The second most senior Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee has filed a bill that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce the principal on loans they own or guarantee.The Principal Reduction Act of 2012, H.R. 3841, sponsored by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-CA, would prevent foreclosure of, and provide for the reduction of principal on, mortgages held by the GSEs.Specifically the bill would require Fannie and Freddie to reduce principal to a 90 percent loan-to-value ratio. It would protect taxpayers by requiring shared appreciation of one-third of the profits if the home is sold and it would allow the GSEs to recapture any reduced funds if the loan subsequently defaults and enters foreclosure.

Congress should consider changing the mandate of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to address a “conflict of interest” that inhibits the Finance Agency’s supervision of the GSEs, a housing economist told senators this week.Testifying before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Columbia School of Business Professor Christopher Mayer said a significant problem with the ongoing operation of the GSEs has been the failure to adequately address operational conflicts.“The evidence suggests that the conflict of interest between the businesses of providing mortgage guarantees and managing a large retained portfolio of mortgages and [mortgage-backed securities] has led to obstacles to normal credit conditions,” said Mayer.

House Democrats doubled down on their ongoing feud with the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency this week as they demand answers from the GSE regulator about a previously unknown 2010 Fannie Mae pilot program to forgive borrower’s mortgage debt that was shelved due to what Dems say was a philosophical opposition to loan writedowns.In a letter to FHFA Acting Director Edward DeMarco, Reps. Elijah Cummings, D-MD, and John Tierney, D-MA, of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, accused the agency head of being less than forthright in his response to lawmakers justifying the FHFA’s position against the writedown of underwater GSE mortgages.“The single most significant revelation in your letter to Congress is that, even based on your own questionable assumptions and data, principal reduction programs serve the taxpayer interests even when compared to your preferred alternative of forbearance,” said Cummings and Tierney.

Industry insiders are cautiously expressing optimism about widespread reports that the Federal Housing Finance Agency is having second thoughts about implementing its proposed overhaul of mortgage servicing compensation in the face of massive lender pushback.Numerous published reports have fueled the industry’s expectation that the FHFA is working to tactfully back away from proposed alternatives for a government-sponsored enterprise compensation model intended to benefit servicers, consumers and investors.The Finance Agency’s September discussion paper set out two alternatives for changing the current 25 basis-point minimum fee compensation method for mortgage loan servicers. One alternative would reduce the minimum-servicing fee to as low as 12.5 bps payment with a 5 bps reserve fund, and the second alternative would institute a fee-for-service method whereby the loan servicer would be compensated with a flat fee per month for each performing loan they service.

Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac retained sizeable shares of mortgage securities with a not insignificant bump during the fourth quarter of 2011, according to a new Inside The GSEs analysis.The GSEs issued a combined $261.6 billion in MBS in the fourth quarter, a 13.0 percent increase from the third quarter.Fannie and Freddie dropped to $852.8 billion in MBS issued for the year, an 11.1 percent decrease in MBS issuance during the January to December period. The GSEs’ issuance represented 72.1 percent of total MBS produced during 2011.Between the two companies, Fannie and Freddie registered an ample 77.1 percent share of new MBS issued during the quarter that ended Dec. 31, 2011, up from the 69.1 percent the two companies held during the third quarter and surpassing the 74.8 percent share both GSEs held during the first quarter.

A Federal judge in Chicago tabled for the moment the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s hopes of a speedy ruling in its favor of its lawsuit to exempt Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from the city’s new vacant building ordinance, although the judge appears open to hearing the FHFA’s jurisdictional argument.Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Joan Lefkow denied the FHFA’s request for summary judgment in its lawsuit against Chicago while she ordered the city to file its response to the Finance Agency’s litigation.Filed in December, the FHFA’s lawsuit on behalf of the two GSEs seeks to prevent the city from enforcing the ordinance which requires mortgagees to pay a $500 registration fee for vacant properties and requires monthly inspections of mortgage properties to determine if they are vacant.

The five large mortgage servicers that agreed to a $25 billion settlement with 49 state attorneys general this week have already established more than enough reserves to cover their costs, analysts say. Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Ally Financial agreed to pay $20.0 billion in financial relief to homeowners and $5.0 billion to federal and state governments, of which $1.5 billion will be used to compensate some borrowers who have gone through foreclosure. Both the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency levied separate monetary penalties...

A number of small to mid-size mortgage firms appear to be taking a second look at holding onto their newly created mortgage servicing rights. There are a handful of forces at work driving this dynamic for smaller companies. First, some big servicers such as Bank of America are dumping their MSRs, in some cases because of the increasingly unattractive legal environment, while others are trying to align their portfolios for the upcoming Basel III capital framework or reacting to hedging strain in a low interest-rate environment. Additionally, the economics are developing in such a way as to encourage smaller...

One potential coup for the mortgage industry in the landmark multistate robosigning settlement announced this week is the detailed look at national servicing standards at a time when the states are racing to implement their separate foreclosure and servicing reforms. The terms for the $25 billion deal reached by 49 states, federal officials and the five major banks – Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Ally Financial – have yet to be released. However, one document that immediately made its way onto the settlement’s new website was an overview of the new servicing...

The mortgage settlement agreement between state and federal law enforcement agencies and the country’s five largest loan servicers will unleash a new foreclosure wave that will cause real estate-owned properties and distressed home sales to increase, according to market observers. Having the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s REO Initiative ready will be useful when the foreclosure and REO tsunami comes rolling in, academics, economists and analysts agree. The number of properties classified by banks as “real estate-owned,” or REO, has declined over the past year. The reason: the robosigning scandals...