Fannie and Freddie: Grow up

Not immediately, but at some time in the foreseeable future, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must be either officially nationalized or fully privatized.
JUL 28, 2008
Not immediately, but at some time in the foreseeable future, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must be either officially nationalized or fully privatized. We vote for fully privatized. Let's cut the apron strings that tie them to the taxpayers' wallets and get government out of the business of guaranteeing securitized mortgages altogether. It is inappropriate for the U.S. taxpayer to be standing behind these two for-profit enterprises, helping to protect the shareholders from the poor and risky business practices of its management. Other countries have healthy real estate markets without anything like Fannie Mae of Washington or Freddie Mac of McLean, Va., providing government guarantees of mortgage-backed debt. That implied government guarantee not only contributed to the mortgage meltdown but now has taxpayers on the hook for as much as $5 trillion of mortgage debt. The existence of Fannie and Freddie encouraged mortgage lenders to lower their lending standards continually, knowing that they wouldn't lose if the mortgagees defaulted, because Fannie or Freddie — or those who bought securities backed by the mortgages — were holding the paper. The implied government guarantees allowed Fannie and Freddie to borrow in the capital markets at low, near-Treasury rates and generated huge profits for shareholders. Those huge profits encouraged investment banks to begin securitizing mortgages and selling them to investors in competition with Fannie and Freddie, further fueling the housing boom. The problem with nationalizing Fannie and Freddie is that the government would have to recognize formally an additional $5 trillion of national debt, driving it up more than 50% to almost $14 trillion. Ironically, Fannie was privatized during the Johnson administration to get it off the federal budget and to keep its debt off the federal balance sheets. Freddie was started to provide competition for Fannie. It isn't clear that Congress will be willing to nationalize the two enterprises and thus recognize the debt. Besides the national debt issue, Fannie and Freddie have many friends in Congress who could forestall any changes. If the two are to be privatized, it will have to be done over time and after the financial crisis has passed. Any action now that throws the future of Fannie and Freddie into question will roil the financial markets not only in the United States but also overseas, because financial institutions around the world hold their debt and equity. The best strategy is for the government to move cautiously, refrain from any action that might spook the markets and allow the mortgage market to recover. If that can be achieved, the ultimate cost to taxpayers of the government guarantee might be significantly less than $5 trillion. In the meantime, the Department of the Treasury can examine how best to privatize the two enterprises at the least cost to taxpayers. One idea from Alex J. Pollack, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research in Washington (as outlined in the New York Sun), is for the government to become investors in Fannie and Freddie, buying large amounts of senior subordinated debt. The debt would pay a rate near the 10-year Treasury bond rate, and no dividends could be paid on the common stock of the enterprises as long as there were outstanding debt. This approach would provide a return to taxpayers for backing the two enterprises while they got their houses in order for full privatization. There also would be changes in the capital requirements of the enterprises and in their governance. Once the government debt was paid off, there would be no further government support for them, implied or explicit. One thing is clear from the fiasco: Fannie and Freddie can't continue to operate as they have — public companies can't be protected from close oversight and challenges by friends in high places.

Latest News

Advisor moves: LPL lands $1B group from Ameriprise
Advisor moves: LPL lands $1B group from Ameriprise

Meanwhile, Cetera has drawn advisors managing around $390 million from LPL and Commonwealth, while Raymond James' financial institutions division announces its own LPL hire in Indiana.

Bluespring Wealth snaps up $1.1B New Jersey RIA in fifth deal of 2026
Bluespring Wealth snaps up $1.1B New Jersey RIA in fifth deal of 2026

Synthesis Wealth Planning brings a fivefold asset growth story and a recently merged practice to the Bluespring fold.

Clients expect to know if you use AI, but don’t realize that their portfolios are likely exposed
Clients expect to know if you use AI, but don’t realize that their portfolios are likely exposed

Janus Henderson Investors research reveals demand for transparency, but lack of awareness of AI’s prevalence in the corporate world.

Retirement dream looking more like a luxury as cost-of-living squeezes savings
Retirement dream looking more like a luxury as cost-of-living squeezes savings

New research reveals rising expenses, forced early exits, and a widening gap between how long people live and how long their money lasts.

Advisor moves: LPL, Raymond James, Brighton Jones raid the talent pool
Advisor moves: LPL, Raymond James, Brighton Jones raid the talent pool

Firms continue their quest to attract and retain the best advisor teams.

SPONSORED Beyond wealth management: Why the future of advice is becoming more human

As technical expertise becomes increasingly commoditized, advisors who can integrate strategy, relationships, and specialized expertise into a cohesive client experience will define the next era of wealth management

SPONSORED Durability over scale: What actually defines a great advisory firm

Growth may get the headlines, but in my experience, longevity is earned through structure, culture, and discipline