What’s Going On With Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Many people acquire deeds by applying for conventional loans. When we say conventional, we mean loans supported by our country’s federal housing agency through two powerhouses of the mortgage world: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

That’s why we keep current with news on the policy changes happening in that agency. And there’s a lot to watch at the moment. What happens now could radically change the ordinary person’s access to housing.

New Broom Sweeps Clean

Real estate developer William Pulte, a Trump appointee, now directs the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Pulte has already revamped Freddie and Fannie. He pushed out board members and executives at both firms. He made himself the chair of both boards.

Since then, he’s been sending out directives on social media. These statements spell trouble for:

• The oversight of lending practices. Pulte said that the former administration’s policy has now ended. Fannie and Freddie will no longer need to screen out misleading or unfair loan requirements.

• Climate risk awareness. Up until now, Fannie and Freddie have been expected to assess the risk that climate factors pose to their financial health.

• Assistance to communities that have traditionally struggled to acquire their own deeds.

Read on, as we unpack that third point.

Purposes and Goals Withdrawn

Social media posts from the Federal Housing Finance Agency have announced an immediate (but at least not retroactive) suspension of:

• Special Purpose Credit Programs. These support lending to people in underserved communities. The programs include Fannie Mae’s popular HomeReady® First. Fannie Mae has long been known for its HomeReady® loans for modest-income loan applicants. With these loans, the borrower with a credit score of 620 up may apply many different funding sources without having to get a co-borrower.  

• Equitable Housing Finance Plans. Fannie and Freddie have been publishing annual reports showing how they’ve met goals that promote social fairness. Their Equitable Housing Finance Plans have supplied down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time mortgage borrowers in underserved communities.

• Developer Incentives. Under their 2025-2027 Equitable Housing Finance Plans (first set forth in 2021), Fannie and Freddie broadened the opportunities for developers to include affordable homes. Crucially, these plans included loans to renovate existing homes.

• Elimination of appraisal bias. Given the use of computer programming and machine learning, proactively dealing with appraisal bias is as important as it ever was.

The new interest in dismantling these initiatives tracks with a Trump Executive Order (EO) named Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing. The EO announced the end of all federal “discriminatory programs, including illegal DEI and ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ (DEIA) mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities…”

Pulte Declares DEI Dead

What has diversity, equity, and inclusion looked like in the mortgage world? It’s a world where more applicants can safely become deed holders. In that environment, private lenders could work with Freddie and Fannie, or built similarly helpful plans themselves.

Freddie Mac has made assistance available for hundreds of households in Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, and Pennsylvania, and on tribal lands. Many households have benefited from thousands of dollars in “cash-to-close” support.

But it’s now clear that the FHFA is rolling back diversity, equity, and inclusion. Bill Pulte has said that DEI is “nonsense” and declared the concept “dead.” And so the administration is uprooting special help for those who have a harder time getting deeds because of, say, a lack of inherited wealth.

Lenders were learning to take such barriers into account, without falling afoul of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. No more, says the new FHFA. No one should get special treatment. That might sound fair on its face. But without extra support for some, a level playing field cannot exist. This is because minorities have been deliberately excluded from U.S. economic prosperity for generations. That’s not healthy for households or the U.S. economy. Access to deeds helps everyone thrive financially — regardless of class, race, sex, or national origin.

A Push for Privatization

The turbulence that’s currently rocking Freddie and Fannie is linked to the Trump administration’s push for privatization. The general drawback with privatization can be summed up simply: less access to deeds. 

And what is the upside? Well, for those who know their way around Wall Street, there are plenty of advantages. Those who own the most shares of the firms await an opportunity to make billions of dollars.

In their current form, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have government support and oversight for a reason. During the mortgage crisis, taxpayers were forced to bail them out. Fannie and Freddie had dealt in risky loans. To get past the crisis and restore faith in the mortgage lending world, legislation was passed to ensure safety and fair play for borrowers.

Slippery Slope

If Fannie and Freddie were to be released from government oversight:

• Investors would lose safety features that a government-backed entity offers. Borrowers would likely be paying higher rates to cover risks.  

• The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage could become scarce. Once privatized, the firms could focus more on short-term loans and adjustable interest rates.

• Rate locks could be in jeopardy, too. Buyers (or homeowners who refinance) can lock in rates today. In a privatized market, lenders might refuse to lock in rates without extra charges.

In fact, privatizing Fannie and Freddie would change the entire mortgage landscape. These two firms are backing the majority of mortgages today. They also have massive control over the secondary market, where lenders sell and buy our home loans. Fannie and Freddie bundle the loans into mortgage-backed securities. Those securities are held by retirement funds, banks, and governments. Settled expectations would be shaken up by any major changes to the system.

Will Privatization Actually Happen?

Fannie and Freddie have been on the path to lessen the racial homeownership and wealth gaps. Without the firms’ proactive support for sidelined households, a heavier burden will fall on cities to sustain affordability. And high-risk, predatory lending could easily make a comeback.

Is this the future? No one knows for sure. But we do know this. Scott Turner, the new secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, calls privatization a priority.

Congress would need to let it happen, though. As a shift to private control could make homes even harder to afford than they already are, lawmakers would need to answer the pushback from voters.