Fannie Mae (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

That's more proper of a Charter revoked scenario.
First of all, "GSE Act" doesn't exist. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac say "GSE Act" when talking about the FHEFSSA currently in force. By concealing the FHEFSSA, they peddle the idea of HERA, when the law in force is the FHEFSSA and Charter Act, as amended by HERA, as a way to conceal the rest of these two only laws in force.

They attempt to blend the FHEFSSA with the Charter Act, and say "GSE Act".
It's also a way to deny the existence of the Charter Act, like all the attorneys and judges have done in the U.S. courts.

FHFA must place us into receivership if they determine that our assets are less than our obligations (that is, we have a net worth deficit)

It turns out that FnF still have around $145B of UST's Funding Commitment remainder in the SPSPA (I don't recall the exact amount), which is triggered precisely when FnF post Net Worth deficit (negative NW). Watch my signature image below with Freddie Mac, to see how it works.

A SPSPA that emanates from the second UST backup of the enterprises inserted by HERA in the Charter Act, that the FnF CEOs want to undermine even its existence, with an Authority of Treasury to Purchase Obligations (subsection (g)).
Therefore, the UST backup of FnF is the Charter Act, not the SPSPA as all the plotters have repeated since day one.

An homonymous provision to the original UST backup (since the Charter's inception) of the enterprises (subsection (c)) that is written in the Charter Act just above the other, and it's the one that prevails, primarily because it's permanent, whereas the other had a deadline of December 31, 2009, and this is why Goldman Sachs' Hank Paulson came up with the idea of SPS LP "increased", instead of issued, so that this deadline on purchases is skipped (Securities Law violations because the obligations SPS are issued to raise cash, so they are dated.)


The original UST backup of FnF was spotted by the Law Professor Nielson, SCOTUS-appointed amicus representing the FHFA in the Collins case, right away, but Calabria didn't want to see.


The SPSPA in light of the second UST backup, has been used to de facto update the obsolete $2.25B limit in the original UST backup established more than 50 years ago when the debt outstanding of FNMA was $800 mll, for instance. Something that the Congress should have done in the first place, instead of enacting HERA.

A UST backup of the enterprises to finance their operations as a last resort (either Equity or Debt), as expressly stated in the section Purposes of the Charter Act, where their Public Mission is set forth, increasing their credit risk and not properly compensated.


The Purpose (2) has more to do with tapping the private capital market for funds. What FnF did in 2005-2008 with multiple issuances of common stocks and JPS. Then, the UST refuses to comply with its part in the Charter Act, or does it badly with a Separate Account thanks to the 2nd UST backup inserted by HERA.

A Charter Act that has already been dismantling through the guarantee fee increases and removing their privileges like Capital standards with the ERCF (Basel framework for capital requirements), and winding down their Investments Portfolios, pursuant to the UST's recommendations on ending the conservatorships, in its Report to Congress in 2011, at the request of the Dodd-Frank law. So, no subsidized g-fee anymore (Point (3)).
The Duty to Serve, point (4), is also outdated, as new markets is what any company is after.
Likewise their countercyclical role (step up in a financial crisis. Point (1) and (3)), also expressly written that all the Public Mission is about secondary market operations (MBSs), not refinancings and loan modifications, which are normal foreclosure prevention actions unrelated to the Charter Act.

There are many people that would love to place FnF into Receivership, but that cannot be possible with the Charter Act. That would be once the Charter Act is revoked, where FnF are bound for.
Beginning with the ambitious Calabria, another "libertarian" carrying out a Bolivarian Socialist revolution: "Nationalize it!", just like Pagliara.


You have to recapitalize FnF first:


And then, Charter revoked. If the UST wishes, by acquiring our stocks at their Book Value.


For a Receivership, you need the Critical Capital level trigger in the first place,


Not meeting a capital threshold called "critical" bothers to the plotters that claim that FnF have been rehabilitated, like the FNMA CEO.

Calabria was the first to remove the Critical Capital requirement in the ERCF in effect since February 16, 2021 (they are 3, not 2 capital requirements), two months before he enacted the Final Rule: Resolution Planning for a Receivership, and one month after writting with Mnuchin the SPSPA amendment with CET1 > 3% of Total Assets for the release, well above the ERCF with Tier 1 Capital > 2.5% of Adjusted Total Assets, which was the mandatory release in the prior FHEFSSA that he struck with HERA (Core Capital > 2.5% of ATA. Undercapitalized threshold).

Let alone using in the same SPSPA amendment the capital metric "Capital Reserve", invalid in the FHEFSSA.
All made up, aiming to thwart the reality of Conservatorship and a Charter Act.
It was not chosen a Receivership in 2008 and neither a Conservatorship is a temporary Receivership, nor calling it "Federal Government Conservatorship" will change anything.
The fact that Calabria forgot to include the typical section 18-month implementation, written always when a law directs a regulatory agency to do something, like changes in the Capital standards (like in the FHEFSSA with capital ratios for the first time in FnF), is evidence that he wanted a "back-end capital rule", that is, after the typical transition period to build capital, given by any regulatory agency when there are changes (For instance, the Federal Reserve to the banks, for the Basel endgame, currently in place). Along with a double UST backup of FnF, he wanted a Separate Account plan, that resembles the one for the FHLBanks in 1989, written by statute.

With $426B of Core Capital sent to UST through capital distributions (Dividends and SPS LP increased for free/offset) restricted in the Restriction on Capital Distributions (Hello) and an adjusted $402B Core Capital deficit over minimum Leverage capital level, the ambitious Calabria even dares to make jokes about where FnF can find $100B in capital among the audience of the numerous luncheons he loved to attend, in need of public recognition.
He doesn't understand that it's $402B the capital shortfall to begin with, because he is thinking of the flawed Capital Reserve that he and Mnuchin made up.


Finally, the revolutionary Calabria in favor of using the conservatorships to create a shadow Housing Finance System with the Credit Risk Transfers.


When it's precisely a Housing Finance System revamp what we are waiting for, as per the UST's 3-option Privatized Housing Finance System chosen for the release in 2011. But it's the role of Congress, not ambitious Calabria's.

CRTs, barred in the Credit Enhancement clause of the Charter Act and in the Fee Limitation of the United States posted above, if it's money syphoned off to UST. A Charter Act that they deny, instead of revoke it.