房利美如何躋身五強
|
????它就是美國政府接管的抵押貸款公司房利美(Fannie Mae)，其三年前的瀕臨破產(chǎn)堪稱全美金融災難演變過程中的一個里程碑。 ????關(guān)于房利美及其小兄弟房地美(Freddie Mac)如何在陷于困境的美國抵押貸款市場中成為第一放款人和最后放款人，已有諸多著述。如今美國每10筆貸款中就有超過9筆是由“兩房”或美國政府國民抵押貸款協(xié)會(Ginnie Mae)等聯(lián)邦兄弟機構(gòu)提供融資或擔保，這樣的安排上至蒂姆?蓋特納，下至普通投資者都認為缺乏可持續(xù)性。 ????但這并不是推動房利美從去年的《財富》美國500強第81位躍升至今年第5的原因。如今，房利美在榜單上僅次于沃爾瑪(Wal-Mart)、?？松梨?/a>(Exxon)、康菲石油(Conoco)和雪佛龍(Chevron)。 ????推動房利美排名大幅提升的(房地美亦然，升至第20)是一項旨在防止大金融公司通過表外項目隱藏風險的會計調(diào)整。加上《財富》長期以來采用總營收（而非華爾街關(guān)注的凈營收）排名的政策，這兩家“大到不能倒”的公司看起來前所未有的大，如果不是前所未有的好的話。 ????以房利美為例，兩項會計規(guī)定——旨在讓公司列明所控制資產(chǎn)和隨之產(chǎn)生的負債的ASC 860，以及要求金融公司將表外項目移入表內(nèi)的ASC 810——導致總營收從去年的290億美元飆升至1,540億美元。 ????該數(shù)字增長超過四倍，是因為房利美確認了過去所有表外抵押貸款的收益。這令房利美一舉超越福特(Ford)、惠普(Hewlett-Packard)等狀況良好的大工業(yè)公司——雖然房利美虧損140億美元，美聯(lián)邦救助成本已達到910億美元。 ????但該公司確認的抵押貸款收益增加是虛的——被利息費用所抵消，特別是定期向投資者支付的信托管理成本。 ????因此，房利美的凈營收——投資者常常跟蹤的數(shù)據(jù)，如果現(xiàn)在他們還關(guān)注這家境遇糟糕的公司——事實上較上年下降22%至175億美元。 ????這樣的來回比較可以讓你理解為何房利美向美國證券交易委員會（Securities and Exchange Commission）提交的財務(wù)報告甚至都不提總營收數(shù)據(jù)。以凈營收計，房利美今年的排名可能低至第94。 ????但鑒于美國國家財政狀況糟糕以及房利美對此負有不可推卸的責任，可能現(xiàn)在是時候讓這家差一點破產(chǎn)的機構(gòu)“安息”了。 |
????The company is Fannie Mae (FNMA), the government-controlled mortgage investor whose collapse three years ago was a major milestone along the road to national financial ruin. ????Much has been made of how Fannie and its little brother Freddie Mac (FMCC) have become the lenders of first and last resort in the troubled U.S. mortgage market. More than nine in 10 loans made nowadays are either financed or guaranteed by the companies or federal cousins such as Ginnie Mae, in an arrangement that everyone from Tim Geithner on down deems unsustainable. ????But that isn't how Fannie ended up rising to 5 on the Fortune 500, behind only Wal-Mart (WMT), Exxon (XOM), Conoco (COP) and Chevron (CVX), and up from 81st last year. ????The driver of Fannie's big move up the charts (and Freddie's too, to No. 20) is an accounting change that aims to keep big financial companies from hiding risks by keeping them off the balance sheet. Combine this with Fortune's longstanding policy of calculating its list using gross revenues -- rather than the net revenues that Wall Street tracks -- and you have two too-big-to-fail outfits looking bigger, if not better, than ever. ????In Fannie's case, the two accounting rules – ASC 860, which aims to make companies list the assets they control and the liabilities they incur, and ASC 810, which calls for financial companies to put off-balance sheet entities back on balance sheet – had the effect of sending gross revenue soaring to $154 billion from $29 billion a year earlier. ????That number more than quintupled because Fannie got to recognize the income from all the mortgages that it previously held off balance sheet. The rise vaulted Fannie past giant, reasonably healthy industrial companies such as Ford (F) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) -- even as Fannie lost $14 billion and the tab on its federal bailout ran to $91 billion. ????But the income gains the company recognized from the mortgages were illusory -- offset by interest expense, notably the cost of administering the trusts, which make regular payments to investors. ????As a result, the company's net revenue -- the number investors tend to track, to the extent they bother looking at this sorry outfit anymore -- actually fell 22% from a year ago, to $17.5 billion. ????This back and forth gives you some idea why the financial reports Fannie publishes with the Securities and Exchange Commission don't even mention the gross revenue number. Using net revenue, Fannie would have ranked a lowly No. 94 this year. ????But given the pathetic state of our national finances and Fannie's not insubstantial role in the same, maybe it's about time we gave this all-but bankrupt institution its due. |
