Associated Press. Retrieved January 20, USA Today.
Retrieved September 13, Bloomberg LLP. Retrieved September 12, United States Congress. Retrieved March 28, The Hill. Retrieved April 7, Triangle Business Journal. Retrieved September 25, Harrington September 8, Press Release. October 6, Retrieved August 5, Financial Times.
Unfortunately, it was too little and too late. Those fell as investors fled to the safety of government-backed bonds. Wouldn't dare estimate these losses.. Orszag announced on September 9, that the CBO intended to incorporate the assets and liabilities of the two companies into their federal budget planning, due to the degree of government control over the entities. One really needs to congradualate the Economist for its vision. We view regulation by the Federal Reserve Board as appropriate and in the best interests of protecting and growing our franchise across our diverse range of businesses. What happened to the depression era value I was taught by my Grandfather and Dad about save now then buy?
Retrieved September 15, September 6, October 12, March 14, Bloomberg LP. July 23, United States Securities and Exchange Commission. August 8, Freddie Mac. August 6, September 22, Lockhart III June 3, Archived from the original PDF on June 12, CNN Money. Retrieved June 19, Retrieved October 4, Retrieved January 8, Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved October 5, The Sun News.
August 11, Retrieved August 11, Background information Impact timeline. Financial crisis of —08 Great Recession Writedowns Indirect economic effects. Error accounts Financial position of the United States Foreclosure rescue scheme Property derivatives.
Great Recession. Automotive industry crisis California budget crisis Housing bubble Housing market correction Subprime mortgage crisis. Rothstein Allen Stanford. Government policy and spending responses. List of banks acquired or bankrupted during the Great Recession. Chrysler General Motors. Auction rate securities Collateralized debt obligations Collateralized mortgage obligations Credit default swaps Mortgage-backed securities Secondary mortgage market.
Tea Party protests United States; c. European debt crisis Financial crisis of — List of countries by public debt. Categories : United States government sponsored enterprise Finance in the United States Debt Mortgage industry of the United States Fixed income Structured finance Subprime mortgage crisis s economic history in American politics. Hidden categories: Webarchive template wayback links All articles with dead external links Articles with dead external links from May Articles with permanently dead external links Use American English from January All Wikipedia articles written in American English Use mdy dates from January All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from January NPOV disputes from October All NPOV disputes Wikipedia articles needing clarification from January All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from January Wikipedia articles in need of updating from July All Wikipedia articles in need of updating.
Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history.
Languages Add links. Fannie and Freddie were publicly traded companies, and still are, but they were created by Congress to keep capital flowing to the housing market. They do so by buying mortgages from lenders, packaging them into securities and guaranteeing investors will be paid even if the underlying mortgages go bad. That guarantee helps keep mortgage rates low, but as defaults piled up after the housing market turned, Fannie and Freddie were losing money fast. He remembers the panic in the market. On Sept. Lockhart looks on in Washington, D.
Then, on Sept. The Federal Housing Finance Agency seized the two companies, placing them in conservatorship. The next morning, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson held a press conference. The exercise was a success, and this type of innovative mortgage became the standard means of financing the postwar housing boom that raised the homeownership rate from 44 percent in to 69 percent by By the s, the basic purpose of the GSEs had shifted to the role of adding more funds to the housing market by connecting prospective homebuyers with major capital markets.
To accomplish this goal, the GSEs use their preferred credit rating to borrow in major financial markets and use the funds raised to acquire residential mortgages from brokers and other mortgage originators, earning profits and covering expenses on the difference in the interest rates earned and paid.
The GSEs also package mortgages acquired from originators into "pass through" securities that are collateralized with qualified residential mortgages. Payments of principal and interest made by the homeowners are then "passed through" to the investors holding the securities. Over much of this period, Fannie Mae and the federal government were minor players in the process.
By , the homeownership rate had risen to 63 percent, but Fannie Mae and the other sources of federal mortgage credit support accounted for only 6 percent of outstanding residential mortgages. Fannie Mae was restructured as a federally chartered corporation in , and its shares were sold to the public a year later. Initially, Fannie Mae was limited to investing in residential mortgages insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the Veterans Administration so as to maintain its public purpose of assisting entry-level homebuyers.
A few years after Fannie Mae's "privatization," Congress authorized the creation of another government-sponsored mortgage credit facility, Freddie Mac, as a federally chartered corporation to provide a secondary market for the conventional mortgages written by savings and loans and other lenders and brokers. Over time, the mandates guiding the FNMA and FHLMC were liberalized, and the scope of their activity was expanded substantially to the point that they and the other federal housing finance programs now account for more than half the residential mortgage market in the United States.
Although structured as private companies, both the FNMA and the FHLMC operate with valuable federal privileges that give them a significant competitive advantage over other participants in the housing finance market. In particular, they are exempt from state and local income taxes; more important, they have exclusive access to lines of credit from the U.
Treasury and the U.
Federal Reserve System. As quasi-private companies obligated to enrich their shareholders with ever-increasing earnings and dividends, and operating with an implicit federal interest rate subsidy as well as a federal mandate to promote homeownership, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had every reason and opportunity to grow rapidly. By the s and early s, they dominated the housing finance market. By parlaying their subsidized borrowing advantage into lower-rate mortgage lending, they gradually pushed life insurance companies and commercial banks out of the less profitable residential mortgage market and squeezed the earnings of the already wobbly savings and loans, which by law could invest only in residential mortgages.
While homebuyers benefited from slightly lower borrowing costs, financial markets were put at greater risk as more and more of the housing finance system was concentrated in the hands of two highly leveraged, unsupervised, federally chartered financial institutions. Many policymakers soon recognized the risk to financial markets posed by such a concentration of market share.
In the late s and early s, Fannie Mae made a bad bet on interest rate trends that left the institution technically insolvent as its net worth briefly turned negative, raising fears of a financial collapse.
Fannie Mae later recovered when the Federal Reserve's monetary policy of the early s led to dramatic declines in market interest rates, restoring the value of Fannie Mae's loan portfolio. After implementing new financial controls and investment practices, Fannie Mae came out of its near-death experience as a better-managed operation.
Nonetheless, the possibility that it might fail could disrupt financial markets in general and mortgage markets in particular. This, in turn, led to calls to limit its size, scope, and privileges. With executive pay, bonuses, expense accounts, and other top management perks, and by promoting its stock to Wall Street analysts, Fannie Mae presents itself to investors as a hard-charging, profit-minded growth company.
However, when protecting itself against the few congressional reformers and marketplace competitors and selling its debt to foreign central banks at favorable interest rates, Fannie Mae poses as a public-purpose government entity that helps America's disadvantaged to become homeowners. Even America's college professors became objects of Fannie Mae's affection when it created and financed two academic journals- housing Policy Debate and Journal of housing Research- that focus with a notable exception on a wide range of housing issues.
The exception is that both journals generally avoid discussing the GSEs' role in the mortgage market and whether they make much of a difference. With many professors still confronting a publish-or-perish environment in pursuit of tenure and promotion, common sense argues against irritating a wealthy and influential publisher. As a result, academia has not been a reliable source of dispassionate inquiry into the GSEs' role in America's housing market.
In fact, a broad review of the evidence accumulated in the postwar era suggests that their impact on homeownership is inconsequential.
Specifically, in , when the GSE presence in the mortgage market was slightly above 6 percent, America's homeownership rate was In this regard, it is worth noting that America's greatest surge in homeownership took place between and , when homeownership jumped from the mid percent range at the end of World War II to 62 percent in , when the FNMA's activity was still limited and the FHLMC did not yet exist.
However, this does not mean the GSEs finally made a difference. With the mortgage rate falling to half of its peak level, housing demand soared as monthly mortgage payments fell accordingly.
The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout occurred September 6, The bailout came as the U.S. Treasury Department was authorized to purchase up to . The federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was the placing into conservatorship of in private financial markets in decades", and one that "could turn into the biggest and costliest government bailout ever of private companies".
As a consequence of these favorable macroeconomic developments, homeownership rose to record levels, independent of anything Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did over the same period. While these anecdotes are less than perfect proof of FNMA ineffectiveness, more comprehensive studies by the Federal Reserve Board and the Congressional Budget Office have come to similar conclusions. In , Wayne Passmore, a Federal Reserve economist, wrote that "the GSE's implicit subsidy does not appear to have substantially increased home-ownership or homebuilding" and argued that the GSE's activity slightly lowered mortgage rates for some homeowners.