Did Fannie Mae Dividend Halt Lead To The Cox Rule?

Could the probable halt of dividend payments from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have led the SEC to adopt an emergency rule curtailing short-selling? There's no doubt that financial regulators all over Washington DC are highly focussed on saving the mortgage giants from impending doom, so it wouldn't be too surprising if awareness of the need for a dividend cut at the companies would have fed fears of rampant short-selling and triggered a move to prevent this.

To understand how a dividend cut can make short-selling easier, it's important to understand the mechanics of short-selling. Many stocks that short-sellers borrow are held by brokerage customers in margin accounts. When companies don't pay dividends, brokerage customers are encouraged to hold shares in those margin accounts.

The tax code creates this incentive system by treating dividend payments differently from substitute payments investors receive when their shares are lent to short sellers. When a customer's shares are lent out, the customer doesn't receive dividends. Instead, the customers receives a payment in-lieu of dividend, which lacks the tax advantages of actual dividends. Brokerage customers respond to this by holding high dividend paying stocks outside of margin accounts, making it more difficult for short-sellers to locate shares to borrow. The other side of the coin is that they move non-dividend paying stocks to margin accounts.

This calculation is somewhat muddied by the fact that brokerages often reimburse customers for the additional taxes incurred. But halting dividend payments should have the effect of encouraging investors to hold shares of Fannie and Freddie in margin accounts, making the stocks of the companies easier to short and increasing the outermost bounds of short interest in the stock.

A tax expert we spoke with this morning thinks this fear of a rise in the ability to short Fannie and Freddie could well have led to the new rule.

"The rule makes shorting more difficult, which looks like an attempt to balance the pro-shorting effect of the dividend cut," the expert said. He asked that we not name him because he'd totally lose his high-paying job at a white shoe law firm if he was quoted on this.

Comments

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 12:01PM

Just look for the gender-shifting tax attorney.

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 1:05PM

Enrcourage all investors to request certificates = no short selling.

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 1:05PM

Encourage all investors to request certificates = no short selling.

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 2:15PM

that cannot be true- can anyone confirm that?

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 2:45PM

Did the Google and found this, though dated:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200009/ai_mark02016047

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 2:46PM

While the margin, non-margin idea has some validity in theory, I don't think that individual investor shares being available to lend would affect supply that greatly. These are not small-cap names with little institutional following.

In fact, Bloomberg shows institutions holding the vast majority of the float in both FNM and FRE, and I gotta believe that they or their custodian banks are lending the shit out of those shares. Probably at cheap borrow rates too; based on their supply I'm guessing just 10-12bps under fed funds.

Posted by John Carney, Jul 16, 2008 3:15PM

@2:46,

Keep in mind that just because a fear isn't rational doesn't mean it's not motivating government policy.

Posted by guest, Jul 16, 2008 10:08PM

A simple question from Finland:

Doesnt the ban on "naked" short selling imply that if I a buy say 100 shares of Lehman on Monday morning I will not be able to sell until the settlement date?

Correct me if I am wrong, but at present if I buy 100 shares on Monday and then turn around to sell 100 shares at Monday afternoon what really happens is that my brooker executes a naked short sell, knowing that at settlement date the 100 shares will be available?

So, the ban will result in you either having to wait until settlement date to sell, or borrow the shares to sell short.

This will generate a gigantic short squeeze, sending shares at least 10 percent higher!

Posted by guest, Jul 17, 2008 2:44AM

Naked short selling is the new craze(actually its new only to those who haven't heard of it)and is the next great scandal to send wall street to the depths.

Naked short selling is selling shares the seller cannot obtain. This creates an FTD(failure to deliver) at the DTC, the clearing house for our stock markets. There are billions of FTDs covering every sector of our markets.

In essence this naked short selling is akin to counterfeiting shares and selling them in the market. Those who shorted have no intention of ever covering them.

Listen to Bud Burrell, Special interview:The Greatest Crime in History at this link....
http://www.financialsense.com/fsn/main.html

PS The DTC is owned by the Federal Reserve

Post Your Comment