Saturday, February 22, 2014

5 billion more paid and 47.6 billion DTA in "accounting" bank

5 billion more paid and 47.6 billion DTA in "accounting" bank

The balance of our net deferred tax assets was $47.6 billion as of December 31, 2013 , compared with net deferred tax liabilities of $509 million as of December 31, 2012 .

thats right 47.6 billion in DTA still for fannie, they will never need money again. they are 47 billion safe.

Deferred tax assets, net
47,560
47,560

Other assets (2)
40,171
47,604
(7,433)

Waters wants mortgage industry to fund Fannie, Freddie guarantees

Waters wants mortgage industry to fund Fannie, Freddie guarantees



Waters believes her government guarantee idea on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds will be key to accomplishing this goal. Further she wants to see this happen without costing the taxpayer a dime. Instead, the mortgage industry will pay.

"Next week, I will be discussing a proposal with Democratic members of the Financial Services Committee to reform the GSEs, which takes into consideration the changes in the marketplace since the crisis," Waters said in a statement. "This proposal will preserve the affordable 30-year, fixed rate mortgage and provide an explicit government guarantee that is paid for by industry."

Hedge Fund Takes $1.3 Billion Position in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Hedge Fund Takes $1.3 Billion Position in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


7 Jaw-Dropping Numbers From the Fannie Mae Earnings Report

7 Jaw-Dropping Numbers From the Fannie Mae Earnings Report



1. $83,963,000,000
In 2013, Freddie Mac saw its net income hit $84 billion as a result of the success in its business, as well as the previously mentioned gains on its credit portfolio and a massive gain from the release of its valuation against its deferred tax asset. To put that into context, this total of $84 billion in net income was more than Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC  ) , Bank of America (NYSE: BAC  ) , Citigroup (NYSE: C  ) , and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM  )combined:

Friday, February 21, 2014

With Fannie and Freddie Debt Repaid to Taxpayers

With Fannie and Freddie Debt Repaid to Taxpayers, Will Uncle Sam Turn Shareholders Into Zombie Investors?


http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2014/02/21/with-fannie-and-freddie-debt-repaid-to-taxpayers-will-uncle-sam-turn-shareholders-into-zombie-investors/

With the Treasury set to recoup its entire investment and then some, one would expect that the firms would be ready to exit government control and begin repaying their investors—more than 21,000 of them. But the near record windfall is for now mostly symbolic, as the government had re-engineered the original agreement to require the GSEs to send all their profits to the Treasury in perpetuity, meaning they can never exit government control.

Taxpayers Made Whole

Fannie Mae Bailout Return: $84 Billion Profit in 2013 — Taxpayers Made Whole



Fannie has now paid 5 billion more than it got, with 10% interest. 
Fannie has a LP of 116 billion and has paid 121 billion. 5 billion more. 
The Lp contains 10% interest on the money borrowed for 4 of 5 years. 
Fannie actually only received about 85 billion from treasury, so in REALITY Fannie paid 36 billion more than they received giving almost a 50% return over 5 years to treasury on taxpayer investment.

GM did not pay back the money it got, Fannie has paid 150% almost of its money. Get real reporting and see the govt for what it is now, a LOAN SHARK.  

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Government Restricting Returns To Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shareholders

Government Restricting Returns To Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shareholders



==================================================================

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac’s Profits Dim Dismantle Proposal


Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Did the Fannie and Freddie Bailout Involve Securities Fraud

Did the Fannie and Freddie Bailout Involve Securities Fraud?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371319/did-fannie-and-freddie-bailout-involve-securities-fraud-jillian-kay-melchior

It would have been one thing if the Treasury had barred shareholders from profits until taxpayers were repaid for the Fannie and Freddie bailouts, but an undisclosed and permanent ban on profits is extreme, especially for those who bought in when times were hard. It’s not quite nationalization, as Fannie and Freddie are both government-sponsored enterprises, but Treasury’s actions could be reasonably interpreted as a kind of seizure of private assets. After all, who would invest in a stock knowing that any of the firm’s earnings would basically be confiscated?

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Litigation Heating Up

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Litigation Heating Up


February 18, 2014, 3:15 pm

congress NOW trying to cover up congress THEN!

congress NOW trying to cover up congress THEN!


From "The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report", by the US GOVT.

In 1992, Congress enacted Title XIII of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1992
( the GSE Act), legislation intended to give low and 
Th e GSE Act, and its subsequent enforcement by HUD, set in motion a series of 
changes in the structure of the mortgage market in the U.S. and more particularly 
the gradual degrading of traditional mortgage underwriting standards. Accordingly, 
in this dissenting statement, I will refer to the subprime and Alt-A mortgages that 
were acquired because of the aff ordable housing AH goals, as well as other subprime 
and Alt-A mortgages, as non-traditional mortgages, or NTMs
Th e GSE Act was a radical departure from the original conception of the GSEs 
as managers of a secondary market in prime mortgages. Fannie Mae was established 
as a government agency in the New Deal era to buy mortgages from banks and other 
loan originators, providing them with new funds with which to make additional 
mortgages. In 1968, it was authorized to sell shares to the public and became a 
government-sponsored enterprise (GSE)9
—a shareholder-owned company with a 
government mission to maintain a liquid secondary market in mortgages. Freddie 
Mac was chartered by Congress as another GSE in 1970. Fannie and Freddie carried 
out this mission eff ectively until the early 1990s, and in the process established 
conservative lending standards for the mortgages they were willing to purchase, 
including such elements as downpayments of 10 to 20 percent, and minimum credit 
standards for borrowers.
Th e GSE Act, however, created a new “mission” for Fannie Mae and Freddie 
Mac—a responsibility to support aff ordable housing—and authorized HUD to 
establish and administer what was in eff ect a mortgage quota system in which a 
certain percentage of all Fannie and Freddie mortgage purchases had to be loans to 
low-and- moderate income (LMI) borrowers—defi ned as persons with income at or 
below the median income in a particular area or to borrowers living.

Over the next 15 years, HUD consistently enhanced and enlarged the AH 
goals. In the GSE Act, Congress had initially specifi ed that 30 percent of the GSEs’ 
mortgage purchases meet the AH goals. Th is was increased to 42 percent in 1995, 
and 50 percent in 2000. By 2008, the main LMI goal was 56 percent, and a special 
aff ordable subgoal had been added requiring that 27 percent of the loans acquired 
by the GSEs be made to borrowers who were at or below 80 percent of area median 
income (AMI). Table 10, page 510, shows that Fannie and Freddie met the goals in 
almost every year between 1996 and 2008.
Th ere is very little data available concerning Fannie and Freddie’s acquisitions 
of subprime and Alt-A loans in the early 1990s, so it is diffi cult to estimate the GSEs’ 
year-by-year acquisitions of these loans immediately aft er the AH goals went into 
eff ect. However, Pinto estimates the total value of these purchases at approximately 
$4.1 trillion (see Table 7, page 504). As shown in Table 1, page 456, on June 30, 
2008, immediately prior to the onset of the fi nancial crisis, the GSEs held or had 
guaranteed 12 million subprime and Alt-A loans. Th is was 37 percent of their total 
mortgage exposure of 32 million loans, which in turn was approximately 58 percent 
of the 55 million mortgages outstanding in the U.S. on that date. Fannie and Freddie, 
accordingly, were by far the dominant players in the U.S. mortgage market before 
the fi nancial crisis and their underwriting standards largely set the standards for the 
rest of the mortgage fi nancing industry.
Th e Community Reinvestment Act. In 1995, the regulations under the 
Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)10 were tightened. As initially adopted in 
1977, the CRA and its associated regulations required only that insured banks 
and S&Ls reach out to low-income borrowers in communities they served. Th e 
new regulations, made eff ective in 1995.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report 


start on pg 433 to find what caused the 2008 housing FALL!!

Sunday, February 16, 2014

The Untouchable Profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

The Untouchable Profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

The memo was addressed to Timothy F. Geithner, then the Treasury secretary, from Jeffrey A. Goldstein, then the under secretary for domestic finance. In discussing Fannie and Freddie, the beleaguered government-sponsored enterprises rescued by taxpayers in September 2008, the memo referred to “the administration’s commitment to ensure existing common equity holders will not have access to any positive earnings from the G.S.E.’s in the future.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/business/the-untouchable-profits-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac.html?partner=yahoofinance&_r=0

the actual memo:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/Tab25.pdf