PJFP.com

Pursuit of Joy, Fulfillment, and Purpose

Tag: Scott Bessent

  • Pershing Square’s Bold Plan: Relist Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac on NYSE in November 2025 – Taxpayers Could Gain $300B+

    Pershing Square’s Bold Plan: Relist Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac on NYSE in November 2025 – Taxpayers Could Gain $300B+

    TL;DR:

    Bill Ackman’s Pershing Square Capital Management just released a 28-page investor presentation urging the Trump administration to immediately (1) deem the Treasury’s Senior Preferred Stock repaid, (2) exercise the 79.9% warrants, and (3) relist Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC) on the NYSE — all while keeping the GSEs in conservatorship. They claim this can be done before the end of November 2025 and would instantly value the U.S. taxpayer’s stake at over $300 billion without disrupting mortgage affordability.

    Key Takeaways

    • Fannie & Freddie OTC shares have already more than doubled in 2025 on Trump administration statements.
    • The three-step plan (repay SPS → exercise warrants → NYSE relisting) can be executed immediately by Treasury and FHFA.
    • Post-relisting, Treasury would own 79.9% of two NYSE-listed companies worth a combined ~$387 billion (Pershing estimate).
    • Taxpayers have already received $301 billion in dividends — $25 billion more than required under the original 10% deal.
    • Pershing strongly opposes any conversion of Senior Preferred into common — calls it value-destructive and legally risky.
    • Relisting unlocks massive institutional buying (many funds are barred from OTC stocks) and fulfills Trump’s campaign promise timing.
    • Conservatorship continues for years, giving the administration runway to finalize capital rules, backstop structure, and governance.

    Detailed Summary of the Pershing Square Presentation (November 2025)

    In a presentation titled “Promises Made, Promises Kept”, Pershing Square lays out a politically and financially attractive path for the second Trump administration to deliver on its GSE reform pledges without raising mortgage rates or rushing a full privatization.

    The core argument: the government has already been fully repaid (and then some) via $301 billion of dividends since 2008. The Obama-era 2012 “Net Worth Sweep” was paused under Mnuchin, but never fully reversed. Pershing says a simple letter agreement between Treasury and FHFA can officially retire the Senior Preferred Stock today.

    Once the SPS is gone, Treasury can exercise its long-held warrants for 79.9% of the common stock at essentially zero cost. The GSEs already meet every NYSE listing requirement (market cap, float, share price, shareholder count, etc.). FHFA can approve relisting while keeping full conservatorship powers intact — no change to operations, no new capital raises, no dividend payments to juniors until fully recapitalized.

    Pershing’s valuation math (as of 12/31/2025):

    • Fannie Mae: 16× 2026E EPS → ~$42–45/share → Treasury 79.9% stake ≈ $196 billion
    • Freddie Mac: 13× 2026E EPS → ~$44/share → Treasury 79.9% stake ≈ $114 billion
    • Total taxpayer value: >$310 billion (plus junior preferred)

    They explicitly reject the idea of converting Senior Preferred into common, warning it would trigger new litigation, force government consolidation onto the federal balance sheet, and slash valuations by 27–56% depending on the multiple the market would assign to a company that wiped out private shareholders.

    My Thoughts

    This is classic Ackman: aggressive, detailed, and perfectly timed to influence policy while he has a massive economic interest (Pershing owns large common positions in both GSEs). The beauty of the proposal is that it is genuinely low-risk from a mortgage-market standpoint and gives the administration an instant “win” before Thanksgiving 2025.

    The politics line up perfectly: Trump gets to post on Truth Social that he turned two “bailed-out” companies into a $300 billion+ taxpayer windfall, keeps 30-year mortgage rates stable (or even lower), and still retains total control to shape the final exit over the next three years.

    If Treasury and FHFA actually follow the three steps before November 30, 2025, the OTC-to-NYSE pop could be one of the largest wealth-transfer events in market history — and almost entirely to existing common shareholders (retail + hedge funds that held on since 2008).

    Watch for any joint Treasury/FHFA announcement or letter agreement in the next two weeks. That will be the trigger.

    Disclosure: Like Pershing Square, the author may have direct or indirect exposure to FNMA/FMCC securities.

  • Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Unpacks Trump’s Global Tariff Strategy: A Blueprint for Middle-Class Revival and Economic Rebalancing

    TLDW:

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained Trump’s new global tariff plan as a strategy to revive U.S. manufacturing, reduce dependence on foreign supply chains, and strengthen the middle class. The tariffs aim to raise $300–600B annually, funding tax cuts and reducing the deficit without raising taxes. Bessent framed the move as both economic and national security policy, arguing that decades of globalization have failed working Americans. The ultimate goal: bring factories back to the U.S., shrink trade deficits, and create sustainable wage growth.


    In a landmark interview, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent offered an in-depth explanation of former President Donald Trump’s sweeping new global tariff regime, framing it as a bold, strategic reorientation of the American economy meant to restore prosperity to the working and middle class. Speaking with Tucker Carlson, Bessent positioned the tariffs not just as economic policy but as a necessary geopolitical and domestic reset.

    “For 40 years, President Trump has said this was coming,” Bessent emphasized. “This is about Main Street—it’s Main Street’s turn.”

    The tariff package, announced at a press conference the day before, aims to tax a broad range of imports from China, Europe, Mexico, and beyond. The approach revives what Bessent calls the “Hamiltonian model,” referencing founding father Alexander Hamilton’s use of tariffs to build early American industry. Trump’s version adds a modern twist: using tariffs as negotiating leverage, alongside economic and national security goals.

    Bessent argued that globalization, accelerated by what economists now call the “China Shock,” hollowed out America’s industrial base, widened inequality, and left much of the country, particularly the middle, in economic despair. “The coasts have done great,” he said. “But the middle of the country has seen life expectancy decline. They don’t think their kids will do better than they did. President Trump is trying to fix that.”

    Economic and National Security Intertwined

    Bessent painted the tariff plan as a two-pronged effort: to make America economically self-sufficient and to enhance national security. COVID-19, he noted, exposed the fragility of foreign-dependent supply chains. “We don’t make our own medicine. We don’t make semiconductors. We don’t even make ships,” he said. “That has to change.”

    The administration’s goal is to re-industrialize America by incentivizing manufacturers to relocate to the U.S. “The best way around a tariff wall,” Bessent said, “is to build your factory here.”

    Over time, the plan anticipates a shift: as more production returns home, tariff revenues would decline, but tax receipts from growing domestic industries would rise. Bessent believes this can simultaneously reduce the deficit, lower middle-class taxes, and strengthen America’s industrial base.

    Revenue Estimates and Tax Relief

    The expected revenue from tariffs? Between $300 billion and $600 billion annually. That, Bessent says, is “very meaningful” and could help fund tax cuts on tips, Social Security income, overtime pay, and U.S.-made auto loan interest.

    “We’ve already taken in about $35 billion a year from the original Trump tariffs,” Bessent noted. “That’s $350 billion over ten years, without Congress lifting a finger.”

    Despite a skeptical Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which Bessent compared to “Enron accounting,” he expressed confidence the policy would drive growth and fiscal balance. “If we put in sound fundamentals—cheap energy, deregulation, stable taxes—everything else follows.”

    Pushback and Foreign Retaliation

    Predictably, there has been international backlash. Bessent acknowledged the lobbying storm ahead from countries like Vietnam and Germany, but said the focus is on U.S. companies, not foreign complaints. “If you want to sell to Americans, make it in America,” he reiterated.

    As for China, Bessent sees limited retaliation options. “They’re in a deflationary depression. Their economy is the most unbalanced in modern history.” He believes the Chinese model—excessive reliance on exports and suppressed domestic consumption—has been structurally disrupted by Trump’s tariffs.

    Social Inequality and Economic Reality

    Bessent made a compelling moral and economic case. He highlighted the disparity between elite complaints (“my jet was an hour late”) and the lived reality of ordinary Americans, many of whom are now frequenting food banks while others vacation in Europe. “That’s not a great America,” he said.

    He blasted what he called the Democrat strategy of “compensate the loser,” asserting instead that the system itself is broken—not the people within it. “They’re not losers. They’re winners in a bad system.”

    DOGE, Debt, and the Federal Reserve

    On trimming government fat, Bessent praised the work of the Office of Government Efficiency (DOGE), headed by Elon Musk. He believes DOGE can reduce federal spending, which he says has ballooned with inefficiency and redundancy.

    “If Florida can function with half the budget of New York and better services, why can’t the federal government?” he asked.

    He also criticized the Federal Reserve for straying into climate and DEI activism while missing real threats like the SVB collapse. “The regulators failed,” he said flatly.

    Final Message

    Bessent acknowledged the risks but called Trump’s economic transformation both necessary and overdue. “I can’t guarantee you there won’t be a recession,” he said. “But I do know the old system wasn’t working. This one might—and I believe it will.”

    With potential geopolitical shocks, regulatory hurdles, and resistance from entrenched interests, the next four years could redefine America’s economic identity. If Bessent is right, we may be watching the beginning of an era where domestic industry, middle-class strength, and fiscal prudence become central to U.S. policy again.

    “This is about Main Street. It’s their turn,” Bessent repeated. “And we’re just getting started.”