Fannie and Freddie Charitable Donations?
I'm generally skeptical about corporate charitable donations. My sense is that they are primarily a transfer of value from shareholders to managers, rather than a value-enhancing investment in goodwill. So on the DC Metro, what did I see today, but a poster advertising the 2012 DC Servathon that featured the logos of a variety of corporate sponsors, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Aren't Fannie and Freddie insolvent and in conservatorship? Whatever one thinks of corporate charitable donations, they are a lot harder to justify when the corporation is insolvent. Critically, as far as I can tell, the sponsorship is from Fannie and Freddie themselves, NOT their charitable foundations--at least there is no indication that it is the foundations, not the GSEs involved. If that is correct, then why on earth is FHFA permitting Fannie and Freddie to make charitable donations? It is practically a fraudulent conveyance. It is also using taxpayer money for charitable donations outside the appropriations process. That strikes me as really problematic. It also raises the question why FHFA will let Fannie and Freddie spend taxpayer money on charitable donations, but not on principal writedowns that might actually save taxpayers money in the long run.So what are Fannie and Freddie doing with their corporate sponsorship? At best, it is an attempt to build goodwill. Remember that Fannie and Freddie do no business with consumers (other than foreclosing on them). And given that they are in a duoposony situation, they hardly have to advertise for their bank customers. So the only thing I can see this advertising as being about is currying political goodwill, which is lobbying in another form, something that Fannie and Freddie are forbidden from doing.
I'm all for charitable giving (with my skepticism about whether it is better done by corporate entities than individuals--there are obvious economy of scale issues for fund-raisers that cut the other way) and this is a good cause, but I really hope insolvent GSE aren't funding charities.
Update 4.1.12: A reader in the know directed me to this FHFA Office of the Inspector General report on the GSEs' charitable activities. Two points of interest. First, GSE charitable giving from 2008-2011 has totalled $219 million. Small potatoes relative to the scope of federal assistance, but still. Second, in October 2008 (months into the conservatorship), FHFA expressly permitted the GSEs to continue their charitable activities "because of the supporting role that such activities would play during the economic downturn." For real? That seems WAY outside of the FHFA's purview as conservator. Since when does conservatorship mean doing macroeconomic policy? And if it does, then let's talk about those principal reductions... Then in 2010, the FHFA ordered the GSEs to wind down their charitable activities by the end of 2013. It seems that there are complications in winding up the Freddie Mac Foundation. That aside, it's not clear to me why three plus years were necessary. imho, the FHFA should have stopped all new charitable giving as of the date of the conservatorship and allowed the Foundations to wind-down. I'm glad to see the IG has been on this issue.
Register of Deeds Cutris Hertel Jr | Ingham County to Begin Collecting Taxes from Mortgage Giants Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae
- Curtis Hertel Jr., Register of Deeds | FBI Investigating Possible Foreclosure Fraud in Ingham County
- Tweet | Curtis Hertel Ingham County Register of Deeds “I am proud to announce Ingham and Branch counties have filed a class action against MERS for unpaid transfer taxes”
- COMPLAINT | Register of Deeds CURTIS HERTEL, of INGHAM COUNTY; and NANCY HUTCHINS, of BRANCH COUNTY vs MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., et al
White Paper | FHFA-OIG’s Current Assessment of FHFA’s Conservatorships of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Solvency Now ‘Mathematically Impossible’
- FHFA – Conservator’s Report on the Enterprises’ Financial Performance, Freddie and Fannie
- Report | Evaluation of FHFA’s Role in Negotiating Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Responsibilities in Treasury’s Making Home Affordable Program
- KABOOM | FHFA Sues 17 Firms to Recover Losses to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Filings)
White Paper | FHFA-OIG’s Current Assessment of FHFA’s Conservatorships of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Solvency Now ‘Mathematically Impossible’
- Report | Evaluation of FHFA’s Role in Negotiating Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Responsibilities in Treasury’s Making Home Affordable Program
- FHFA – Conservator’s Report on the Enterprises’ Financial Performance, Freddie and Fannie
- KABOOM | FHFA Sues 17 Firms to Recover Losses to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Filings)
White Paper | FHFA-OIG’s Current Assessment of FHFA’s Conservatorships of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Solvency Now ‘Mathematically Impossible’
- Report | Evaluation of FHFA’s Role in Negotiating Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Responsibilities in Treasury’s Making Home Affordable Program
- FHFA – Conservator’s Report on the Enterprises’ Financial Performance, Freddie and Fannie
- KABOOM | FHFA Sues 17 Firms to Recover Losses to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Filings)
Judge Rules against Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, Taxpayers Will Recover Millions (VIDEO)
Adam Levitin | Calling DeMarco’s Bluff? Use the GSEs’ Market Power to Force 2d Lien Write Downs
Calling DeMarco’s Bluff? Use the GSEs’ Market Power to Force 2d Lien Write Downs
There's been mounting pressure on the acting head of the FHFA, Ed DeMarco to order Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to undertake principal reductions. DeMarco's pushed back, arguing that it's not fair for the GSEs to write-down principal when there are second liens on some of the loans that are on banks' books and the banks aren't doing write-downs (see here and here and Felix's critique here). DeMarco is arguing for strict observance of absolute priority. He notes that reducing the GSEs' first lien balances at taxpayer expense effects a bailout of the banks as it bouys the likelihood that their second liens will be repaid.
DeMarco's correct about a write-down of the firsts alone being a bailout of the banks. But his argument for doing nothing doesn't hold up for two reasons. First, there are plenty of GSE loans without seconds. There's no reason not to do write-downs on those loans. And second, the GSEs have the market power to force the banks to write down seconds as a term of doing business with the GSEs. If DeMarco's serious about dealing with negative equity, he'll start running the GSEs' like the 800 lb. gorilla they are in the housing market.
Not all GSE loans have second liens. It's not hard to determine if there's a second lien on a property--a title search and/or a credit report will show that. Those aren't free, but I hate to think that would be what's keeping DeMarco from ordering the GSEs to write-down principal on loans that don't have seconds. The possibility that some might have seconds shouldn't get in the way of writing down principal on those that don't have seconds.More importantly, DeMarco's hardly a helpless babe in this situation. DeMarco has the leverage to force the banks' hand on second liens. The GSEs have no obligation to do business with anyone they don't want to deal with, and the GSEs get to set the terms on which they do business. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that prevents DeMarco from instructing the GSEs to adopt a policy that they will not purchase mortgage loans from any financial institution that does not agree to abide by a second lien write-down policy. That could be a policy that says 2ds get written off completely if there is a principal reduction on the 1st, or one that makes for a pro rata reduction, etc. The precise terms aren't key.
What is key is that the GSEs have the power to force these terms on the banks. The GSEs ARE the mortgage market today. They have monopsony power. (The GSEs' could also probably condition continuation of servicing rights on second lien treatment...) If DeMarco wants to use the banks' seconds as an excuse not to do principal reductions, he needs to explain why he isn't willing to exercise the GSEs' market power. And it can't just be vague statements that it "isn't appropriate" or "legal restrictions." He needs to be citing chapter and verse, but I don't think there's anything to cite and certainly not something that forecloses (no pun intended) the possibility--at most there's an issue to be litigated, which gives FHFA all the leverage it needs. And fwiw, FHA could do the same darn thing. (Ahem, Shaun Donovan.)
Sadly, rather than thinking creatively about this issue, FHFA (and its GC in particular) seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time on devising ways to supp up the foreclosure process and get rid of those pesky laws protecting homeowners (such as through a uniform state law making to strip away consumer protections under the banner of uniformity--lowest common denominator prevails!) or requiring that servicers care for properties that have been abandoned.
I'd love to see DeMarco order the GSEs not to do business with anyone who won't enter into a second-lien reduction agreement with them. It would focus a very sharp spotlight on the second liens on the banks' books. Clearly they can afford some principal reductions without going belly up, or else we wouldn't (or perhaps shouldn't) be seeing dividend payments. But this is the shibboleth: if DeMarco's serious about principal reductions, he's got the tool to do it. And if he isn't, it's time for him to go.
Fannie and Freddie: Slashing Mortgages Is Good Business
Report Criticizes Housing Regulator on Mortgage Servicing
- Federal Housing Finance Agency Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress – Housing Regulator Failed to Stop Fannie, Freddie Mortgage Issues
- Report | Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Oversight of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Executive Compensation Programs
- Fannie and Freddie’s Regulator Opposes Making Mortgage Giants Subject to FOIA
Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn | Principal Reductions or Cash Payments to Homeowners Who did not Pay their Mortgage is un-American, and it is Wrong
- Rep. Lofgren and 115 Reps. Call for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to Help Underwater Homeowners Via Principal Reductions
- AG Coakley: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Should “Change Course” and Allow Principal Loan Forgiveness for Homeowners
- American Association of Mortgage Investors (AMI) Takes Position against Mortgage Servicing Settlement
Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris ASKS Fannie and Freddie to Stop Foreclosing

Did you hear about this? California’s Attorney General, Kamala Harris has asked the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA, which is the government agency that is acting as conservator for failed mortgage behemoths Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to stop foreclosing in California until it has conducted a “thorough, transparent analysis of whether principal reduction is in the best interests of struggling homeowners as well as taxpayers.”
Well, damn woman… that’s the spirit. I didn’t know you had it in you. Bravo!
Can I just tell you something about this? If this works… I am going to be so pissed off that I may have to be medicated. We’ve already lost a bazillion homes to foreclosure in California, half the damn state is underwater and you know it’s higher than that if you add in real estate commissions and other miscellaneous costs associated with selling a home. And there are about 2 million homes in foreclosure or very seriously delinquent right this moment in this state.
As a result of the foreclosure crisis, we’ve got headline unemployment around 12 percent, with the real number being over 16 percent, and some economists saying under-employment in the state is 22 percent, which isn’t at all hard to believe.

And all of this has created a huge budget deficit of $9.2 billion through June 2013. That’s after making significant cuts, raising taxes on the wealthy, adding a half-cent sales tax bump and assuming the Facebook IPO goes well. And even with that, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office has just released its study of Governor Brown’s numbers, saying…
“We can identify no strong rationale for the administration’s assumption that capital gains will grow very rapidly in 2012 and later years.”
I’m not even going to mention how much yours truly has watched evaporate since 2007. It may not be as much as it cost for the Obamas to take their family ski vacation in Aspen recently, but it’s quite a bit more than it would cost to send SEVEN kids to Harvard for FOUR years.
So, if she ASKS for the foreclosures to stop and they do… well, I’m… I mean… no, I think… but when you… um… oh my God… it’s just that… would you… arghhhhh.
A Mind of His Own…
The U.S. Congress, President Obama, and Secretary Geithner have all been leaning on acting director Edward DeMarco to allow Fannie and Freddie to do more to stop foreclosures, and specifically to start reducing principal for quite some time now, as in over a year, and DeMarco has said, “No.” And when this man says “no” he means no, damn it.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), who has also urged DeMarco to change his position, was quoted in the Huffington Post as having said in a recent interview…
“All the administration can do is keep pushing. DeMarco has the power.”
I’ll say this… it’s fascinating to watch, that’s for sure. I must have missed it, and I do apologize for that, but what’s this form of government we’re now using called? I tried looking it up… is it an “Adhocracy?” Here are a few of the characteristics of an adhocracy according to Wikipedia:
- Little formalization of behavior.
- Job specialization based on formal training.
- A tendency to deploy specialists in small, market-based project teams to do their work.
- Low standardization of procedures.
- Roles not clearly defined.
- Work organization rests on specialized teams.
- Power-shifts to specialized teams.
- High cost of communication.
- Culture based on non-bureaucratic work.
That sounds close, doesn’t it? It’s either that or “Chiefdom,” seems to fit as well.
Ed DeMarco is so lucky that Obama’s a wussy… wait, oh my God, did I just say that out loud? I am so sorry; I can’t believe I did that. But my point is the same.

I’d like to see DeMarco trying this sort of thing with Lyndon Johnson in the Oval Office. Oh, ho, ho… Ed would kick some sand in Lyndon’s face and find himself being called “Stumpy” for the rest of his natural life, you dig what I’m saying here?
Actually, truth be told, I can’t even think of a President in my lifetime that would tolerate this nonsense from some econocrat hired to be a fancy-pants version of a bankruptcy trustee for a failed mortgage company. Were it President Kennedy we were talking about, DeMarco might have climbed into the back of his limo to head home after a long day, only to find Sam Giancana had replaced his driver.
“Yeah, well Jerry wasn’t feeling so good, so I gave him the night off, Mr. DeMarco,” Mooney would have said… as the doors all locked at once. “You just sit back and relax, we’ll be across the river and in Virginia in no time.” And then he’d turn on the radio and start singing “That’s Amore,” along with Dino.

At least that’s how it would go in a Martin Scorsese picture about President Kennedy, which is how I like to think of JFK. Either that, or DeMarco would have found himself on his way to Playa Girón in the Gulf of Cazones on the southern coast of Cuba.
So, Kamala says, “Boy, if you don’t… don’t make me come out there…”
I was about to jump into a Chris Rock routine there for a moment. Actually, I don’t even know if she can pull off that angry black woman thing, but that’s exactly what we need at a time like this. You think Weezy Jefferson would be putting up with some nerdy pasty white guy causing people to be thrown out of their homes? I’d say not. Isabel Sanford would have kicked DeMarco’s butt out into the street last summer before Labor Day.

But, so help me Lord… if Kamala’s “request” accomplishes anything close to what she’s asking for, I’ll probably pass out, hot the floor, and have to be hospitalized for weeks as I sit in the bed mumbling all sorts of strange things to myself.
I mean, people have been abused, tortured, taken years off their lives no doubt, and some even taken their own lives, and all we had to do was get Kamala to request that he cut it out? And she’s only just thinking of this now? She couldn’t have come up with the “maybe I could ask him” idea last year? Just what was it that caused her to have this epiphany right now anyway, and does she THINK that it might work?
Or, is she treating me like I’m a toddler with a learning disability who’s going to give her credit for trying. “It’s okay, at least you tried. Let’s give her a hand everybody, at least Kamala tried. She’s looking out for us all… she’s trying… can’t argue with that… thank you Kamala.”
And what do you suppose is next… I mean if her request happens to fall on Ed’s characteristically deaf ears? Is she going to try again, but with “pretty please and sugar on top?” And what if that doesn’t do the trick either… “Simon says?”
Oh hell… you know what? The bar’s so damn low nowadays, I’m starting to think… well, at least she did ask, and that’s a damn sight more than Governor Brown has done… or at least most of the House of Representatives and the entire United States Senate.
And our state legislature… do we still even have a state legislature? Someone should run over to our state capital and see if everyone’s okay in there. You don’t know… maybe they’ve all been gassed or someone poisoned the water supply and bodies are strewn across the floors in there, dead for weeks or even months… you don’t know, how would you know? It’s been so quiet, I’d forgotten they even exist… maybe they’re all gone?
Alright, so never mind, Kamala… good job, thanks for thinking of us, we do appreciate it… and you’ll let us know if DeMarco says yes, won’t you? We’ll just be waiting over here someplace… you have my number, right? I’ll email my contact information just so you have it.
Sorry everybody… false alarm… Kamala’s asked, and that’s really all anyone can do… so, we’ll let you go back to bed now. Lo siento. Que’ se mejore pronto!
It means… “I’m sorry. And I hope you get better soon.”
Mandelman out.
Rep. Lofgren and 115 Reps. Call for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to Help Underwater Homeowners Via Principal Reductions
Kamala Harris Wants Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to ‘Pause’ Foreclosures
- OCCUPY LOS ANGELES | LETTER TO AG KAMALA HARRIS – We urge you to implement an immediate moratorium on foreclosures so you can investigate
- Kamala Harris: National Mortgage Deal Still Not Good Enough For California
- Petition to Enforce | PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, KAMALA HARRIS v FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION
Legal Fees Mount at Fannie and Freddie
Ed DeMarco | Meet the Man Standing in the Way of Fixing the Economy
MA AG Coakley Lawsuit Against Banks Ripped to Shreds in Settlement
- MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
- Massachusetts AG Martha Coakley (NOT BONDI) Reaches $125M Settlement with Option One, H&R Block Subsidiary Known as Sand Canyon
- AG Coakley: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Should “Change Course” and Allow Principal Loan Forgiveness for Homeowners
NYT: Gingrich’s ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are deeper than you think
Uh oh.
Awfully thoughtful of the Times to toss this grenade in his lap just hours before Nevadans head out to caucus. Then again, what’s the worst that can happen? He loses by 30 points instead of 25? You know who this benefits? Once he became speaker in 1995, Mr. Gingrich’s support loomed large as the companies [...]
AG Coakley: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Should “Change Course” and Allow Principal Loan Forgiveness for Homeowners
The Permanent Foreclosure Crisis and Obama’s Refinancing Obsession
For the umpteenth time, President Obama has announced that his solution to the foreclosure crisis is to encourage "responsible" homeowners to refinance at lower interest rates. Adopting the Tea Party rhetoric and blaming home buyers who got houses in 2006 for their inability to foresee what few economists foresaw, Obama has steadfastly refused to push for principal reductions and payment suspensions for homeowners behind in payments, lest their luckier neighbors who bought at lower prices become resentful. As a result, he continues to offer help to homeowners who need it least.
Behind the rhetoric is an important policy choice: who will bear the billions of mortgage losses that have yet to be flushed out of the system. Principal reduction modifications for defaulted borrowers would distribute the losses among taxpayers (via Fannie and Freddie), private investors and banks (who hold non-GSE loans), and give underwater homeowners some relief. More importantly, principal modifications mitigate the aggregate losses to the system while accelerating the necessary deleveraging. Refinancing current borrowers does nothing to prevent the huge deadweight losses from continuing foreclosures, at 50% loss severities, on homes whose owners are delinquent. Choosing to do no more for the 7 million or so delinquent mortgage debtors means maximizing losses to those homeowners, but also to taxpayers and investors. It would certainly help to continue driving down home prices, which does benefit new first-time buyers, but at a huge aggregate cost.
In fact, as conservator of the nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the federal government could make the needed modifications of delinquent mortgages happen with a stroke of the pen, more or less. Instead, the Administration proposes the dubious strategy of loading up the FHA portfolio with 4% mortgages at 125% loan-to-value ratios, thus continuing the process of transferring future mortgage losses from banks to taxpayers, and amplifying those losses, while letting the foreclosure crisis continue, just as Mitt Romney proposes. Nothing about the refinancing strategy moves forward the process of realigning mortgage debt to home values. Instead, the strategy relies on the doubtful proposition that home values will soon return to rising at their pre-2007 clip.
Pacta sunt servanda and the housing market and broader economy be damned.
FHFA Statement on Freddie Mac “Refinance” Story RE Betting Against American Homeowners
New Romney Florida ad: You don’t really want to nominate a disgraced Freddie Mac shill, do you?
Gloves off.
I understand why he’d want to hit Newt hard on Freddie in Florida, which has taken a beating from the housing downturn. What I don’t understand is what he’ll say when Newt reminds the world tonight that Mitt put more than $250,000 in mutual funds that invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, among other [...]
Fraudclosure Radio | Today (1pm ET) & Tomorrow (7pm ET) RI State Senator Moura on Freddie/Fannie’s Manufactured-Fraudclosure Tactics
Petition to Enforce | PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, KAMALA HARRIS v FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION
- Kamala Harris | California Breaks from 50-State Probe into Mortgage Fraudclosures
- KABOOM | Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Subpoenas Lender Processing Services (LPS) in Wide-Ranging Probe of Mortgage and Fraudclosure Practices
- CA Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Announces Creation of Mortgage Fraud Strike Force to Protect Homeowners
FBI LAUNCHES PROBE OF FANNIE, FREDDIE
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac | An Inconvenient Truth
Robbing Peter to Pay Paul: US Economy Edition
The Administration seems to have cut a deal to extend the payroll tax cut, which is a smart economic move in terms of trying to support demand. But it's being paid for by an increase in the "G-fee" (guarantee fee) charged by FHA and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on the loans they purchase. In other words, anyone refinancing or taking out a mortgage now will be subsidizing reduced payroll taxes. The result is robbing Peter to pay Paul, which means the economic benefits from extending the payroll tax cut are going to be muted by the chill this puts on the struggling housing market.
The argument that it will encourage homeowners to look for non-GSE/FHA loans is pretty silly and hides the foolishness of using housing to pay for payroll tax cuts. Homeowners don't choose whether they have a GSE loan or not. They choose whether to do FHA or not, but if it's not an FHA loan, the homeowner doesn't know if the loan is going to stay in the lender's portfolio, be sold to another lender, be sold to a GSE (and maybe securitized by the GSE) or be privately securitized. Raising the costs of the GSE execution might encourage more portfolio lending, but it's hard to believe that a few basis point change in GSE execution costs is going to suddenly make the private-label securitization market revive. The problems in that market aren't just the economics--particularly of servicing--but the utter lack of trust investors have in the underwriting, documentation, and servicing. For the private-label market to revive, there will need to be a much more significant difference in execution costs between private-label and the GSEs. The increased G-fee doesn't do it.
It's painfully apparent that this Administration doesn't have a housing policy, and that's a serious problem when housing is the anchor weighing down the economy. Consider, on the one hand, the Administration tries to make refinancing easier via the expansion of HARP. Then it raises the "G-fee" that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge on every loan they purchase, which gets passed on the homeowner in the form of a higher mortgage rate. (I'm not sure of the pass-through rate, but I'd guess it's pretty high.) If the Administration is trying to fix the housing market, this sure isn't the way to do it.


