Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #fanniegate
Most recents (24)
GIFTED SPS: CAPITAL DISTRIBUTION➡️COMMON EQUITY ESCROWED
Cash div on the Income Stmnt?👇Fraud. Neither a div nor cash.
GOAL:$0 EPS. It can't appear as OCI either.
A pure Equity transaction(Bce Sheet): SPS debited from RE in the absence of APIC. Both operations missing.#Fanniegate
Cash div on the Income Stmnt?👇Fraud. Neither a div nor cash.
GOAL:$0 EPS. It can't appear as OCI either.
A pure Equity transaction(Bce Sheet): SPS debited from RE in the absence of APIC. Both operations missing.#Fanniegate
The Income Stmnt would be correct if:
-A NWS div like before.
-FHFA-C activates the Cumulative feature of the SPS div, as Net Income attributable to Cs captures this div debited (payable) from Retained Earnings in the future.
It wasn't this case,but a payment TODAY of SPS,debited
-A NWS div like before.
-FHFA-C activates the Cumulative feature of the SPS div, as Net Income attributable to Cs captures this div debited (payable) from Retained Earnings in the future.
It wasn't this case,but a payment TODAY of SPS,debited
TODAY (both operations missing on the bce sheet),regardless of the SPS redeemed for cash in the future, which is a different operation.
Bove provided the alibi of this, adding"a unique type of loan." It's SPS and it wasn't a div. Even if it were a stock dividend, same accounting.
Bove provided the alibi of this, adding"a unique type of loan." It's SPS and it wasn't a div. Even if it were a stock dividend, same accounting.
$400B CAPITAL SHORTFALL OVER 205B C.REQUIREMENT
C.covers unexpected losses.
Actual C.shortfall posted=$304B,but an offset for $95B gifted SPS reduces Retained Earnings(C.C.).FnF evade it with fraud(SPS missing).Someone has to pay for it,like the initial $1B SPS👇
Joke.#Fanniegate
C.covers unexpected losses.
Actual C.shortfall posted=$304B,but an offset for $95B gifted SPS reduces Retained Earnings(C.C.).FnF evade it with fraud(SPS missing).Someone has to pay for it,like the initial $1B SPS👇
Joke.#Fanniegate
A joke is authorized in the FHFA-C's Incidental Power(FHFA's best interests) if the Common Equity is held in escrow, pursuant to the exceptions 1,2,3,4 in the CFR1237.12. I.e.,at some point, it'd be reversed(SPS cancelled)
Just like the 10%/NWS divs for SPS reduction(HERA)/Recap.
Just like the 10%/NWS divs for SPS reduction(HERA)/Recap.
Finally,Capital Reserve/Surplus (bce sheet: the portion of Equity/NW above the Capital Stock)=$0
FnF pass $94B NW off as Capital Reserve(Retained Earnings)
In truth,that NW is the $94.7B SPS missing on their bce sheets(NWS 2.0)to evade the offset and sell the "build Capital" lie.
FnF pass $94B NW off as Capital Reserve(Retained Earnings)
In truth,that NW is the $94.7B SPS missing on their bce sheets(NWS 2.0)to evade the offset and sell the "build Capital" lie.
Last Day of Arguments #Fanniegate Fans!
Let's pick up where we left off, in the middle of Ps closing. We'd just seen plaintiffs trilemma, and any one of them proves their case.
Let's pick up where we left off, in the middle of Ps closing. We'd just seen plaintiffs trilemma, and any one of them proves their case.
Of course DeMarco's selective memory has deleted all his meetings with Geithner, so Ps need to rely on emails discussing those meetings to show the jury what really happened. But critically we don't need to prove ill will or malfeasance here, gross negligence is sufficient.
Hamish: How reasonable is it that someone wrote out that memo about the meeting with Geithner and DeMarco and it not be true? That email shows they weren't concerned about the companies or the market, the rush was because they WERE making profits above the dividends, building...
Hamish Hume for the Plaintiffs
First, I want to thank you and I'm sure Mr Stern will agree, your lives have been disrupted and I know at times it seems messy and confusing and boring, and I know how hard you've worked, we've seen you taking notes, and this is how our system works
First, I want to thank you and I'm sure Mr Stern will agree, your lives have been disrupted and I know at times it seems messy and confusing and boring, and I know how hard you've worked, we've seen you taking notes, and this is how our system works
we've had a disagreement for a very long time, and its messy, but now we get a chance to summarize and hopefully clear up all the confusion. So I'd like to begin with what the question is, because that is critical and its this,
By agreeing to the Net. Worth. Sweep... on Aug. 17
By agreeing to the Net. Worth. Sweep... on Aug. 17
Long day #Fanniegate Fans, in a long trial.
Too much time spent on motions meant we only got half the closings, but let's review them a bit.
Too much time spent on motions meant we only got half the closings, but let's review them a bit.
There was a brief discussion of the issues to be addressed after the rebuttal case finished, but we'll see that when we get to it. Dharan was here for his cross examination. Ds brought up the draft issue but Dharan explained it again for them.
Ds: You understand that these are not official projections right?
Dha: I don't know what that means
Ds point to Benson's testimony, "call it an unofficial forecast", "more of a strategic thought piece"
Dha: Yes it was part of a strategic planning meeting
Dha: I don't know what that means
Ds point to Benson's testimony, "call it an unofficial forecast", "more of a strategic thought piece"
Dha: Yes it was part of a strategic planning meeting
You're in for real treat today #Fanniegate Fans!
Today we start the rebuttal case with Dr Dharan re-taking the stand, he's been here the since day 2, has heard every word of the Ds case, and this time the gloves are coming off...
Today we start the rebuttal case with Dr Dharan re-taking the stand, he's been here the since day 2, has heard every word of the Ds case, and this time the gloves are coming off...
Ps: Did you hear Attari's and Satriano's testimony about the DTAs?
Dha: Yes
Ps: And did that change your opinion?
Dha: No
Ps: Attari said something about the DTA being only temporary?
Dha: He wasn't very clear, but got the accounting wrong. Once it comes in it stays as an asset
Dha: Yes
Ps: And did that change your opinion?
Dha: No
Ps: Attari said something about the DTA being only temporary?
Dha: He wasn't very clear, but got the accounting wrong. Once it comes in it stays as an asset
Dha [cont]: future income adds to the net worth without impacting the DTA, which basically just converts to a cash asset. For example, if you have $10 inc and would owe $3 tax but you keep $3 b/c of DTA, the value of the DTA goes down by $3 but the cash goes up by $3.
Vincere Aut Mori #Fanniegate Fans!
Cooper & Kirk's [on of Ps reps] motto seems appropriate going into Monday. Let's see what else happened Friday so we're prepared.
Cooper & Kirk's [on of Ps reps] motto seems appropriate going into Monday. Let's see what else happened Friday so we're prepared.
Ds call their last witness, Satriano, head of accounting at FHFA for the last 10 years, and worked there and at their predecessor, OFHEO, for the last 19 years. Started his career at GAO [I think DeMarco did too, would be interesting to see if they overlapped there].
Satriano explains that FHFA regulates FnF and the FHLBs, he oversees the accounting office which decides how to record accounting info and reviews the SEC docs to insure transparency.
Ds jump right in with an email from Ugoletti to Satriano and a bunch of FHFA big wigs.
Ds jump right in with an email from Ugoletti to Satriano and a bunch of FHFA big wigs.
Alright #Fanniegate Fans, lets start with a summary of Lamberth jury trial Day 1.
First, apparently a juror didn't show up (or maybe 2?) and their are now 9 jurors seated (probably a jury of 6 with 3 alternates but not 100% clear). This delayed the start of opening arguments until after 11:30am. Some brief argument over a tsy document but it was included.
Ps opening was extremely clear. Tsy got $150B from NWS than the 10% original deal (explained step by step with slides). JPS Ps paid in $33B and only received $5B back in dividends, and NWS cut of all possibility of future dividends (clear and simple slides), so $27B down...
"EACH ENTERPRISE REMAINS UNDERCAPITALIZED"
Citing the 2021 FHFA report to Congress.
He ignores the Capital Rule is effective Feb16,2021 and that it's been concealed until the 2Q2022 earnings reports, showing a whopping $313B Capital deficit($182+$131👇)
$398B adjusted.#Fanniegate
Citing the 2021 FHFA report to Congress.
He ignores the Capital Rule is effective Feb16,2021 and that it's been concealed until the 2Q2022 earnings reports, showing a whopping $313B Capital deficit($182+$131👇)
$398B adjusted.#Fanniegate
Adjusted for SPS increased for free,reducing Retained Earnings(C.C.).SPS missing on their bce sheets to evade it(@SEC_Enforcement)
Capital is meant to cover unexpected losses and "protect the taxpayer" from SPS purchases when negative NW.
$461B of Capital generated held in escrow
Capital is meant to cover unexpected losses and "protect the taxpayer" from SPS purchases when negative NW.
$461B of Capital generated held in escrow
(*) Concealed until the 1Q2022 earnings reports.
@RepFrenchHill @RepBlaine @RepLoudermilk @RepRalphNorman
@RepFrenchHill @RepBlaine @RepLoudermilk @RepRalphNorman
SECRET PLAN (THE LAW)
A $301B div (Core Capital) was used to repay the SPS and Recap, under the exceptions to the Restr on Capital Distr. SPS for free, a joke.
Unwound:
-SPS canceled
-$178B UST net refund
Both tax-exempt profit (C.C.)
-Warrant canceled.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
A $301B div (Core Capital) was used to repay the SPS and Recap, under the exceptions to the Restr on Capital Distr. SPS for free, a joke.
Unwound:
-SPS canceled
-$178B UST net refund
Both tax-exempt profit (C.C.)
-Warrant canceled.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
Once FnF meet the threshold to resume the div payment,the cumulative div on the SPS repaid in 2013/2014, for FMCC/FNMA, resp.,is assessed 0%. Each "purchase" carried its own IRR. 0% due to the illegal collateral W (barred in Fee Limitation),security to (iii) protect the taxpayer.
UST hasn't purchased 1 security of FnF. It got the initial $1B SPS and Warrant for free and then,everything is INCREASED(fraud)
The initial gifts were illegal in the Charter +barred in the FHFA-C's power (C.C. reduction)
The W additionally credited to Additional Paid-In C.(fraud)
The initial gifts were illegal in the Charter +barred in the FHFA-C's power (C.C. reduction)
The W additionally credited to Additional Paid-In C.(fraud)
WRITE DOWN🆚WRITE OFF
The atty also requested "writing down the LP of the SPS to 0". Not only he didn't add that there must be a tax-exempt profit (Core Capital),but also he uses write down, used for an asset price reduction, but when it's reduced to...#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
The atty also requested "writing down the LP of the SPS to 0". Not only he didn't add that there must be a tax-exempt profit (Core Capital),but also he uses write down, used for an asset price reduction, but when it's reduced to...#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
zero, it's called "write-off",since there are no more incremental write-downs and it involves a credit to a profit acct.
Even a write down involves a profit, because SPS are obligations of FnF(debentures)
In this world,if you are pardoned debt,it's a profit for you.
The same they
Even a write down involves a profit, because SPS are obligations of FnF(debentures)
In this world,if you are pardoned debt,it's a profit for you.
The same they
are illegally increased (unique=ISSUED separately each time), he wants to simply reduce the price to zero and evade to record any profit (Core Capital)
The more Capital needs, the more stock offerings for the hedge funds and assault on the ownership.
@WhiteHouse @SEC_Enforcement
The more Capital needs, the more stock offerings for the hedge funds and assault on the ownership.
@WhiteHouse @SEC_Enforcement
THE ARTICLE ADVOCATES FOR KEEPING THE CHARTER
FnF arent't liquidity providers.That's the #Fed.FnF buy mortgages for a guaranty mortgage securitization biz.
Cross-subsidy:even the authors claim that it's a common feature among insurers."Now,considerably less".This is...#Fanniegate
FnF arent't liquidity providers.That's the #Fed.FnF buy mortgages for a guaranty mortgage securitization biz.
Cross-subsidy:even the authors claim that it's a common feature among insurers."Now,considerably less".This is...#Fanniegate
because they realized that all the borrowers authorized in the Charter pose similar risk at origination, since the Charter's requirement is just LTV<80%.
They claim that the UST backup in the Charter,to "ensure their solvency", is a taxpayer subsidy, ignoring that the true backup
They claim that the UST backup in the Charter,to "ensure their solvency", is a taxpayer subsidy, ignoring that the true backup
of FnF is their Capital Reserve ($252b as of Dec 2021 w/ the secret plan),as 4th layer of protection. The other 3 are:
-The Charter's Credit Enhancement clause: borrower bears losses(max 80%LTV: PMI or down payment),...
-Collateral
-Loan Loss Reserve
So,the
-The Charter's Credit Enhancement clause: borrower bears losses(max 80%LTV: PMI or down payment),...
-Collateral
-Loan Loss Reserve
So,the
THE CFOs' ILLEGAL ACCOUNTING MANEUVERS WITH THE SPS INCREASED FOR FREE (COUNT 3 & 4)
FnF report Comprehensive Income, not just Net Income.
What FnF do:
Not an expense result of operations
A change in Equity from nonowner sources
Distribution to a Preferred Stockholder.#Fanniegate
FnF report Comprehensive Income, not just Net Income.
What FnF do:
Not an expense result of operations
A change in Equity from nonowner sources
Distribution to a Preferred Stockholder.#Fanniegate
This is why FnF don't include it in Other Comprehensive Income for the Total Comprehensive Income,but outside the Comprehensive Income, as a distribution of income, like occurs with a cash dividend to the JPS/SPS holders.
This is misleading because the ending result is Net Income
This is misleading because the ending result is Net Income
attributable to shareholders, but it's also known as Net Income distributable to shareholders. By considering it like a cash div, there's no income left for distribution, when that's untrue. SPS increased for free means that there's no cash wire,so the Net Income is available for
ALITO GOT IT WRONG CALLING THE 6TH AMNT "4TH"
SPS issued for free:
Initial $3b
SPS increased for free:
Dec2017,4th amnt: $3b in 1Q2018.NW=$3b,the rest swept to UST.
Sept2019,5th amnt:max NW=$20b/$25b,resp.
Jan2021,6th amnd:NW increases until Capital requirement is met.#Fanniegate
SPS issued for free:
Initial $3b
SPS increased for free:
Dec2017,4th amnt: $3b in 1Q2018.NW=$3b,the rest swept to UST.
Sept2019,5th amnt:max NW=$20b/$25b,resp.
Jan2021,6th amnd:NW increases until Capital requirement is met.#Fanniegate
We see in the screenshots that the maximum amount of Net Worth they are allowed to hold, it's called Applicable Capital Reserve, like in the 3rd amndt.
But now, it isn't Capital Reserve as SPS for free reduce the Core Capital.
So,NW increase=SPS, not Capital.
NWS with other name.
But now, it isn't Capital Reserve as SPS for free reduce the Core Capital.
So,NW increase=SPS, not Capital.
NWS with other name.
Also,we see that the Jan 2021, 6th amndt to PA, isn't exceptional. The maximum Net Worth is increased, like in the 4th and 5th amendments.
Alito passed it off as a game changer that "eliminated the (Equity holders') injuries."
🚨JPS holders aren't FnF shareholders.@TheJusticeDept
Alito passed it off as a game changer that "eliminated the (Equity holders') injuries."
🚨JPS holders aren't FnF shareholders.@TheJusticeDept
INC POWER: IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF FHFA-C,NOT @FHFA
"Authorized by this section". It should've been Act,like FDI Act.Drafted by Calabria?
Power: S&S condition. FHFA chose solvent 1st(reduce SPS)instead of soundness(1st,Recap until Undercap for release,then reduce SPS)#Fanniegate
"Authorized by this section". It should've been Act,like FDI Act.Drafted by Calabria?
Power: S&S condition. FHFA chose solvent 1st(reduce SPS)instead of soundness(1st,Recap until Undercap for release,then reduce SPS)#Fanniegate
Other examples of this Inc Power:
-The best interests of FnF is recapitalization(earnings),but FHFA chose a prudent stance forcing them to over-reserve for future losses(more than 2x the actual credit loss through 2011),increasing the losses(SPS)
-Selling off loans to reduce risk
-The best interests of FnF is recapitalization(earnings),but FHFA chose a prudent stance forcing them to over-reserve for future losses(more than 2x the actual credit loss through 2011),increasing the losses(SPS)
-Selling off loans to reduce risk
Multiple examples of what a conservator can do,instead of focusing on earnings.What also is behind the word "may".But once FnF post earnings (C. Capital),it's kept for Recap.
Scotus interpreted it w/ "in the best interests of the Agency and,by extension,the public it serves".Sick
Scotus interpreted it w/ "in the best interests of the Agency and,by extension,the public it serves".Sick
THE SCOTUS OPINION CALLS THE NWS "PATH OF REHABILITATION"
It bought @TheJusticeDept's argument contending that the NWS was necessary to preserve the UST funding commitment,as the 10% div made(losses)FnF request draws from UST to pay it,depleting the funding commitment.#Fanniegate
It bought @TheJusticeDept's argument contending that the NWS was necessary to preserve the UST funding commitment,as the 10% div made(losses)FnF request draws from UST to pay it,depleting the funding commitment.#Fanniegate
The Justice mixed up the Authority of UST to Purchase Obligations (SPS) that HERA required the emergency determination(ii)to prevent disruptions in the availability of mortgage finance, with the rehabilitation of FnF, which is exclusively the FHFA-C's power: "Put FnF in a sound
and solvent condition".I.e.,Recap and reduce the SPS,resp,what the Restriction on Capital Distributions and exception B,are about.
He mentioned the deadline to purchase obligations under this provision(g):Dec 2009,related to the purchase,not future purchase w/ funding commitment.
He mentioned the deadline to purchase obligations under this provision(g):Dec 2009,related to the purchase,not future purchase w/ funding commitment.
ACTING @FHFA DTR,S.THOMPSON,SPENT 23 YRS AT THE FDIC BOD PRIOR JOINING FHFA IN 2013
HERA mirrors the FDI Act.Thus,it has the same:
1-Restriction on Capital Distribution:threadreaderapp.com/thread/1378953…
2-Conservatorship section:conservator's Power,Inc Power,etc.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
HERA mirrors the FDI Act.Thus,it has the same:
1-Restriction on Capital Distribution:threadreaderapp.com/thread/1378953…
2-Conservatorship section:conservator's Power,Inc Power,etc.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
FDI Act: 12USC1821(d); 12USC1831o(d)
1-In the link posted,it's explained that HERA amended the FHEFSSA to remove the Restr on Capital Distribution from each Capital classification(Conservatorship included)and put a single provision replica of the FDI Act,at the end of the section
1-In the link posted,it's explained that HERA amended the FHEFSSA to remove the Restr on Capital Distribution from each Capital classification(Conservatorship included)and put a single provision replica of the FDI Act,at the end of the section
Capital Classification,w/ the goal to conceal it,as in the FDI Act is a stand alone provision APPLICABLE TO ALL FIN INSTITUTIONS (IN GNRL)
2-@Scotus based its opinion on the Inc Power:any action...but skipped
"authorized by this Chapter":FDI Act
"authorized by this Act":FDIC rule
2-@Scotus based its opinion on the Inc Power:any action...but skipped
"authorized by this Chapter":FDI Act
"authorized by this Act":FDIC rule
I EXPECT THE @WhiteHouse TO OVERRULE THE FLAWED @SCOTUS' OPINION
A "strike the shareholders,side w/ the Govt"-type of opinion.
Based on the @FHFA-C's Inc Power "in the best interests of the Agency". The Justice adds "by extension, the public it serves".#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
A "strike the shareholders,side w/ the Govt"-type of opinion.
Based on the @FHFA-C's Inc Power "in the best interests of the Agency". The Justice adds "by extension, the public it serves".#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
It seems that he copy/pasted the flawed ruling from J.Sweeney:
1-The Justice omits that the provision begins referring to "Agency,as conservator".It can't conclude "authorization to serve the public"
2-The Justice omits the phrase "authorized by this section" in the same sentence
1-The Justice omits that the provision begins referring to "Agency,as conservator".It can't conclude "authorization to serve the public"
2-The Justice omits the phrase "authorized by this section" in the same sentence
clearly,serve the public isn't authorized by the section of the Conservatorship, e.g., the FHFA-C's power.
The Justice now claims that the rehabilitation mandate is related to serve public interests,like a NWS.Of course!
Rehab is its power "put FnF in a sound & solvent condition"
The Justice now claims that the rehabilitation mandate is related to serve public interests,like a NWS.Of course!
Rehab is its power "put FnF in a sound & solvent condition"
WHAT'D I DO?
Financially,it's better a Govt taking over the common stocks(the JPS are redeemed by FnF or stay;No Voting Right)than a $182b refund.
A fair value could be the sector's PER 13,but I'd try to subtract the cost of Moral/Punitive damages from the price tag.#Fanniegate
Financially,it's better a Govt taking over the common stocks(the JPS are redeemed by FnF or stay;No Voting Right)than a $182b refund.
A fair value could be the sector's PER 13,but I'd try to subtract the cost of Moral/Punitive damages from the price tag.#Fanniegate
Then, the price of the Taking would be:
FNMA =$181ps
FMCC =$235ps
Calculated with an average of the adjusted EPS in the 4Q2020 and 1Q2021.
The resulting PER is 11.3 times.
Market Capitalization=$362b
Moral & Punitive damages(13%/12%)=$52b, defrayed by @TheJusticeDept.
Total=$415b
FNMA =$181ps
FMCC =$235ps
Calculated with an average of the adjusted EPS in the 4Q2020 and 1Q2021.
The resulting PER is 11.3 times.
Market Capitalization=$362b
Moral & Punitive damages(13%/12%)=$52b, defrayed by @TheJusticeDept.
Total=$415b
In the end,in a Taking we can't complain if the fair value is justified,but it's a subjective value. We don't get to sell the stocks to @USTreasury.Our stocks are taken away.
Reminder:@FHFA-C has to use its Inc Power prior day 1,to enable the redemption or refinancing of the JPS.
Reminder:@FHFA-C has to use its Inc Power prior day 1,to enable the redemption or refinancing of the JPS.
.@FHFA's PREMEDITATION WHEN IT CARRIED OUT THE SECRET PLAN: STOCK PRICE MANIPULATION
2011:It enabled the continuation of the plan of distributing Capital to UST,but earmarked for other purposes(reduce SPS)by saying "it's intended to supplement" the law.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
2011:It enabled the continuation of the plan of distributing Capital to UST,but earmarked for other purposes(reduce SPS)by saying "it's intended to supplement" the law.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept
Corroborated also in the preface of the Final Rule,making clear that there is a law that contemplates the Capital distribution while in Conservatorship(besides talking about its Rehab power)
🚨A Federal Agency can't supplement a law,only Congress can do it,unless required by law.
🚨A Federal Agency can't supplement a law,only Congress can do it,unless required by law.
Had it not approved the 12CFR1237.12 (1)for Recap, the div to the UST would have had to come to a halt in 2013 and 2014, for FMCC and FNMA, resp., because it's when I estimate that is when the SPS were fully reduced under the exception B to the FHEFSSA's Restr on Capital Distrib.
THE @US1stCircuitCt SLAMS THE CONSPIRATORS' SLOGANS REGARDING
-The SPSPA is a contract
-The SPSPA is the backstop
-FHFA went out there to find financing in 08
Actions PURSUANT TO AN AUTHORITY IN THE CHARTER.Guess what! There are more provisions!#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
-The SPSPA is a contract
-The SPSPA is the backstop
-FHFA went out there to find financing in 08
Actions PURSUANT TO AN AUTHORITY IN THE CHARTER.Guess what! There are more provisions!#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
The judge cites an authority of UST(added by HERA)to purchase UNLIMITED YIELD obligations SPS +Warrant(iii)to protect the taxpayer.
But a provision W/ THE SAME NAME,already existed in the Charter w/ low cost funding,consistent w/ the provision FEE LIMITATION that bars the Warrant
But a provision W/ THE SAME NAME,already existed in the Charter w/ low cost funding,consistent w/ the provision FEE LIMITATION that bars the Warrant
The UST backstop is the Charter,not the PA.
HERA allowed the 10%/NWS div,but the FHEFSSA restricts the Capital distributions unless it's applied towards SPS repayment(exception B).FHFA added(2011)a fraudulent exception(1)for Recap.
Low cost funding prevails: 0% due to collateral.
HERA allowed the 10%/NWS div,but the FHEFSSA restricts the Capital distributions unless it's applied towards SPS repayment(exception B).FHFA added(2011)a fraudulent exception(1)for Recap.
Low cost funding prevails: 0% due to collateral.
THE SECRET PLAN AIMED AT AVOIDING A JPS HOLDER REVOLUTION,LIKE OCCURRED IN🇪🇸IN 2011
"We want our money back""Against the Prfd Stock fraud"
With a true Conservatorship & the Charter's Fee Limitation:
-Commons trade at $60,$140,...$200 now
-JPS below par-value all along.#Fanniegate
"We want our money back""Against the Prfd Stock fraud"
With a true Conservatorship & the Charter's Fee Limitation:
-Commons trade at $60,$140,...$200 now
-JPS below par-value all along.#Fanniegate
FnF are building up Capital($205b C requirement)w/ the div suspended.Blame FHFA.The crooks Pagliara,Bradford,C.Phillips,Rosner,etc,run the story of Govt theft instead,maintaining the expectation of a Court resolution,when the lawsuits are the problem(Capital deficit not targeted)
Clarification: in🇪🇸,it was sold the idea that there's fraud w/ the JPS,when the loss isn't fraud(see the chart when a JPS suspends the div payments)
The true scandal is that the JPS were sold to seniors as simple fixed-income securities w/o informing of the risks.
Berkowitz knows
The true scandal is that the JPS were sold to seniors as simple fixed-income securities w/o informing of the risks.
Berkowitz knows
SAME FRAUD
SPS increased for free can't appear on the Income Statement because it isn't an expense of the operations(no cost to us)
The line item now called:"Future increase in the SPS Liq Pref". Future? It's increased at the end of the quarter.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
SPS increased for free can't appear on the Income Statement because it isn't an expense of the operations(no cost to us)
The line item now called:"Future increase in the SPS Liq Pref". Future? It's increased at the end of the quarter.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
But we see in the balance sheet that it's NEVER recorded. Since the 4th amdnt to PA(Dec 2017),the SPS in the balance sheet don't match the real data(Fin Statement Fraud)in order to don't post the offset(Reduction of Retained Earnings,once Additional Paid-In Capital was exhausted)
Nothing is "for free". The money has to come from somewhere. If FnF increase the SPS for free(w/o getting the cash),there's an offset in other accts(shareholders' pocket)
SPS= $89.1b as of 3/31/2021. $91.4b in June, due to $2.4b NW in 1Q.
(Also, SPS must be issued, not increased)
SPS= $89.1b as of 3/31/2021. $91.4b in June, due to $2.4b NW in 1Q.
(Also, SPS must be issued, not increased)
CALABRIA CLAIMS THAT THE PSPA ARE NOT LINES OF CREDIT
The name doesn't matter: line of credit, borrowing right,funding commitment
We know it can't be tapped to leverage FnF but to fund a negative Net Worth(Equity) issuing SPS(obligations/Equity)#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
The name doesn't matter: line of credit, borrowing right,funding commitment
We know it can't be tapped to leverage FnF but to fund a negative Net Worth(Equity) issuing SPS(obligations/Equity)#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept @Scotus
The key is that it emanates from the provision in the Charter Act called: Authority of UST to Purchase Obligations.Terms and Conditions.
There are 2:
-The original low cost
-The one added by HERA w/ UNLIMITED yield.
@USTreasury can't buy anything w/o an authorization by Congress.
There are 2:
-The original low cost
-The one added by HERA w/ UNLIMITED yield.
@USTreasury can't buy anything w/o an authorization by Congress.
HERA's was used for the 10%/NWS div,but it wasn't needed if there is the original,limited to $2.25b because it was set more than 50yrs ago,w/ FNMA only 15b in debt vs $800b in 2008.
The original is called "special borrowing right from UST" by Prof.Nielson(Scotus-appointed amicus)
The original is called "special borrowing right from UST" by Prof.Nielson(Scotus-appointed amicus)
