Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Feds Collect Record Taxes in First Month Under Tax Cut; Run Surplus in January
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="miamited" data-source="post: 72331775" data-attributes="member: 270136"><p>Hi NH,</p><p></p><p>I'd have to do more study to see what kind of impact the dissolution of these two major players in our mortgage process would have for the individual borrower, but...</p><p></p><p>They are there. They hold some interest in nearly every mortgage in the country. That's fine if we can come up with an alternative, but we have to deal with the here and now. Right now fannie and freddie hold some securing interest in about 90% of the mortgages being made. If they go, then rates will go up. Most likely housing prices would go down because the increased rates would mean fewer qualified buyers for homes.</p><p></p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/id/100946537" target="_blank">What you need to know if Fannie and Freddie go</a></p><p></p><p>It's worth noting in this article that it is claimed that since the great housing market collapse, the two agencies have paid me and you $132 billion (this report is dated 2013 and so that $132 billion was paid in just two years) That's the dividend return that they have paid to the federal government since the collapse. Should that continue, then over the next couple of years, from this report, they will have each paid back all the money that the government shelled out to them during the collapse and will likely have already paid the government at least the $5.1 billion that we might give them this year. While that's certainly a long term return, it also means that they don't really bleed the government dry. As an investment for the government it may not be as good as it can be, but it isn't costing the government over the long haul. Here's another article which gives a better picture of the more current situation.</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/02/17/fannie-mae-to-pay-treasury-55-billion-after-profit-doubles.html" target="_blank">Fannie Mae to pay Treasury $5.5 billion after profit doubles</a></p><p></p><p>So, let's be careful what we wish for. According to this article, they each paid the government well over the $5.1 billion in 2017 that they are now asking for to remain solvent. According to some sources, part of the reason for their fall in equity is due to a change in how the government allows them to keep assets and capital on their books. Basically, they're being required to not keep assets and capital from year to year. This means that when things go south temporarily, then they have to go to the government to get back some working capital.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, I'm not fully knowledgeable on the situation and perhaps others will put in some better understanding, but according to these articles, which are not new reports, Fannie and Freddie have been an overall gainer for the federal government. Yes, the federal government gave them $116 billion during the collapse (some reports say $180 billion), but year after year in the long term picture, they have paid the treasury a lot more than they have cost the treasury.</p><p></p><p>BTW, the second article came from Fox which has long been a big supporter of the present administration. So they're showing this glowing report of Fannie and Freddie's dividend payments to the federal treasury should look good to the Trumpites. From where I'm sitting, it looks like the federal government may be cutting it's nose off to spite it's face if it were to dissolve the two companies. Not to mention the problems such a move could cause home buyers.</p><p></p><p>God bless,</p><p>In Christ, ted</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="miamited, post: 72331775, member: 270136"] Hi NH, I'd have to do more study to see what kind of impact the dissolution of these two major players in our mortgage process would have for the individual borrower, but... They are there. They hold some interest in nearly every mortgage in the country. That's fine if we can come up with an alternative, but we have to deal with the here and now. Right now fannie and freddie hold some securing interest in about 90% of the mortgages being made. If they go, then rates will go up. Most likely housing prices would go down because the increased rates would mean fewer qualified buyers for homes. Source: [URL='https://www.cnbc.com/id/100946537']What you need to know if Fannie and Freddie go[/URL] It's worth noting in this article that it is claimed that since the great housing market collapse, the two agencies have paid me and you $132 billion (this report is dated 2013 and so that $132 billion was paid in just two years) That's the dividend return that they have paid to the federal government since the collapse. Should that continue, then over the next couple of years, from this report, they will have each paid back all the money that the government shelled out to them during the collapse and will likely have already paid the government at least the $5.1 billion that we might give them this year. While that's certainly a long term return, it also means that they don't really bleed the government dry. As an investment for the government it may not be as good as it can be, but it isn't costing the government over the long haul. Here's another article which gives a better picture of the more current situation. [URL='http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/02/17/fannie-mae-to-pay-treasury-55-billion-after-profit-doubles.html']Fannie Mae to pay Treasury $5.5 billion after profit doubles[/URL] So, let's be careful what we wish for. According to this article, they each paid the government well over the $5.1 billion in 2017 that they are now asking for to remain solvent. According to some sources, part of the reason for their fall in equity is due to a change in how the government allows them to keep assets and capital on their books. Basically, they're being required to not keep assets and capital from year to year. This means that when things go south temporarily, then they have to go to the government to get back some working capital. Anyway, I'm not fully knowledgeable on the situation and perhaps others will put in some better understanding, but according to these articles, which are not new reports, Fannie and Freddie have been an overall gainer for the federal government. Yes, the federal government gave them $116 billion during the collapse (some reports say $180 billion), but year after year in the long term picture, they have paid the treasury a lot more than they have cost the treasury. BTW, the second article came from Fox which has long been a big supporter of the present administration. So they're showing this glowing report of Fannie and Freddie's dividend payments to the federal treasury should look good to the Trumpites. From where I'm sitting, it looks like the federal government may be cutting it's nose off to spite it's face if it were to dissolve the two companies. Not to mention the problems such a move could cause home buyers. God bless, In Christ, ted [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Feds Collect Record Taxes in First Month Under Tax Cut; Run Surplus in January
Top
Bottom