Journal of Financial Services Research

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 43–58 | Cite as

Focusing on Fannie and Freddie: The Dilemmas of Reforming Housing Finance

  • Lawrence J. White
Article

Abstract

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are unique and controversial participants in the housing finance system of the United States. Because of these enterprises' federal government charters, the financial markets believe that the government would not allow Fannie and Freddie to fail to honor their debt obligations, and they are thereby able to borrow more cheaply in credit markets; in turn, they lower interest rates for residential mortgages. If the financial markets are right, however, Freddie and Fannie also create a contingent liability for the government. Though there are positive externalities from home ownership, the Fannie/Freddie route is far too broad and unfocused to address those externalities effectively. Privatization, accompanied by targeted federal assistance for potential first-time low- and moderate-income home buyers, would be a superior policy direction.

Housing finance mortgages Fannie Mae Freddie Mac government sponsored enterprises. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brown, Jonathan. “Reform of GSE Housing Goals.” In: Peter J. Wallison, ed., Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Washington, DC: AEI Press, 2001, pp. 153–165.Google Scholar
  2. Calomiris, Charles W. “An Economist's Case for GSE Reform.” In: Peter J. Wallison, ed., Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Washington, DC: AEI Press, 2001, pp. 85–106.Google Scholar
  3. DiPasquale, Denise, and Edward L. Glaeser. “Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens?” Journal of Urban Economics 45 (March 1999), 354–384.Google Scholar
  4. Ely, Bert. “GSEs as Instruments of Federal Policy: Public Benefits and Public Costs.” In: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, The Financial Safety Net: Costs, Benefits, and Implications for Regulation, 37th Annual Conference on Bank Structure and Competition, May 11, 2001.Google Scholar
  5. Fannie, Mae. 2000 Annual Report (2001).Google Scholar
  6. Freddie, Mac. 2000 Annual Report (2001).Google Scholar
  7. Gatti, James F., and Ronald W. Spahr. “The Value of Federal Sponsorship: The Case of Freddie Mac.” AREUEA Journal 25, (Fall 1997), 453–485.Google Scholar
  8. Green, Richard K., and Michelle J. White. “Measuring the Benefits of Homeowning: Effects on Children.” Journal of Urban Economics 41, (May 1997), 441–461.Google Scholar
  9. Hendershott, Patric H. “Tax Changes and Capital Allocation in the 1980s.” In: Martin Feldstein, ed., The Effects of Taxation on Capital Accumulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 259–290.Google Scholar
  10. Hermalin, Benjamin E., and Dwight M. Jaffee. “The Privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Implications for Mortgage Industry Structure.” In: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Studies on Privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Washington, DC, 1996, pp. 225–302.Google Scholar
  11. McCarthy, George, Shannon Van Zandt, and William Rohe. “The Economic Benefits and Costs of Home Ownership: A Critical Assessment of the Research.” Working paper No. 01–02, Research Institute for Housing America, Arlington, VA, May 2001.Google Scholar
  12. McClure, Kirk. “The Twin Mandates Given to the GSEs: Which Works Best, Helping Low-Income Buyers or Helping Underserved Areas?” Cityscape 5,no. 3 (2001), 107–143.Google Scholar
  13. Mills, Edwin S. “Has the United States Overinvested in Housing?” AREUEA Journal 15 (Spring 1987a), 601–616.Google Scholar
  14. Mills, Edwin S. “Dividing Up the Investment Pie: Have We Overinvested in Housing?” Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (March–April 1987b), 13–23.Google Scholar
  15. Pearce, James E. “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Mortgage Purchases in Low-Income and High-Minority Neighborhoods.” Cityscape 5,no. 3 (2001), 265–316.Google Scholar
  16. Quercia, Roberto G., George W. McCarthy, and Susan Wachter. “The Impacts of Affordable Lending Efforts on Homeownership Rates.” Working paper #304, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, June 1998.Google Scholar
  17. Rohe, William M., and Leslie S. Stewart. “Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability.” Housing Policy Debate 7,no. 1 (1996), 37–81.Google Scholar
  18. Rohe, William M., and Michael A. Stegman. “The Impact of Homeownership on the Social and Political Involvement of Low Income People.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 30,no. 1 (1994), 152–174.Google Scholar
  19. Rohe, William M., Shannon Van Zandt, and George McCarthy. “The Social Benefits and Costs of Homeownership.” Working paper No. 00–01, Research Institute for Housing America, Arlington, Va., May 2000.Google Scholar
  20. Rosen, Harvey S. “Housing Decisions and the U.S. Income Tax: An Econometric Analysis.” Journal of Public Economics 11 (February 1979), 1–23.Google Scholar
  21. Rosen, Harvey S. “Housing Subsidies: Effects on Housing Decisions, Efficiency, and Equity.” In: Alan J. Auerbach, and Martin Feldstein, eds, Handbook of Public Economics, vol. 1. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1985, pp. 375–420.Google Scholar
  22. Rossi, Peter H., and Eleanor Weber. “The Social Benefits of Homeownership: Empirical Evidence from National Surveys.” Housing Policy Debate 7,no. 1 (1996), 1–35.Google Scholar
  23. Seiler, Robert S., Jr. “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as Investor-Owned Public Utilities.” Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting, & Financial Management 11 (Spring 1999), 117–154.Google Scholar
  24. Seiler, Robert S. “Estimating the Value and Allocation of Federal Subsidies.” In: Peter J. Wallison, ed., Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Washington, DC: AEI Press, 2001, pp. 8–39.Google Scholar
  25. Taylor, Lori L. “Does the United States Still Overinvest in Housing?” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Second Quarter 1998), 10–18.Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Congressional Budget Office. “Federal Subsidies and the Housing GSEs.” May 2001a.Google Scholar
  27. U.S. Congressional Budget Office. “Interest Differentials between Jumbo and Conforming Mortgages, 1995–2000.” May 2001b.Google Scholar
  28. U.S. Congressional Budget Office. “Letter from Dan L. Crippen to Congressman Richard H. Baker.” July 11, 2001c.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. “RBC FAQs.” July 19, 2001.Google Scholar
  30. Van Order, Robert. “A Microeconomic Analysis of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” Regulation 23,no. 2 (2000a), 27–33.Google Scholar
  31. Van Order, Robert. “The U.S. Mortgage Market: A Model of Dueling Charters.” Journal of Housing Research 11,no. 2 (2000b), 233–255.Google Scholar
  32. Van Order, Robert. “The Economics of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” In: Peter J. Wallison, ed., Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Washington, DC: AEI Press, 2001, pp. 41–54.Google Scholar
  33. Wachter, Susan, James Follain, Peter Linneman, Roberto G. Quercia, and George McCarthy. “Implications of Privatization: The Attainment of Social Goals.” In: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Studies on Privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Washington, DC, 1996, pp. 337–377.Google Scholar
  34. White, Lawrence J. “Comments on the Hermalin-Jaffee Paper.” In: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Studies on Privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Washington, DC, 1996, pp. 305–313.Google Scholar
  35. White, Lawrence J. “Focusing on Fannie and Freddie: The Dilemmas of Reforming Housing Finance.” Working paper, Department of Economics, Stern School of Business, New York University, 2002.Google Scholar
  36. White, Michelle J., and Lawrence J. White. “The Subsidy to Owner-Occupied Housing: Who Benefits?” Journal of Public Economics 7 (February 1977), 111–126.Google Scholar
  37. Williams, Richard A., Eileen McConnell, and Reynold Nesiba. “The Effects of the GSEs, CRA, and Institutional Characteristics on Home Mortgage Lending to Underserved Markets.” Cityscape 5,no. 3 (2001), 9–106.Google Scholar
  38. Woodward, Susan E. “Rechartering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: The Policy Issues.” Working paper, Sand Hill Econometrics, Menlo Park, California, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence J. White
    • 1
  1. 1.New York UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations