Fannie Mae is informing the mortgage cooperatives it works with that going forward that all the different affinity groups doing business with the government-sponsored enterprise will be treated the same when it comes to guaranty fees and charges for its Desktop Underwriter program, Inside Mortgage Finance has learned. One executive close to the situation told Inside Mortgage Finance that action by Fannie essentially “equalizes” all cooperatives in terms of the pricing breaks they receive from the GSE. Some affinity relationships have been in place...

A temporary exemption for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgages is among the plethora of provisions contained within the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s long-awaited “qualified mortgage” rule issued last week. Even so, credit unions fear onerous GSE buyback requirements may be an unintended consequence of the new rule.Called for by the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB’s QM rule lists the characteristics of a qualified mortgage, or one that regulators will presume will be within a borrower’s ability to repay the loan.

Last week’s $10 billion settlement between Fannie Mae and Bank of America over outstanding and potential repurchase claims is at least a truce in the bitter battle between the GSE and the bank that has simmered since the housing bubble burst. But the jury is still out as to how much business the two companies will do again going forward. Under the agreement, BofA will pay Fannie $3.55 billion cash and spend $6.75 billion to buy back some 30,000 loans sold by Countrywide Financial to the GSE. The “comprehensive solution” between the firms covers current and future repurchase obligations related to loans with an outstanding balance of $297 billion as of Nov. 30, 2012, that were originated and sold directly to Fannie from 2000 through 2008. The bank will also pay Fannie $1.3 billion in “compensatory fee obligations” for taking too long to address foreclosures.

With roughly $900 billion of mortgage servicing rights changing hands since October (or about to), and more on the way, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be busy in the months ahead approving the transfer of MSRs.Much of the MSR product being sold by Bank of America in its recent deal with Nationstar Mortgage and Walter Investment Management Corp. is tied to loans guaranteed by Fannie, Freddie and Ginnie Mae.Servicing advisors who’ve worked with the GSEs note that their approval on a servicing sale is hardly a routine matter, especially if the product has high delinquencies, which is the case with some of the BofA receivables.

It’s no secret that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are back in the black when it comes to earnings, but in the quarters ahead the two are likely to perform even better as delinquencies and foreclosures continue to wane, and they move to recapture some of their massive loss reserves. But another factor could bolster their earnings as well: large legal settlements with the nation’s megabanks, which will go straight to their bottom line, according to an analysis done by Inside The GSEs. As part of Fannie’s buyback settlement with Bank of America (see related story on page 1), Fannie will receive some $3.6 billion in cash from the bank, plus BofA is repurchasing almost $7 billion in legacy loans.

Interest rates on adjustable-rate mortgages fell to their lowest level ever early this year, but consumers continue to prefer fixed-rate products. Freddie Mac reported that the average initial rate for one-year ARMs offered in early January was just 2.56 percent, the lowest ever recorded in its 29-year-old survey. Fewer than half the participating lenders offer one-year ARMs, but initial rates on the more common three-year and five-year hybrids were 2.72 percent and ... [Includes one data chart]

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined did more business in single-family mortgage-backed securities issuance in 2012 than in any year since 2003, with a growing share of their business coming from small and mid-sized lenders, according to an Inside The GSEs analysis. The two GSEs pumped out a staggering $1.266 trillion in new single-family MBS in 2012, a 48.1 percent increase over their total production in 2011. It marked the biggest annual output by Fannie and Freddie since the all-time record of $1.912 trillion nine years earlier.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency announced two key staffing changes this week, including the appointment of Sandra Thompson as deputy director of the FHFA’s Division of Housing Mission and Goals. Thompson will move from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to the Finance Agency where she will oversee the FHFA’s housing and regulatory policy, financial analysis and policy research.She will join the FHFA in March after serving at the FDIC in various capacities over the past 23 years, most recently as director, Division of Risk Management Supervision.

A rejuvenated Mortgage Partnership Finance program helped its six participating Federal Home Loan Banks more than double the number of home loans funded in 2012, program officials announced this week. Last year, the FHLBanks of Chicago, Boston, Des Moines, New York, Pittsburgh and Topeka purchased $14.33 billion of loans from member banks, a dramatic increase from $6.99 billion in 2011.Introduced in 1997, the MPF provides member institutions a competitive alternative to selling to the GSEs or holding loans in portfolio and retaining all the risk.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency should review the concerns of industry trade groups about Fannie Mae’s plans to reduce the cost of lender “force-placed insurance” and then facilitate a “collaborative resolution” that’s open and transparent, industry groups contend. In a letter to the FHFA earlier this month, the American Bankers Association warned that Fannie’s March 2012 request for proposal inviting insurance companies to compete for the GSEs lender-placed insurance business directly as a way to ensure a significant reduction in insurance costs is rife with unintended consequences to the industry. “The proposal, if adopted, effectively would allow Fannie Mae to pick winners and losers among insurers, would be potentially inconsistent with state insurance requirements and would dramatically alter existing servicing operations, contracts and costs,” noted the ABA. “Such a proposed major reform of the mortgage servicing market should be considered in the sunshine.”