What Do Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Do?
March 10, 2003
"What are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and what do they do?"
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are "government-sponsored enterprises"
(GSEs). This means that they are privately owned, but receive support
from the Federal Government, and assume some public responsibilities.
The GSEs provide a secondary market in home mortgages, purchasing
mortgages from the lenders who originate them. They hold some of these
mortgages, and some are "securitized" -- sold in the form of securities
which the GSEs guarantee.
The two GSEs today are among the largest corporations in the world.
What mortgages do the GSEs purchase?
"Conforming mortgages" as they are called consists of all home mortgages
that meet the underwriting requirements of the agencies, and are no
larger than the largest loan the GSEs are allowed by law to purchase. In
2003 the maximum was $322,700. It is raised every year in line with
increases in home prices. The mortgages the GSEs can purchase account
for roughly 80% of the conventional (non-FHA/VA) home loan market.
What kind of support do the GSEs receive from Government?
The major support consists of the credit lines with the US Treasury.
This, along with their histories -- both were public institutions before
they became privately owned -- mark them as having a special claim for
Government assistance in the event they ever get into financial trouble.
As a result, investors consider the notes they issue and the mortgage
securities they guarantee almost as good as securities issued by the
Federal Government itself.
Do the GSEs have competitors?
Not in the conforming loan market. Because of their Government backing,
the GSEs can sell notes and securities at a lower yield than any
strictly private secondary market firm. This gives them a monopoly -- or
rather a duopoly, since there are two of them -- in the market in which
they operate.
The GSEs do have emulators, however, in the non-conforming market. While
the cast of players changes, at any one time there are usually 15 or
more strictly private firms that purchase non-conforming loans and
securitize them in much the same way as the GSEs.
"Why do two private firms receive Government support, while the others
don’t?"
The Government did not select the two firms for special treatment. Both
the GSEs began as Government entities, and the major objective in
privatizing them (while retaining Government support) was to encourage
development of a private secondary market. The other firms arose later,
based on the GSE model, so that objective was achieved.
If the objective was achieved, why do the GSEs continue to receive
special support?
The GSEs are unwilling to give it up, and they have become so powerful
politically that they have managed to thwart the several attempts that
have been made to take it away.
Do I have anything at stake in this issue?
If you are a potential borrower eligible for a conforming loan, your
interest rate will probably be about 1/4% lower than it would be absent
the GSEs. This reflects their relatively low funding costs, part of
which is passed through to borrowers.
In addition, if you are a low or low-to-moderate income borrower, and/or
reside in an underserved area, you might find a loan through a GSE. As
part of their public responsibility, the GSEs commit to purchase
specified numbers of such loans. How many would not be made without the
GSEs, however, is not clear.
As a taxpayer, on the other hand, you have a cause for concern. The low
borrowing costs of the GSEs is based on implicit Government backing for
their $3+ trillion of debt and guarantees. If the GSEs ever have a
financial disaster, the Government will have to bail them out and you
and I will be on the hook for the cost.
"Is anybody regulating the GSEs to prevent such a disaster?"
A few years ago Congress gave that responsibility to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Very few informed observers believe
that HUD is up to the task.
"Is there a way to eliminate the risk of a financial disaster by
removing Government support without hurting investors who rely on that
support?"
It could be done by 1) revoking the credit line the GSEs now have with
the Treasury, and b) providing an explicit Federal guarantee of all debt
and GSE guarantees outstanding on the date the credit line is revoked.
An explicit guarantee on the old claims would prevent any repercussions
in the financial markets, yet put the markets on notice that news ones
are not guaranteed. Over time, the volume of guaranteed claims would
gradually decline.