At the FHFA, Singh was involved in strategic planning to help attract private capital to the mortgage industry, a key goal of former Acting Director Edward DeMarco…
Miller said the GSEs' profitability also is "driven by income from their retained portfolios, which benefit from being funded through Treasury capital support at low rates the private market cannot obtain."
The number of mortgage companies in California rose 7.8 percent on a sequential basis. Nationwide, there are 392,896 federally registered mortgage loan officers…
It would either require an act of Congress or a commitment from Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s regulator to bring the two GSEs out of government conservatorship, depending on which expert you believe, and perhaps who is heading the Treasury Department. Investment banker Jim Millstein is once again pushing for a plan to deal with the future of Fannie and Freddie, saying the two GSEs should be allowed to rebuild capital. In a recent report, Millstein – who at the Treasury Department oversaw the restructuring of bailed-out insurer American International Group – says if the two firms are allowed to recapitalize, they could create a cash cushion that can be placed in front of Treasury’s existing backstop.
Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley last week filed suit against Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, alleging that the GSEs are violating state law by failing to let non-profits buy foreclosed homes to sell them back to their former homeowners. In 2012, Massachusetts lawmakers passed An Act to Prevent Unnecessary and Unreasonable Foreclosures, which prohibits creditors from blocking or placing conditions on home sales to non-profits that intend to resell those properties back to their former owners. The AG’s complaint, filed in Suffolk Superior Court, says the GSEs failed to comply with the Bay State law by “blocking foreclosure buyback programs” designed to help residents keep their homes.
Attorneys for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac junior shareholders have doubled down in their assertions that the government had no authority to initiate a “net-worth sweep” of nearly all GSE profits. They say a federal court should not only decline Uncle Sam’s recent motion to dismiss but also “vacate the illegal sweep amendment.” In a joint rebuttal motion filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, attorneys for Perry Capital and Fairholme Funds note that in attempt to evade judicial scrutiny, the Treasury Department and the Federal Housing Finance Agency raise “a host of frivolous and irrelevant challenges” to the plaintiffs’ legal standing while ignoring investors” core assertion that the 2012 sweep was illegal.
RSS