During the next several years, as the housing market crashed and then began to eke its way back, Fannie and Freddie drew $188 billion from the Treasury. They were in turn forced to pay 10 percent stock dividends back. Then in 2012, the Treasury announced that that agreement would be replaced by a quarterly sweep of every dollar of profit that each institution earned in the future.

(Read more: Map: Tracking the recovery)

The move was designed to, “help expedite the wind down of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, make sure that every dollar of earnings each firm generates is used to benefit taxpayers, and support the continued flow of mortgage credit during a responsible transition to a reformed housing finance market,” went the 2012 release.

By 2012, with the housing market rebounding and newly originated loans faring better than any in history, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began turning annual profits. By 2013, those profits were growing dynamically, and the two are now nearing the amount they originally drew from the Treasury, although the payments do not go to pay back the draw. The Treasury still owns the preferred stock. The money simply goes to the government.

Now, as individual investors in Fannie and Freddie stock cry foul, launching lawsuits against the government and demanding their share, lawmakers are under increased pressure to find a fitting end for the conservatorship and the entities. The question is whether or not to put a government backstop into the market yet again.

“The construct of a government-guaranteed, mortgage-backed security is absolutely going to be needed,” said David Stevens, CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association. “You can’t have a functioning housing finance system where private capital just leaves it in the next recession. You need to have constant liquidity provided to the U.S. system, and that comes from the guaranteed mortgage-backed security.”

Confidence is key going forward, and investors are unlikely to pour money back into the mortgage market without a guarantee that in another catastrophic crash there won’t be some government backstop. One of the leading bipartisan proposals in Congress, introduced by Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Mark Warner, D-Va., does create an investor and borrower-funded backstop. It will make loans slightly more costly, but the government guarantee on mortgage-backed securities would be there.

“The biggest problem is that Congress wants supercheap mortgages and they want to eliminate taxpayer risk for the housing market, and that’s just a holy grail to get,” said Guggenheim’s Seiberg. “Anything less than 100 percent government backstop is going to raise questions about whether fixed income investors are really going to be there to pick up the slack and to buy those securities.”

Federal regulators are already trying to shrink the portfolios of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even as Congress still debates their future. They have layered on heavy fees to lenders, which have actually made conforming loans (those backed by Fannie and Freddie) more costly than jumbo loans funded by banks. There is also a move to lower the loan limits on conforming loans, which would push banks and investors to take on more of the markets.

(Read more: Jobs report tempers mortgage rates)

Article source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101018586

“Sales are subpar, prices mainly flat and I don’t anticipate much change,” said Andrew LePage, an analyst with San Diego’s DataQuick, which produced the report. “Lots of people are stacked up on the sidelines, waiting for a better time to buy or sell when things are more certain.”

The median price for all homes – resale, new and condos – sold across the nine Bay Area counties in November was $363,500, down 4.3 percent from a year ago.

The total number of properties changing hands edged up 3.4 percent to 6,317, compared with last year.

Not much inventory

Low inventory remains an issue as many people are reluctant to sell, said Rick Turley, president of Coldwell Banker’s Bay Area region.

“The home seller who becomes a move-up buyer is almost like a missing generation,” he said. “We have some people out there with an appetite (to buy) who have a down payment and can qualify, but because of the ho-hum market, there isn’t inventory for them.”

Turley said he sees about 4 1/2 months’ worth of inventory for high-end homes and just a few weeks’ worth on the low end.

Cindi Hagley, managing broker at Prudential California Realty in San Ramon, observed similar dynamics.

“We have multiple offers on almost everything we sell for under $400,000,” she said.

But at the other end, “People who could theoretically afford to buy bigger homes are hunkering down a bit,” Hagley said. “People are downsizing” rather than moving up.

High-end sales are also taking a hit from a change in the conforming loan limit, which eliminates most government-backed mortgages between $625,501 and $729,750. Lawmakers restored FHA loans in that bracket, but Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgages are no longer available.

“We don’t know yet to what extent FHA and the private mortgage market can fill that void,” LePage said.

The tighter financing for high-end homes is reflected in declining sales volume.

Low-price purchases

For instance, in Santa Clara County, November sales of homes over $800,000 were down 18.2 percent from a year earlier, while sales of homes under $300,000 rose 22.3 percent compared with November 2010, LePage said.

Throughout the real estate downturn, sales of higher-end homes have declined dramatically. Mortgages above $417,000 accounted for about 29.7 percent of November’s purchase lending, DataQuick said. Before 2007, such “jumbo” mortgages represented almost 60 percent of local purchase loans.

Distressed sales – foreclosures and short sales sold for less than is owed on the mortgage – remain a potent force, accounting for almost half of all resales in the Bay Area in November.

Investor activity remains high, with absentee buyers snapping up 22.6 of all homes sold last month compared with a regular monthly average of 13.9 percent since 2000. All-cash buyers represented 27.9 percent of November sales.

Other national reports out this week underscored the market’s continued malaise:

– Real estate service Zillow.com said values nationwide were down 5.1 percent in October compared with a year earlier. In the San Francisco metropolitan area, it said, values fell 6.3 percent and are now 33.8 percent off their peak.

– Foreclosure service RealtyTrac said November foreclosure filings nationwide were down 14 percent compared with a year ago. But the company said that despite that seasonal slowdown, numbers suggest a new surge of foreclosures in coming months.

California foreclosure auctions hit a 10-month high in November and the state had the nation’s second-highest foreclosure rate (after Nevada) with 1 in every 211 properties receiving a foreclosure filing in the month. Bucking the national trend, California foreclosure filings rose 11 percent in November compared with 2010.

– Move.com, the nation’s largest online collection of for-sale listings, with data from all of the country’s 900-plus multiple listing services, showed national inventory down 21.3 percent in November compared with a year ago and median list prices up 4.05 percent.

In the counties of San Francisco, San Mateo and Marin, Move.com showed median list prices basically flat compared with a year ago and inventory down significantly. Homes in those counties sold much faster than those elsewhere in the country, with an average inventory age of 76 days versus 114 days nationwide.

E-mail Carolyn Said at csaid@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page D – 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/15/BU6K1MCHQJ.DTL

Article source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/45342400?__source=RSS*blog*&par=RSS