Fortune 500 Names Fannie Mae Top 8 Company in America
Anyone else see an issue with a company that has been sucking on the government teat making the Fortune 500 list? OK, so any of those people also see an issue with said company making the top 10? Try #8 on the list:
Last year, Fannie Mae catapulted from No. 81 on the Fortune 500 to No. 5, thanks to new accounting rules. On this year's list, the government-controlled mortgage giant slipped to No. 8 after revenues fell by more than 10% to $137.5 billion. Losses for the year grew to $16.9 billion from $14 billion in 2010.I'm no accountant but I know enough about the scam to say that "thanks to accounting rules" usually means "we made some shit up to make the numbers add up better" - or something along those lines. Again, I'm not an actual accountant so, you know, the translation could be a bit off.
Fannie Mae continues to be dragged down by its portfolio of loans dating back to the pre-housing crash heyday. The lender has borrowed $116 billion from the government so far, and at the end of last year it sought an additional $4.6 billion to help cover its operating losses. It's difficult to see a turnaround on the horizon.
Here's how great Fannie Mae is doing these days:
Mortgage backer Fannie Mae reported the best quarterly results since before the housing meltdown, saying it did not need additional billions in tax funds for the quarter and that it believes losses on past mortgages peaked at the end of last year.WOW, that's GREAT news... or something.
The company also reported just enough profit in the three months ended March 31 to cover its latest payment to the Treasury Department, and predicted better profits ahead.
Since , Fannie has received $116.1 billion in bailout funds. It has made $22.6 billion in dividend payments back to Treasury, including $2.8 billion in the most recent quarter. The result was a net cost to taxpayers of $93.5 billion. [my emphasis]First of all, am I the only one who thinks CNN must be shilling for the Treasury writing glowing crap like that on behalf of Fannie? Words like "would have been profitable" are nonsense since THEY AREN'T. Let's do the math quick... $116.1 billion... dividend payments of $22.6 billion... yeah, I'm no mathlete that's still a loss for taxpayers.
Freddie Mac has received $72.3 billion from the Treasury, and paid back dividends of $18.3 billion. It needed $19 million from Treasury at the end of the first quarter, after making a $1.8 billion dividend payment.
There have been quarters in this period when Fannie would have been profitable if not for the large dividend payments and the payment from Treasury was simply being used to make the dividend payment back to the government. That was the case for Freddie in the first quarter.
Before the dividend payment, Fannie reported net income in the quarter of $2.7 billion, compared to a net loss of $6.5 billion a year earlier.
Just goes to show, folks, if you work hard, fuck people and get the Treasury to hook you up, you too can end up on the top 10 of the Fortune 500 list.