Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

BOMBSHELL. Second attempt to supplant the same law.
First, it was the Trump Administration, stating in the 2019 UST Housing Reform plan:

Applicable law does not prescribe a specific end point for the Conservatorship.

When it was the Dodd-Frank Law that required UST in 2011 to establish an end point and it chose 3 options for a Housing Finance System revamp based on a Privatized System. In 2019, the UST simply chose the option 3: Government catastrophic-loss reinsurance. The 2022 communication to "market participants" by Freddie Mac with its resecuritizations, confirms it, because it's a reinsurance priced at 9.375 bps.
Now, a second time, with the FHFA using the same language laid out in the Dodd-Frank Law, "requiring" FnF to submit a Capital plan, when it was the 2011 requirement by Law and, with the UST's recommendations on ending the Conservatorship, it's the Separate Account plan for recapitalization to that end, because a Privatized System requires bank-like Capital requirements, formally known as Basel framework incorporated by the Federal Reserve and now FHFA in its Capital Rule effective February 16, 2021 or, as the option 3 states: "stringent capital requirements for the guarantors".
The FHFA and UST saw an opportunity using the exceptions to the Restriction on Capital Distributions in the FHEFSSA and, in 2011, foreseeing the fast repayment of the SPS (exception B) with the coming NWS dividend, a new exception in the CFR 1237.12, in compliance with the FHFA-C's Rehab power: put FnF in a sound and solvent condition.
This plan is 12 years in the making, pursuant to a law.

OBSESSION W/ SUPPLANTING THE SAME LAW
A 2022 FHFA Final Rule "required" FnF to submit a Capital plan by May 20,2023.
Same language in the Dodd-Frank law that "required" UST to submit "recommendations on ending Conservatorship":Privatized Sys(Basel)
12yrs in the making.#Fanniegate https://t.co/uTfNS6HBaf pic.twitter.com/oDHt78FbhD

— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) April 30, 2023