry. She suggested pressing harder on other points. "I was able to incorporate those comments for the rest of the cross. It was really special for me to be able to have her there and have her participate in the cross and, of course, it was a special day for both of us."
It's quite a bit of work, todays WSJ, on the anatomy of a Plaintiff Securities Class Action Lawyer Lawsuit:
"The suit, filed in 2018, alleged that Tesla's chief executive controlled the approval process and that the board misled investors, who later approved it. Musk has said he didn't dictate the terms of his pay plan.
The judge in the case, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick, found that the process for securing approval of Musk's compensation was "deeply flawed," and agreed to rescind the CEO's package, which was valued at a maximum of $55.8 billion.
The case was originally filed by lawyers from Friedman Oster & Tejtel and Delaware-based Andrews & Springer, which also represents Tornetta in a separate lawsuit that began in 2019.
The lawyers brought in Varallo and several others from his firm in 2021. At the time, they had just survived a motion to dismiss by Tesla's board of directors, raising the likelihood that the case could go to trial. The original legal team recognized it was going to be a massive undertaking, said David Tejtel, principal at Friedman Oster & Tejtel, which is based in New York and specializes in corporate-misconduct cases in Delaware.
More than a week before the trial, the entire legal team essentially moved into Bernstein Litowitz's office and its trial war room to work around the clock. "That was home for us outside the courtroom," Tejtel said.
As a corporate-defense lawyer for 36 years at Delaware's largest firm, including a time as president of the firm, Varallo litigated hundreds of complex business disputes throughout the U.S., including in Delaware. He represented Goldman Sachs in a challenge to its compensation structure, and served as lead counsel for News Corp and 21st Century Fox in shareholder litigation. News Corp is the parent company of Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal.
In 2019, the self-described "blue-collar kid" from Philadelphia made an uncommon decision for a well-established defense lawyer: to start working for plaintiffs.
"This was an opportunity in a very entrepreneurial way, to do something entirely new, to work with people that I did know, but in an area that would require some new learning on my part," he said in a 2021 podcast interview .
In his free time, Varallo said he enjoys goose and duck hunting and has been "a game hunter for a long, long time." An elk from Northern Colorado and a mule deer from Mexico trophy hang in his office in Wilmington.
He also plays poker. "We litigate in a world where we have imperfect information, and you play competitive poker in a world where you've got imperfect information," he said on a podcast from The Deal. "There's some, I think, overlap between the two."
It isn't uncommon for a plaintiff's law firm to seek out a shareholder willing to serve as a lead plaintiff, said John Jasnoch, a partner at law firm Scott+Scott, who wasn't involved in the Musk case. Such plaintiffs don't always play a big role in the case, but can receive compensation if a case is successful.
The plaintiff "is standing in the shoes of the company," Jasnoch said, and sues its board or executives for actions that harmed the company. If the suit is successful, the financial benefits go to the company, while the plaintiff typically receives a small incentive award.
Tornetta, who didn't respond to requests for comment, previously worked for a company that created aftermarket audio equipment for cars and other automotive companies, according to public records and an archived version of his LinkedIn page.
Tejtel praised Tornetta for not backing down during the litigation despite some people making negative online statements about the case. "It took a ton of courage to step forward and stay in the game," Tejtel said.
Lawyers have the potential to score a much bigger bounty, said Renee Zaytsev, a partner at law firm Boies Schiller Flexner.
In Delaware, a judge has the final say on the fees lawyers receive. The fees are typically a percentage of the benefit the company receives, Zaytsev said, and a factor is the stage at which the case is resolved.
In the Musk case, the judge directed both sides to meet and come to an agreement on court costs and who pays them, as well as the precise language of a final order in the case, Varallo said. Tesla's board of directors would then have 30 days to file an appeal once that order is entered, he said."
HeeeeHeeee! I think release from the never ending conservatorships would be quicker under one guy versus the other !
Do you think the current administration would rather have the private sector or the government run the GSES? 🤔
The reason for the move up today? https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/02/judge-postpones-trump-dc-election-trial-pending-appeal.html
https://www.heritage.org/courts/commentary/3-supreme-court-cases-could-shake-the-administrative-state
"KEY TAKEAWAYS
The major theme of the coming Supreme Court term is administrative law. Once obscure, this body of statutes...gained public attention through recent cases.
Loper Bright will have major implications for citizens fighting administrative agencies in courts.
These three cases remind us how excessive judicial deference coupled with congressional laziness has created our all-powerful administrative state."
"Now, three cases on the fall docket could reshape the foundations of the administrative state and the power the unelected bureaucracy has over the American people and the economy: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Securities Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services of America.
Agency discretion and independence are motifs in all three cases. Obvious as it may sound, agencies are meant to be agents. They do not carry out their own will; rather, they implement Congress’ commands and assist the president in his constitutional duty to faithfully execute Congress’ laws.
To be effective, an agent needs some flexibility to carry out the principal’s commands. But the greater the latitude, the greater the risk that the agent decides to follow his own agenda over the principal’s. The more that agencies reinterpret laws to make room for their own policy judgments, the more agencies appear to act like judges or legislators, though, under the Constitution, they are neither."
🚀🚀🚀
https://finance.yahoo.com/quotes/fmcc,fnma,fmckj,fmcki,fmccm,fmcck,fmcct,fmcci,fmckk,fmccg,fmcch,fmccl,fmccn,fmcco,fmccp,fmccj,fregp,fmckp,fmccs,fmcko,fmckm,fmckn,fmckl,fnmap,fnmao,fnmfo,fnmam,fnmag,fnman,fnmal,fnmak,fnmah,fnmai,fnmaj,fnmas,fnmat,fnmfm,fnmfn/view/v1
It will be appealed for sure, according to this guy, who could be the next VP and subsequent POTUS.....
The Delaware Chancery Court’s decision to strike down Tesla’s deal with Elon is a threat to the future of capitalism. Courts shouldn’t second-guess the *business judgments* of boards to maximize shareholder value. Yet that’s exactly what Tesla’s board did here - successfully. pic.twitter.com/aU6DOOjfrl
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) January 31, 2024
"In addition, the Committee will continue reducing its holdings of Treasury securities and agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities, as described in its previously announced plans. The Committee is strongly committed to returning inflation to its 2 percent objective."
"Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Thomas I. Barkin; Michael S. Barr; Raphael W. Bostic; Michelle W. Bowman; Lisa D. Cook; Mary C. Daly; Philip N. Jefferson; Adriana D. Kugler; Loretta J. Mester; and Christopher J. Waller."
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20240131a.htm
https://www.federalreserve.gov/live-broadcast.htm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/politics/live-news/new-hampshire-primary-01-23-24/index.html
"Trump wins New Hampshire GOP primary, CNN projects"
"Biden campaign says Trump has "all but locked up the GOP nomination"
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/23/new-hampshire-primary-live-updates-nikki-haley-battles-donald-trump-to-the-finish.html
"New Hampshire primary results: Trump defeats Haley; Biden sweeps Democrats"
https://days.to/until/us-presidential-inauguration
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/whos-protecting-consumers-consumer-financial-protection-bureau.amp
Will she break a buck fifty?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-fuels-meme-rallies-stocks-173457553.html
"Shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the mortgage-finance giants that have been in the federal government’s hands since the Great Financial Crisis — climbed to hit two-and-a-half year highs."
"Fannie and Freddie Join Rally
The gains have also extended beyond the usual suspects to companies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose stocks are traded over-the-counter, amid speculation that a second Trump administration would move to privatize the companies. During his presidential term, Trump backed an attempt to return the mortgage companies to private control which could’ve brought big returns to investors, though it was never enacted."
November 11, 2021 to Paul Rand: "The idea that the government can steal money from its citizens is socialism..."
"f. “Final Non-appealable Judgment” means the judgment of the Court after (1) any
and all appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (the “Court of Appeals”) have been adjudicated, or the time for appeal to the Court of Appeals has expired with no appeal having
been taken, (2) any and all petitions for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Supreme
Court”) have been adjudicated, or the time for filing petitions for writ of certiorari has expired with
no petition having been filed, and (3) if any petition for writ of certiorari is granted, any and all
appeals to the Supreme Court have been adjudicated."
"k. “Total Plaintiffs’ Award” means the sum of all damages and interest awarded during
the trial of the claims in this matter and post-trial proceedings, and allowed after Defendants’ appeal
(or after the expiration of time allowed for filing such appeal, if no appeal is filed within that time),
inclusive of attorneys’ fees, non-taxable litigation expenses, and pre- and post-judgment interest as have been or may be awarded to Plaintiffs, and inclusive of any interest earned through such
investments as the Court may direct following Defendants’ payment of the judgment."
"m. “Net Class Award” means the Total Plaintiffs’ Award less: (i) service awards, if
any, to the representative Plaintiffs; (ii) attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses awarded to Class
Counsel; (iii) compensation and expenses paid or reimbursed to the Distribution Administrator;
(v) any additional administrative expenses that may be charged against the Total Plaintiffs’ Award
at the Court’s direction; and (vi) the Net Berkley Award.
n. “Fannie Preferred Net Class Award” means the portion of the Net Class Award to
be allocated to the Fannie Preferred Class.
o. “Freddie Preferred Net Class Award” means the portion of the Net Class Award to
be allocated to the Freddie Preferred Class.
p. “Freddie Common Net Class Award” means the portion of the Net Class Award to
be allocated to the Freddie Common Class.
q. “Net Berkley Award” means the portion of the Total Plaintiffs’ Award to be
allocated to the WR Berkley Plaintiffs."
Does this mean that there are approximately 146,017 unique Shareholders in the Class Action?
"In accordance with that Order, and as detailed in the Declaration of Jack Ewashko
Regarding (A) Mailing of Notice of Class Action; (B) Publication of Summary Notice; and (C)
Report on Requests for Exclusion Received [ECF No. 153], Plaintiffs’ claims administrator, A.B.
Data, disseminated to potential Class Members and Nominees a total of 146,017 copies of the
Notice as approved by the Court (id. at ¶8)."
"On August 14, 2023, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs, finding that
(a) Plaintiffs proved by a preponderance of the evidence that FHFA, in its role as Conservator of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, acted arbitrarily or unreasonably in entering into the Net Worth
Sweep, thereby violating the reasonable expectations of holders of Fannie Mae junior preferred
stock, Freddie Mac junior preferred stock, and Freddie Mac common stock; and (b) Plaintiffs
proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Fannie Mae junior preferred shareholders, the
Freddie Mac junior preferred shareholders, and the Freddie Mac common shareholders sustained
harm as a result of the Net Worth Sweep. The jury awarded damages as follows:
? Fannie Mae junior preferred shareholders: $299.4M
? Freddie Mac junior preferred shareholders $281.8M
? Freddie Mac common shareholders $31.2M"
Higher Capital Requirements will result in hard working low and moderate income American Families paying more for access to the 30 year prepayable at any time Fixed Rate Mortgage. That's why low and moderate income housing nonprofits are teaming up with the 'evil banksters' to protest higher Capital Requirements on the Hill.
Here's the rest of the article from yesterday's WSJ:
"WASHINGTON -- Everybody, it seems, is complaining about the Federal Reserve's plan to make big banks hold more capital.
Not surprisingly, large banks have led the charge, and Republicans who are frequent critics of regulators have pushed to ditch the proposal. But they have been joined by unlikely allies including a broad cross-section of Democratic lawmakers as well as affordable-housing advocates.
The broad pushback could complicate regulators' stated goal of boosting the system's resilience after a spate of midsize bank failures in 2023, say analysts and banking officials.
Dozens of House and Senate Democrats recently signed formal letters protesting aspects of the plan, floated in July. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, housing advocates and civil-rights groups said it could widen a racial homeownership gap by making it more expensive for banks to offer mortgages to lower-income and minority borrowers.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) said she worries U.S. banks would face stricter rules than competitors overseas. Fed officials have acknowledged that the U.S. rules would likely be tougher than those in other jurisdictions.
The rules implement the last in a series of steps global policymakers agreed on after the 2008-09 financial crisis, making banks around the world hold additional capital so they could weather downturns. The latest proposal aims to more explicitly and consistently guard against risks including cyberattacks.
The Fed's point person on the plan, Michael Barr, has signaled he is open to changes. At least some of those sought by Democrats could be achieved with relatively modest adjustments.
"We want to make sure that the rule supports a vibrant economy that supports low- and moderate-income communities," he said this month."
Here you'll love this, I quoted the WSJ Editorial Board the other day, but this is what the Washington Post Editorial Board had to say today, (but do these unelected Government Bureaucrats really have a disinterested neutral stake in interpreting the limits of their power as mandated by their enabling Statutes OR are their interpretations the result of the political whims of the current POTUS?):
"With the major-questions doctrine in place, courts already have more latitude to prevent liberal presidents from regulating ambitiously. By also pushing for Chevron's destruction, conservatives run the risk that, when Republican administrations try to write weak regulations that arguably fall short of what Congress desired, future courts might not defer to them.
This risk rises as time goes on and the judiciary continues to evolve, at some point drifting back leftward. Progressives will ask judges to force federal agencies to, say, more aggressively enforce clean-air laws, substituting their own expansive view of the law for that of agencies that might be more cautious.
The moment calls for restraint from a court decreasingly interested in this virtue. Not because overturning Chevron would permanently hobble progressive governance but because doing so would be disruptive and unnecessary. Chevron's underlying logic is sound: On balance, federal experts are better suited to filling gaps in the law than courts. Overturning Chevron, meanwhile, would spur advocates of all ideological stripes to bring countless new lawsuits before judges they believe will be sympathetic to their cause; they will have some 800 federal district court judges across the country from whom to choose."
The banks seem poised to challenge their federal regulators requirements for holding yet more Capital: (todays WSJ): "Banks have spent more than a decade since the financial crisis showing relative deference to regulators. Now big banks have signaled they are considering legal action, something they rarely do. To help craft a legal strategy, the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, has hired Eugene Scalia -- a frequent scourge of regulators and the son of late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
"The banking industry never expected Congress to fix this proposal, but the pressure they've applied ensured that the chorus clamoring for changes is loud enough to be heard and heeded by the Fed," said Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at financial-services firm BTIG.
Heightened capital requirements could make it harder and more expensive for consumers and small businesses to get mortgages and other loans, banks and some lawmakers say."
Eliminating Chevron Deference would simply require the federal agencies interpretation and implementation of their enabling Statutes to be defended by them and withstand scrutiny in the forum of the federal courthouse.
This would put another check and balance on federal government agency overreach and would be a win for Americans Liberty and Freedom.
I thought your beloved party was all about defending Democracy and Freedom. Here's JB, the other day (why would he have his Attorney argue FOR maintaining a doctrine that takes AWAY from our Liberty and Freedom as Americans?):
"In the winter of 1777, it was harsh and cold as the Continental Army marched to Valley Forge. General George Washington knew he faced the most daunting of tasks: to fight and win a war against the most powerful empire that existed in the world at the time.
His mission was clear. Liberty, not conquest. Freedom, not domination. National independence, not individual glory.
America made a vow. Never again would we bow down to a king."
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/01/05/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-third-anniversary-of-the-january-6th-attack-and-defending-the-sacred-cause-of-american-democracy-blue-bell-pa/