Fannie Mae - Chance auf Verdreifachung bis Juli

vor dem Senat. Bradford hat einige Passagen der Befragung verschriftlicht und im Artikel bei Seeking Alpha veröffentlicht. Navycmd von iHub hat den Artikel mit Hervorhebungen (von ihm) gepostet.

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/...sg.aspx?message_id=167503060

Kurz: Bradford hält das Interview zwar für "verwirrend", versucht aber (wie üblich), die gute Seite zu sehen.

Hier die wichtigsten Absätze (zu lang für deepl)

Senator Tillis from North Carolina had the following exchange with Sandra Thompson:

.

Tillis: Miss Thompson, can you provide more clarity about the prospect of FHFA eventually releasing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from conservatorship? Is there an anticipated time frame and are you concerned about any negative market impacts?

Thompson:Senator that's a great question, certainly we would defer to congress on the exit from conservatorship for the GSEs. In the meantime there are a number of things we are doing. The enterprises are building capital. We are encouraging the Credit Risk Transfer program and we are establishing pricing so we are also supervising them in a safe and sound manner and making sure that they meet their mission so that whenever they exit from conservatorship, they will be ready. I'd also like to mention that there are a number of stakeholders that would likely need to be involved and engaged in a discussion before that ever happened. The Treasury, certainly, as the owner -- the majority owner of the GSEs -- and certainly going to make sure that the taxpayers are adequately compensated. We'd probably have conversations with the Fed and also the Justice Department on outstanding litigation, so just a number of steps that would have to take place before the enterprises would be able to exit conservatorship and they'd have to meet their capital targets which are quite vast.

Needless to say, this was absolutely frightening to hear as a shareholder of these companies where the law is clear that FHFA does not need congress to release Fannie and Freddie from conservatorship. You will see in the following exchange with Senator Hagerty that needing to defer to congress was not in line with his interpretation of the law either. I think what is happening here is that Sandra Thompson is not in a position to do anything on her own, and she has to defer to Treasury, and it sounds like Treasury is looking at possible legislation to best enact its version of housing reform.

That said, let's look at what Hagerty's exchange with Thompson was like. After Tillis came Senator Hagerty from Tennessee:

Hagerty: As director of the FHFA, you are meant to carry out the law, not to be a policy maker, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act does not permit indefinite conservatorships, by definition no conservatorship is meant to be permanent. My question to you: "Will you commit to do everything in your power to fulfilling your statutory mandate to end the conservatorships?"

Thompson:Certainly no one ever expected the enterprises or any financial institution to be in conservatorship for 13 years. We believe that congress has a role and we will be working to help in any way that we can facilitate any questions that you have but we think that this is something that congress needs to work on as well.

Hagerty: Is there any point in the law that says congress must approve an exit from conservatorship?

Thompson: I don't know that they must approve an exit from conservatorship, but just in terms --- there are a number of issues that congress will have to address, specifically if the enterprises exit conservatorship will the companies be private, will they be public, what form will they be in? There's just a whole host of issues that would have to be considered that congress must weigh in on, but certainly FHFA can get the enterprises ready.

Hagerty: Acting director, if you are concerned that the HERA act does not provide adequate clarity, I hope that you will get back to me and my team in the areas that you see inadequacy in the legislation because it is my expectation that the legislation is clear and that an exit is called for.

Hagerty made it clear that Congress is not needed for FHFA to end the conservatorships of Fannie and Freddie. At this point, I was wondering if Sandra Thompson even knows what she is talking about. My interpretation of her commentary thus far was that deferring to congress means that she will defer to what the law says and this is her opportunity to get in front of active legislators and work on potential legislation to best resolve the conservatorships of Fannie and Freddie --- a noble cause. This perspective began to grow roots when Senator Crapo came up next and pointed out earlier conversations about potential pending legislation.

After Hagerty, Senator Crapo made it sound like there was a back channel discussion regarding pending housing reform legislation being had between FHFA and his office:

Crapo: Let me start out with you director Thompson. First of all I very much appreciated our visit last Tuesday. I just had one quick question for you which we discussed then. Housing finance reform, which you know is a top priority of mine and it's been my view that congress must find a pathway forward to resolve the conservatorship of our GSEs and do so expeditiously. In that context, I applaud Senator Toomey for releasing his housing finance reform principles last March which reflect many of the goals that I outlined when I was addressing this issue as the Chairman of the committee. These principles include establishing stronger levels of taxpayer protection, preserving the 30 year fixed rate mortgage, increasing competition among mortgage guarantors, ensuring a level playing field for lenders of all sizes and promoting access to affordable housing. My question to you is if confirmed as the FHFA director, would you be willing to support legislation that is consistent with these principles?

Thompson: Absolutely. Thank you senator.

Crapo: Nice brief answer, and the right answer --- I appreciate it.

So, now things were making more sense. It sounds like Thompson is working on potential legislative reform in addition to her own versions of reform. Needless to say, her commentary so far was arguably confusing because of her insistence to defer to Congress which out of context doesn't really make sense. Senator Toomey followed up with some more pointed questions to prove to the panel that Sandra Thompson did realize that she could end the conservatorships without Congress:

Toomey:It's my view that HERA clearly does authorize the FHFA to take the GSEs out of conservatorship. Can you tell me specifically is there something that is lacking in legislation that you think is required for you to move in that direction?

Thompson: FHFA is going to have to have a conversation with Treasury. The end state of the enterprises is something that Congress would have to legislate. If the enterprises reach their capital requirements that we've established, we certainly would be having conversations with lots of different stakeholders, but the end state, if Congress wants the enterprises to come out as-is, then that I think is doable within the statute, but if there is another outcome --- if they wanted to be a utility or if they want other charters --- those are things that Congress is going to have to do.

Toomey:Well sure, if we wanted to change the existing statutes and change existing charters then we would have to pass legislation to do so, but my point is that's not the only option available. Would you commit to going as far as you legally can in moving in the direction of coming out of conservatorship?

Thompson:I will commit to positioning the enterprises and working with the Congress to do whatever is necessary to move them out of conservatorship in a responsible time frame. We will certainly be wanting to work with Congress and other stakeholders on this issue.

As such, it is more of a preference of hers to work with Congress, and why not? After all, these are the people she needs to approve of her so that she can become permanent director of the FHFA, and it sounds like at least Crapo wants to pass pending legislation so she has to play the game to get into the seat.

Die Anhörung von Sandra Thompson vor dem Senat (siehe Text in # 930) lässt klar erkennen, dass es zumindest den Fragestellern aus dem Senat wichtig war, dass der Kurs von Freilassung/KE weiter beschritten wird.

Die Fragesteller haben Thompson teils förmlich darauf festgenagelt. Sie hat teils ausweichend, teils kooperierend geantwortet, insgesamt "willig" hinsichtlich Freilassung, aber nebulös ("ja, aber erst wenn die Kapitaldecke erreicht ist, damit alles schön solide wird, und dann auch nur nach Rücksprache mit der Regierung ... blah blubb").

Wichtiger als die Antworten Thompsons finde ich allerdings die Fragen von Seiten des Senats. Sie machen unmissverständlich klar, dass der Kurs von Freilassung/KE weiterhin auf der Agenda steht, und zwar offenbar unabhängig davon, ob Demokraten oder Republikaner am Ruder sind.

Dies ist auch daran erkennbar, dass der NWS nicht wieder aktiviert wurde - und wohl auch nicht mehr wird (Die LP hingegen - siehe letztes Posting - steigt weiterhin.)

Nun dürfte sie (Yellen) es allerdings bald "eilig" haben.