 |
|
|
|||||
Want more housing market stories from Lance Lamberts ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter. On Thursday, President Donald Trump announced that government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will buy an additional $200 billion in mortgage bonds. Trump wrote: Because I chose not to sell Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in my first term, a truly great decision and against the advice of the experts, it is now worth many times that amountan absolute fortuneand has $200 billion in cash. Because of this, I am instructing my representatives to buy $200 billion in mortgage bonds. This will drive mortgage rates down, monthly payments down, and make the cost of owning a home more affordable. Long-term yieldslike the 10-year Treasury yield and the average 30-year fixed mortgage rateare set by demand / lack of demand for the underlying bond. Yields move inversely to bond prices. If demand for long-term bonds rises, prices go up and yields/mortgage rates fall. If bond demand falls, bond prices drop and yields/mortgage rates rise. For example, when the Federal Reserve engages in quantitative easing, as it did during the pandemic, it buys long-term assets like Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities (MBS), increasing bond demand and pushing bond prices up and long-term yields down, including mortgage rates. The Feds MBS purchases put additional downward pressure on mortgage rates in 2020 and 2021. Conversely, during quantitative tightening since 2022, the Fed has been letting MBS assets roll off its balance sheet without replacing themeffectively removing a major MBS buyer from the marketwhich can put additional upward pressure on 30-year fixed mortgage rates. Effectively, Trump is proposing to use Fannie Mae and Freddie Macboth in government conservatorshipto absorb a larger share of mortgage bonds, increasing relative market demand for MBS. That could put some short-term upward pressure on MBS prices and downward pressure on mortgage rates, further reducing the mortgage spread. Around the same time the Federal Reserve began raising short-term rates and stopped buying long-term bonds in the spring of 2022, financial markets started pulling back from bonds, causing long-term yieldsincluding mortgage ratesto surge. Only, without the Fed buying MBS, the 30-year fixed average mortgage rates saw a bigger jump than the 10-year Treasury yield. At its peak in June 2023, the mortgage spreadthe difference between the 10-year Treasury yield and the average 30-year fixed mortgage ratehit 2.96 percentage points (296 bps). That was far above the 1.76 percentage point (176 bps) historical average since 1972. Over the past 2 years, the mortgage spread has slowly compressedhitting 2.05 percentage points (205 bps) in December 2025. The goal of Trumps announcement on Thursday (i.e., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buying an additional $200 billion in mortgage bonds) is to accelerate that mortgage spread compression. As reported by Bloomberg in December, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have already started to accelerate their retained mortgage holdingswith them climbing around $69 billion in the second half of 2025. According to John Burns Research and Consulting, if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to add another $200 billion in mortgage bond holdings in 2026, it would put the GSEs pretty close to their $450 billion legal limit ($225 billion each). On Thursday, Alex Thomas, research manager at JBREC, tweeted: Fannie [Mae] and Freddie [Mac] have already added ~$70B to their retained mortgage portfolios since May of last year. Adding another $200B would basically put the GSEs at their legal cap ($225B each). Following Trumps Thursday post, there was some immediate MBS pricing movement. That said, its unclear exactly just how much impact an additional $200 billion in GSE retained mortgage bonds ould have on the mortgage spread and the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate. Through the end of June 2025, there is $9.26 trillion in agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), according to data the Urban Institute recently provided to ResiClub. Below is the breakdown: > $3.00 trillion held by depositories (banks) > $2.74 trillion held everyone else > $2.14 trillion held by the Federal Reserve > $1.33 trillion held by foreign buyers > $0.06 trillion held by GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) The chart below is the same as the one above, but it shows MBS holders by distribution. Prior to the Great Financial Crisis, the GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) used to be much bigger buyers of mortgage-backed securities. In an Urban Institute report published in January 2026, Laurie Goodman and Jim Parrott explain what happened: For years, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the buyers of last resort in the market, stepping in to profit from widening spreads and, in doing so, putting a comforting outer bound on MBS volatility. Once they went into conservatorship, the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) were replaced in that role by the Federal Reserve, which stepped into the agency MBS market to calm much larger swings in the economy. All of this went unnoticed outside of the MBS market until recently, when the Federal Reserve finally ended its time in the stabilizing role, leaving the MBS market without a buyer of last resort for the first time in decades. The GSEs gave up their role as market stabilizer when they went into conservatorship and began reducing their portfolio under the terms of their bailout by the Treasury. The Federal Reserve then promptly stepped into the role. As part of its broader effort to shore up the market in the wake of the financial crisis, the Federal Reserve bought $1.25 trillion in agency MBS between January 2009 and March 2010 and bought another $823 billion between 2012 and 2014. Largely because of that aggressive posture, along with the bailout of the GSEs, the MBS market and mortgage liquidity generally remained stable through the depths of the crisis, a remarkable feat given the level of dislocation in the rest of the economy. The Federal Reserve was then well positioned to handle the next major disruption in the MBS market, when financial markets seized up in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. In February and early March 2020, the financial markets froze, and investors were forced to sell their agency MBS to build cash reserves, pushing mortgage spreads wider by 75 basis points. The Federal Reserve stepped in in March, committing to buying agency MBS and Treasury securities in the amounts needed to support smooth market functioning and effective transmission of monetary policy to broader financial markets and the economy. 1 True to its word, the Federal Reserve, over the next month, bought more MBS than the entire gross production of the securities, stabilizing spreads and, with them, mortgages rates. Spreads ultimately settled a bit higher than they had been before the pandemic, but that was attributable to volatility in fixed income and a refinance wave triggered by the drop in Treasury rates. The Federal Reserve relinquished its role as the stabilizer of the agency MBS market when it pivoted to quantitative tightening in March 2022, ending its purchases of MBS and committing to running off its MBS portfolio. With the GSEs still operating under the portfolio constraints imposed in conservatorship, that left the market without a stabilizer for the first time in recent history.
Category:
E-Commerce
Two years ago, countries around the world set a goal of transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly and equitable manner. The plan included tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency gains by 2030important steps for slowing climate change since the energy sector makes up about 75% of the global carbon dioxide emissions that are heating up the planet. The world is making progress: More than 90% of new power capacity added in 2024 came from renewable energy sources, and 2025 saw similar growth. However, fossil fuel production is also still expanding. And the United States, the worlds leading producer of both oil and natural gas, is now aggressively pressuring countries to keep buying and burning fossil fuels. The energy transition was not meant to be a main topic when world leaders and negotiators met at the 2025 United Nations climate summit, COP30, in November in Belém, Brazil. But it took center stage from the start to the very end, bringing attention to the real-world geopolitical energy debate underway and the stakes at hand. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva began the conference by calling for the creation of a formal road map, essentially a strategic process in which countries could participate to overcome dependence on fossil fuels. It would take the global decision to transition away from fossil fuels from words to action. More than 80 countries said they supported the idea, ranging from vulnerable small island nations like Vanuatu that are losing land and lives from sea level rise and more intense storms, to countries like Kenya that see business opportunities in clean energy, to Australia, a large fossil-fuel-producing country. Opposition, led by the Arab Groups oil- and gas-producing countries, kept any mention of a road map energy transition plan out of the final agreement from the climate conference, but supporters are pushing ahead. I was in Belém for COP30, and I follow developments closely as a former special climate envoy and head of delegation for Germany and senior fellow at the Fletcher School at Tufts University. The fight over whether there should even be a road map shows how much countries that depend on fossil fuels are working to slow down the transition, and how others are positioning themselves to benefit from the growth of renewables. And it is a key area to watch in 2026. The battle between electro-states and petro-states Brazilian diplomat and COP30 President André Aranha Corra do Lago has committed to lead an effort in 2026 to create two road maps: one on halting and reversing deforestation and another on transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly, and equitable manner. What those road maps will look like is still unclear. They are likely to be centered on a process for countries to discuss and debate how to reverse deforestation and phase out fossil fuels. Over the coming months, Corra plans to convene high-level meetings among global leaders, including fossil fuel producers and consumers, international organizations, industries, workers, scholars and advocacy groups. For the road map to both be accepted and be useful, the process will need to address the global market issues of supply and demand, as well as equity. For example, in some fossil fuel-producing countries, oil, gas or coal revenues are the main source of income. What can the road ahead look like for those countries that will need to diversify their economies? Nigeria is an interesting case study for weighing that question. Oil exports consistently provide the bulk of Nigerias revenue, accounting for around 80% to over 90% of total government revenue and foreign exchange earnings. At the same time, roughly 39% of Nigerias population has no access to electricity, which is the highest proportion of people without electricity of any nation. And Nigeria possesses abundant renewable energy resources across the country, which are largely untapped: solar, hydro, geothermal and wind, providing new opportunities. What a road map might look like In Belém, representatives talked about creating a road map that would be science-based and aligned with the Paris climate agreement, and would include various pathways to achieve a just transition for fossil-fuel-dependent regions. Some inspiration for helping fossil-fuel-producing countries transition to cleaner energy could come from Brazil and Norway. In Brazil, Lula asked his ministries to prepare guidelines for developing a road map for gradually reducing Brazils dependency on fossil fuels and find a way to financially support the changes. His decree specifically mentions creating an energy transition fund, which could be supported by government revenues from oil and gas exploration. While Brazil supports moving away from fossil fuels, it is also still a large oil producer and recently approved new exploratory drilling near the mouth of the Amazon River. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ctvhR/1 Norway, a major oil and gas producer, is establishing a formal transition commission to study and plan its economys shift away from fossil fuels, particularly focusing on how the workforce and the natural resources of Norway an be used more effectively to create new and different jobs. Both countries are just getting started, but their work could help point the way for other countries and inform a global road map process. The European Union has implemented a series of policies and laws aimed at reducing fossil fuel demand. It has a target for 42.5% of its energy to come from renewable sources by 2030. And its EU Emissions Trading System, which steadily reduces the emissions that companies can emit, will soon be expanded to cover housing and transportation. The Emissions Trading System already includes power generation, energy-intensive industry, and civil aviation. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/PeAlZ/1 Fossil fuel and renewable energy growth ahead In the U.S., the Trump administration has made clear through its policymaking and diplomacy that it is pursuing the opposite approach: to keep fossil fuels as the main energy source for decades to come. The International Energy Agency still expects to see renewable energy grow faster than any other major energy source in all scenarios going forward, as renewable energys lower costs make it an attractive option in many countries. Globally, the agency expects investment in renewable energy in 2025 to be twice that of fossil fuels. At the same time, however, fossil fuel investments are also rising with fast-growing energy demand. The IEAs World Energy Outlook described a surge in new funding for liquefied natural gas, or LNG, projects in 2025. It now expects a 50% increase in global LNG supply by 2030, about half of that from the U.S. However, the World Energy Outlook notes that questions still linger about where all the new LNG will go once its produced. What to watch for The Belém road map dialogue and how it balances countries needs will reflect on the worlds ability to handle climate change. Corra plans to report on its progress at the next annual U.N. climate conference, COP31, in late 2026. The conference will be hosted by Turkey, but Australia, which supported the call for a road map, will be leading the negotiations. With more time to discuss and prepare, COP31 may just bring a transition away from fossil fuels back into the global negotiations. Jennifer Morgan is a senior fellow at the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy and Climate Policy Lab at Tufts University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
A new year brings a new tax filing season. With many cash-strapped Americans worried about their finances, many cant wait to file their returns. The sooner you file, the sooner your chances of getting your refund, after all. But just when can you begin submitting your tax return to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)? That depends. Heres what you need to know about the 2026 tax filing season. When does the 2026 tax filing season begin? There are actually two start dates to the 2026 tax filing season this year. The 2026 tax filing season refers to the period taxpayers have to file their tax returns for the 2025 calendar year. According to an IRS press release on Thursday, the official day of the 2026 tax filing season begins on Monday, January 26, 2026. From this day, anyone who is required to file a federal tax return can do so. But January 26 isnt the earliest date some people can begin submitting their tax returns to the IRS. As the IRS noted in its Thursday release, the agency will actually begin to accept tax returns from a select group of taxpayers starting today, Friday, January 9, 2026. Who can submit their tax returns beginning on January 9? Not every taxpayer can submit their returns beginning on January 9. According to the IRS, this submission start date is only open to qualified taxpayers. So, who is a qualified taxpayer? The IRS says a person meets that designation if they are in a select group of people who use the IRS Free File program to submit their taxes. Per the IRSs Thursday notice: The IRS Free File program will begin accepting individual tax returns starting Friday, Jan. 9 for qualified taxpayers. Taxpayers comfortable preparing their own taxes can use IRS Free File Fillable Forms starting Jan. 26, regardless of income. What this means is not everyone who uses the IRS Free File program can submit their tax returns starting todayonly select individuals. Those IRS Free File users who can begin submitting their tax returns today are limited to those individuals who need to report $89,000 in adjusted gross income (AGI) or less, according to the IRSs Free File information page. Taxpayers who use Free Files online forms and who make more than $89,000 in adjusted gross income will need to wait until January 26 to submit their tax returns, just like everyone else. Will eligible taxpayers who submit via Free File before January 26 get their tax refunds faster? Thats unknown, as every individuals tax situation is different. In the IRSs notice, it states that the agency will begin accepting tax returns from eligible individuals on January 9. It does not say it will begin “processing” the returns then. What this means is that even if you are eligible to submit your tax return before January 26, it cant be guaranteed that the IRS will actually begin processing your return before January 26. Still, its reasonable to assume that if you want to get your tax refund as soon as possible, you should file your tax return on the earliest date you can. The IRS says individuals have until Wednesday, April 15, 2026, to file their taxes for the 2025 tax year and pay any taxes owed.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||