Fannie and Freddie "are teetering on the brink" as losses increase and borrowing costs rise新任奥巴马政府没有宣布任何计划重新Fannie和Freddie

Fannie and Freddie "are teetering on the brink" as losses increase and borrowing costs rise, Jerry Howard, chief executive of the National Association of Home Builders, said in an interview. He called for the government to explicitly guarantee their debt and for Congress to quickly come up with a new structure and better-defined role for Fannie and Freddie.

Some banks, which have long had an uneasy relationship with Fannie and Freddie, would like to see them disappear, at least in their current form. One idea being discussed among bankers is to replace Fannie and Freddie with several lender-owned cooperatives that would package loans into securities. Under this idea, the U.S. Treasury would get fees for backing up those securities if losses reached catastrophic levels.

In prepared remarks for a speech in Detroit on Tuesday, Bank of America Corp. Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis called for scrapping the business model of Fannie and Freddie. He said the U.S. should "move in the direction of a system that relies more on private-sector institutions," without government guarantees, to channel money from investors to home-mortgage lenders.

'More Explicit' Backing
In the short term, though, Mr. Lewis said the government should make its backing of Fannie and Freddie "more explicit" to boost investor confidence and push down mortgage interest rates.

The Mortgage Bankers Association, a trade group, will host a meeting of lenders, real-estate brokers and academics in Washington on Wednesday to discuss how the two companies might be reshaped and how the U.S. could best ensure a steady flow of money into home mortgages.

The meeting comes amid concern that the $11 trillion U.S. residential-mortgage market needs an overhaul rather than a few tweaks.

Bankers have accused Fannie and Freddie of grabbing more than their fair share of profits from the mortgage business, while Fannie and Freddie officials have insisted that banks wanted to gouge consumers with higher mortgage rates.

Any attempt to scrap Fannie and Freddie entirely is sure to lead to a debate. The home builders and the National Association of Realtors both oppose the idea of relying totally on private institutions to provide money for mortgages.

"In times of crisis, the government really needs to step in," said Lawrence Yun, chief economist of the Realtors. Mr. Howard, of the home-builders group, opposes the idea of nationalizing them, saying that a government agency wouldn't be nimble enough to keep up with market needs. But he said it might make sense to treat them as tightly regulated public utility companies or as cooperatives owned by mortgage lenders.

Future Role
The uncertainty over how the companies will be reshaped and even whether they will continue to exist has made many investors wary of buying bonds issued by Fannie and Freddie.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson last week said investors can "bank on" the government's promises to ensure that Fannie and Freddie will pay their obligations. But there is no explicit federal guarantee of Fannie and Freddie debt, and investors, especially those overseas, are less willing than in the past to accept "implied" guarantees or oral promises.

Because of the ambiguity over government backing for them, investors are demanding higher yields on their bonds, particularly those that mature in 12 months or more. On Tuesday, yields on two-year Fannie and Freddie bonds were 1.67 percentage points above those on comparable Treasury bonds, compared with a spread of just 0.29 point in mid-2007, according to FTN Financial Capital Markets.

Spreading Worry
On Sept. 6, federal regulators seized control of the management of Fannie and Freddie. At that time, the Treasury pledged to provide as much as $100 billion of capital to each company in exchange for preferred stock. Last week, Freddie said it needs a $13.8 billion cash injection from the Treasury, and Fannie said it may need Treasury funds by year end.

For the third quarter, Fannie and Freddie reported combined losses of about $54 billion, largely due to the elimination of tax credits no longer expected to be usable.

The incoming Obama administration hasn't announced any plan for reformulating Fannie and Freddie, though President-elect Barack Obama referred to them earlier this year as a "weird blend" of the public and private sectors.
中文:奥巴马不好办!
Fannie和Freddie “是摇摇欲坠的边缘”的损失和增加借贷成本上升，杰里霍华德，首席执行官全美住宅建筑商协会在接受采访时说。他要求政府明确保证他们的债务和国会尽快拿出一个新的结构和更好地界定作用Fannie和Freddie 。

一些银行，其中有长期的不安与Fannie和Freddie ，希望看到它们消失，至少在其目前的形式。一个想法正在讨论各银行将取代Fannie和Freddie与几个银行所属合作社，将一揽子贷款证券化。根据这一设想，美国财政部将获得学费备份，如果这些证券损失达到灾难性的水平。

在准备发言的一次讲话中底特律星期二，美国银行首席执行官肯尼思刘易斯要求取消商业模式Fannie和Freddie 。他说，美国应该“走向一个系统，更多地依赖于私营部门机构， ”无政府担保，引导资金投资房屋抵押贷款。

'更明确的'备份
在短期内，不过，刘易斯先生表示，政府应该作出自己的支持， Fannie和Freddie “更明确” ，以提高投资者的信心，压低抵押贷款利率。

美国抵押贷款银行家协会，贸易团体，将举行一次会议的贷款，房地产经纪人和学者29日在华盛顿讨论如何两家公司可能会重新塑造和美国如何能够最好地确保源源不断的资金投入住房抵押贷款。

这次会议正值关注的是，十一万亿美元美国住宅抵押贷款市场的需要大修，而不是少数的调整。

银行家指责Fannie和Freddie抓住超过其公平分享利润抵押贷款业务，而Fannie和Freddie官员坚持认为，银行要泥的消费者具有较高的抵押贷款利率。

任何企图取消Fannie和Freddie完全肯定会导致一场辩论。该房屋建筑和全国房地产经纪人协会都反对的想法完全依靠私人机构提供资金贷款。

“在危机时刻，政府真正需要的一步， ”劳伦斯云说，首席经济学家的房地产。霍华德先生的房屋建筑群，反对的想法，国有化，他们说，一个政府机构将不灵活跟不上市场需求。但他表示，可能是有意义的对待他们严格规范公用事业公司或合作社所拥有的抵押贷款。

未来的作用
在不确定性的公司如何将重塑，甚至他们是否会继续存在，使许多投资者担心购买其发行的债券Fannie和Freddie 。

财政部长保尔森上周表示，投资者可以“银行对”政府的承诺，以确保Fannie和Freddie将支付他们的义务。但是，没有明确的联邦保证Fannie和Freddie的债务，投资者，尤其是那些在海外，都不太愿意比过去接受“暗示”保证或口头承诺。

由于模糊了政府的支持他们，投资者要求收益较高的债券，尤其是那些成熟的12个月或更长时间。周二，收益率两年Fannie和Freddie债券1.67个百分点，高于可比国债，与之相比蔓延0.29点只是在2007年年中，根据FTN金融资本市场。

推广无忧
9月6日，联邦监管机构控制的管理Fannie和Freddie 。当时，财政部承诺将提供高达1000亿美元的资本每家公司，以换取优先股。上周，弗雷迪说，它需要138亿美元现金注资的财政部和联邦表示，它可能需要国债资金今年年底。

第三季度， Fannie和Freddie报告相结合的损失约为540亿美元，这主要是由于取消税收抵免不再预计将使用。

新任奥巴马政府没有宣布任何计划重新Fannie和Freddie ，但当选总统奥巴马称他们今年早些时候，作为一个“奇怪的混合”的公共部门和私营部门。