Fannie Mae set to pay Treasury $2.9 billion

Mortgage giant Fannie Mae said Friday that it will pay the Treasury Department $2.9 billion in dividends next month after a strong finish to the year. 

The government-controlled mortgage company reported net income of $2.5 billion in the October-December quarter, up from the $2 billion posted in the third quarter. 

{mosads}“Our strong 2015 results demonstrate our commitment to improving both our company and the broader housing finance system,” said Timothy Mayopoulos, president and chief executive officer.

“We are evolving our business model so we better serve the industry and taxpayers and fulfill our essential role in making affordable mortgage and rental options available for millions of people across the country,” Mayopoulos said.

With its March payment to the Treasury, Fannie will have paid back $147.6 billion, more than the $116.1 billion it received in the taxpayer bailout.

For the year, Fannie reported net income of $11 billion, which was less than the $14.2 billion in 2014 when the enterprise received more money from mortgage-backed securities settlements.

On Thursday, Freddie Mac reported $2.2 billion in profits in the final three months of last year and will send $1.7 billion to the Treasury.

Freddie has made dividend payments totaling $98.2 billion, exceeding the $72.3 billion the company received from Treasury during the financial crisis. Dividend payments do not count against that those rescue funds.

The companies buy loans from lenders, package them as securities and provide a government guarantee against default.

Mel Watt, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, on Thursday urged Congress to complete an overhaul of the housing finance system. 

“By giving this speech today, I am signaling my belief that some of the challenges and risks we are managing are escalating and will continue to do so the longer the enterprises remain in conservatorship,” he said at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “Consequently, I believe that I have a responsibility, both as regulator and as conservator, to identify and discuss this concern more openly.”