January 13, 2026
Finance

Economist Warns Fannie and Freddie Stimulus Could Inflate Housing Costs Instead of Enhancing Affordability

Mark Zandi cautions that the $200 billion mortgage bond purchase directive may exacerbate housing price inflation rather than ease affordability challenges

Trade Idea
FANNIE MAE
Loading...
Loading quote...

Summary

Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi critiques President Donald Trump's directive for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to acquire $200 billion in mortgage bonds, asserting this approach is likely to push home prices upward instead of alleviating the nation’s housing affordability crisis. Despite a slight reduction in mortgage rates, Zandi emphasizes that the stagnant housing supply will lead to rising prices, diminishing the intended benefit for prospective homebuyers. He further highlights concerns over conflicts with Federal Reserve monetary policy and the erosion of previous constraints on these government-sponsored enterprises’ balance sheets.

Key Points

President Trump's directive instructs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds aiming to improve housing affordability.
Moody’s Mark Zandi contends that due to limited housing supply, this stimulus will primarily raise home prices rather than lower monthly payments.
The initiative conflicts with Federal Reserve strategies, potentially undermining the central bank’s control over monetary policy.
The relaxation of balance sheet constraints on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac risks returning them to pre-2008 financial crisis behaviors, posing systemic risks.

In a recent analysis, Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi expressed significant reservations regarding the executive order issued by President Donald Trump that mandates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion worth of mortgage bonds. Contrary to the administration’s assertion that this stimulus would restore affordability and lower monthly mortgage payments for American homebuyers, Zandi argues that the plan overlooks essential economic principles and risks inflating housing prices further.

President Trump has positioned his directive as a measure to revitalize the "American Dream" by making homeownership more attainable, primarily through lowering the costs associated with mortgages. Immediately following the announcement, fixed mortgage interest rates did see a modest decline, dropping by approximately 10 to 20 basis points to just above six percent. This initial market reaction suggested a short-term easing of borrowing costs.

However, Zandi warns that this apparent relief could be misleading because the fundamental issue remains unresolved - a pronounced shortage of available housing inventory. The increased liquidity and purchasing power for mortgage bonds, he contends, will translate into heightened demand in an already constrained market. As a result, buyers will find themselves bidding against one another, thereby driving the prices of homes upward despite marginally lower interest rates.

This dynamic, Zandi highlights, means the executive order will do "little to make homebuying more affordable." The influx of funds into the market, while intended to support borrowers, inadvertently exacerbates the challenge by pushing up home prices in a supply-limited environment.

Beyond the immediate effects on housing prices, Zandi identifies a bigger institutional tension underlying these developments. Since the Federal Reserve reinstated quantitative easing measures in December, it has maintained a policy of allowing its holdings of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) to prepay and mature, thereby gradually reducing its exposure.

The aggressive intervention directed by the White House to have Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy an expanded amount of these bonds represents, according to Zandi, a countervailing force working against the Federal Reserve’s efforts to manage the mortgage securities market strategically. He characterizes this maneuver as a "backdoor way" for the White House to circumvent the Federal Reserve’s control over monetary policy, creating a power struggle concerning who governs money supply regulation.

With the executive branch imposing its stimulus directive independently of Federal Reserve actions, Zandi poses the critical question: "Who is in charge of setting monetary policy?" He regards this overreach as more troubling than the immediate market mechanics of the mortgage market intervention.

Moreover, this policy move signals a reversion to previously limited regulatory frameworks concerning the GSEs. President Trump has previously celebrated his decision not to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during his first term, citing significant cash accumulations as a benefit. Yet, Zandi views the loosening of constraints on these firms’ balance sheets as fraught with risk, undoing post-2008 financial crisis safeguards.

Prior to the 2008 financial collapse, these agencies had expansive portfolios that operated similarly to "huge hedge funds," a model which ultimately played a role in the crisis. By removing caps on their asset holdings, there is concern that these entities might return to such practices, a scenario that Zandi warns could "go badly awry" once again.

Looking ahead to Federal Reserve policy, market instruments like the CME Group’s FedWatch tool indicate a 95 percent probability that interest rates will remain unchanged in the upcoming January session. The broader market responded on the day following the executive order with modest gains: the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) closed up by 0.16 percent at $695.16, and the Invesco QQQ Trust ETF (QQQ) increased by 0.083 percent to $627.17. However, futures for major indices including the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Dow Jones were reported trading lower on the subsequent day, reflecting some market uncertainty.

Risks
  • Increased demand from mortgage bond purchases may inflate house prices in an already supply-strapped market.
  • Policy clashes between the White House and Federal Reserve could introduce uncertainty in mortgage markets and monetary policy execution.
  • Erosion of regulatory safeguards on government-sponsored enterprises could amplify systemic financial vulnerabilities.
  • Market reaction to stimulus measures remains uncertain, with initial gains possibly offset by ensuing volatility.
Disclosure
Education only / not financial advice
Search Articles
Category
Finance

Financial News

Ticker Sentiment
FNMA - neutral
Related Articles
Amazon's Investment Propels Beta Technologies Stock in After-Hours Trading

Beta Technologies Inc, an aerospace company specializing in electric aircraft and propulsion systems...

Zillow Faces Stock Decline Following Quarterly Earnings That Marginally Beat Revenue Expectations

Zillow Group Inc recent quarterly results reflect steady revenue growth surpassing sector averages b...

Robinhood Reports Q4 Revenue Peak and Expands Market Contracts to 8.5 Billion

Robinhood Markets Inc. delivered a notable fourth-quarter performance with record revenue of $1.28 b...

Amazon Commits $200 Billion Investment to Expand Cloud Infrastructure and AI Technologies

Amazon is advancing a substantial capital expenditure plan estimated at $200 billion this year, mark...

IBM Advances Storage Technology with AI-Integrated FlashSystem Portfolio

IBM announced the launch of its latest FlashSystem portfolio, incorporating artificial intelligence ...

Upstart Holdings Posts Robust Q4 Earnings Growth, Shares Rise in Extended Trading

Upstart Holdings, Inc. reported fourth-quarter 2025 financial results that exceeded analyst expectat...