Fannie and Freddie will Remain Under Government Control for Now

In October 2015, White House officials rejected proposals to release government-backed lending enterprises Fannie Mae (The Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) from federal control. The companies have been operating under a conservatorship by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) since 2008 as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis.

Over the past year, the Obama administration has faced pressure from lobbyists and affordable housing advocates to release the enterprises from their conservatorship. Whether they are released or not can affect the amount of money you can borrow to buy a home. For more information about how their remaining in conservatorship or becoming private companies once again will affect you as a real estate buyer or seller, discuss the details of your case with an experienced New York Business Law Firm.

NYC Real Estate Law

What Would Releasing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae Mean for Home Purchasers?

Affordable housing advocates claim that if Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae remain under government control, potential low-income buyers are shut out of the housing market. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae operate by purchasing mortgage loans from private lenders, allowing the lenders to use this money to fund new mortgage loans. This is how mortgage lenders make a profit. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, once they have ownership of a mortgage loan, sell it as a bond on the secondary investment market. By playing such a large role in the United States’ credit system, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can prevent a complete meltdown of the mortgage and lending market, keeping mortgage rates affordable for buyers.

But when the housing bubble burst in 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac faced financial crisis and were bailed out by the FHFA. In 2012, the terms of their conservatorship changed, creating a situation where the government took all of the enterprises’ profits in profitable quarters and did not require a dividend in losing quarters, resulting in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae paying the United States Treasury a total of $239 billion since the takeover. Now, the government is facing lawsuits from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae shareholders alleging that the government’s changed terms in 2012 were unlawful. Part of this lawsuit is shareholders calling for the federal government to release the companies from its control.

As a potential home buyer, the government’s release of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could make it easier for you to obtain a mortgage loan or a loan with a lower interest rate. But the release could still be years away, depending on how this lawsuit progresses through the court.

New York Business Attorney. If you have Business Law questions and are in need legal assistance for litigation, appeals, construction law or need a Business Law Attorney contact the Law Firm of Menicucci, Villa, Cilmi PLLC for a no cost case evaluation. We are a Business Law Firm with offices in Staten Island, Brooklyn and New York City.
Brooklyn Business Lawyer – Brooklyn Business Law Attorney – Brooklyn Business Law Firm –
Staten Island Business Lawyer – Staten Island Business Attorney – Staten Island Business Law Firm.
 

This website includes general information about legal issues and developments in the law. The content of this website is provided for informational purposes only, and is not intended to be legal advice, and should not be relied upon by any reader. You should not take, or refrain from taking, any legal action in reliance upon the contents of this website. Legal websites and blogs cannot and do not replace or substitute in place of a consultation with a knowledgeable attorney who may offer legal advice based upon the specific circumstances of your situation, and the laws in effect in your geographical location and jurisdiction. Laws vary by jurisdiction, and the contents of this blog may not apply to you. The jurisdictions in which each of the firm’s lawyers are licensed to practice are noted on this website. The ability of any firm lawyer to engage in any activities for a client outside of that lawyer’s state(s) of licensure is subject to state statutes, professional standards and court rules. The Firm does not seek, and this website is not intended to solicit, legal engagements in jurisdictions outside of our lawyers’ states of licensure when such engagements would constitute the unauthorized practice of law in any jurisdiction, or be a violation of any ethical rules in effect. This website/ blog is not intended to be a solicitation of business or any client. Your viewing or use of this website/ blog does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and this firm. Any information supplied by you to this firm in an unsolicited manner, without a retainer agreement, will not be deemed confidential or attorney-client privileged. To the extent permitted by law, this firm hereby disclaims liability to any person for any loss which may arise from relying on or by using information contained on this blog. Although the information on this blog is intended to be current, accurate and complete, it is not guaranteed to be. Further, this blog may contain links to other web sites or other blogs. This firm can make no representation or guaranty that the content of any such websites or blogs are current, accurate or complete, and does not necessarily endorse, approve, or support the content thereof.
 
IRS Circular 230 Notice. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service requirements, this is to inform you that any information on this website that could be construed as United States tax advice is not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed on this website. See IRS Circular 230.

 

 

, ,

Comments are closed.